Target Col Gaddafi,

Western Democracies Descend to Middle Ages

UNSC Cover for Euro-US Bombing for Libyan Oil
Undermines Moral & Legal Authority of WWII Alliance 

Moscow cries foul, too late; interference into the internal, civil war not sanctioned by the UN resolution                                                                                                    

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land...”

“To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader and--more profoundly--our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.” Barack Obama

"In his March 28 speech, Obama justified his air strikes against Libya on the grounds that the embattled ruler, Gadhafi, was using air strikes to put down a rebellion --- against state authority as presently constituted—However the current US president and the predecessor Bush/Cheney regime have murdered many times more people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia -- using air strikes and drones --than Gadhafi has murdered in Libya.” Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of the treasury and former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal,

“The Westphalian principle that nation states could run their internal affairs as they pleased helped to reduce war for 300 years. That principle is now increasingly abandoned, not just in Libya but through the International Monetary Fund and other non-democratic international organizations. (UNO!) The consequences are hugely hazardous, while putting at risk the immense benefits the ancient treaty brought.” - Martin Hutchinson 

“—Rebels have seized control of the bulk of Libya’s oil industry – including the country’s largest oilfields in the so-called Sirte basin and the main terminals –-with the assistance of NATO air strikes. A Libyan opposition leader said that Qatar had also agreed to sell oil on its behalf in international markets –Washington made clear that opposition oil sales need not be subject to the sanctions imposed on Libya.” Financial Times, London

"We believe that coalition's interference into the internal, civil war has not been sanctioned by the UN resolution. Protection of the civilian population remains our priority," Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on 28 March, 2011

“--The object of bombing are barracks of the Libyan army, around which are densely populated residential areas, and next to it - the largest in Libya's Heart Centers. Civilians and the doctors could not assume that common residential quarters will be about to become destroyed, so none of the residents or hospital patients was evacuated. –

“With full responsibility as witnesses and participants of what is happening, we state that the United States and its allies are thus carrying out genocide against the Libyan people - as was the case in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq. Crimes against humanity, carried out by coalition forces akin to those crimes committed by the fathers and grandfathers of today's Western leaders and their henchmen in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan and in Dresden in Germany, where civilians were also being destroyed in order to deter, to break the will of the people to resist (Germany remembers it, and therefore refused to participate in this new slaughter house). Today they want in such ways to make the Libyan people surrender their leader and the legitimate government and meekly lay down their national oil wealth for the countries of the coalition.” From a letter to president Medvedev from Russian doctors working in Libya. 

“Gaddafi's acquiescence to demands to end his own program for developing nuclear weapons, and the price the North Koreans say he is now paying--North Korea may be right: its nuclear program does provide a solid deterrent against any notion of doing anything - even if North Korea isn't actually going to explode one of those things for real,” Donald Kirk

In early 21st century, with Nobel Peace Prize (awarded in advance!) winner US president Barack Hussein Obama leading from front and then from the back, white European nations, the former colonial powers known for their genocide, carnage, loot and worse along with some client Arab states and a reluctant Turkey ruled by Riyadh supported Islamist AKP, have relentlessly Cruise and Tomahawk missiled and bombarded cities and positions held by the legitimate forces of Libyan strongman Moammar Gaddafi and the tribes supporting him. This action has been opposed by African Union, Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Venezuela, Argentina and many other nations who rightly demand its cessation as it is not sanctioned by UN Resolution1973.

Obama’s predecessor George Bush had declared United Nations irrelevant before invading Iraq under patently false charges, for its oil. Now Washington with some Euro-nations and an assorted group are destroying whatever prestige and authority UN has been left with since its inception, under a feckless and wimp of a secretary general. Washington hated the guts of two secretary generals, Kofi Annan and Boutrous Ghali who did not act like US doormats.

What purpose does United Nations serve now, specially its Security Council, except for the mighty powers who can go for their illegal objectives by naked brutal force? Why have this façade of an organization which was ostensibly set up to usher in lasting peace, freedom from want, social security, labor rights and disarmament as well as self-determination, free trade and freedom of religion. It has failed or not come up to expectations on most counts.

“Few Americans realize it, but our leaders who lack military experience tend to be more hawkish than leaders who have served in the military,” Matt Pottinger.

Three Deadly Ladies

It was the axis of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joined by US Ambassador to UN Susan Rice and the influential Office of Multilateral and Human Rights Director Samantha Power who argued for airstrikes against Libya. Their advice triggered an abrupt shift in U.S. policy, overturning more cautious administrations' counselors. Both Obama and defense secretary Robert Gates opposed ‘intervention’ in Libya and No Fly Zone. This is the first time in U.S. history that a female-dominated diplomatic team has urged illegal military action. 

Invasion by air of Libya is a present day version of old gunboat diplomacy by former rapacious Christian powers, and not any humanitarian intervention i.e. to protect rebel civilians in Libya. It is like the erstwhile White man’s burden and the mission of saving souls and civilizing the natives. But it always was to rule over them, grab and exploit their resources. This version is being enforced by Cruise and Tomahawk missiles and field trial of the latest weapons of destruction to help Libya’s ragtag opposition composed of opportunists, Al Qaida and other such elements, recognized by France and now Qatar too.

29th March London Conference on Libya 

Xinhua net reported on 30th March about the London Conference with top diplomats from 40 countries meeting to discuss Libya’s future. They agreed to form a contact group to direct political efforts in the country.  Military action will continue. A statement released by the British foreign secretary, William Hague, says participants reaffirmed their commitment to full and swift implementation of UN Security Council resolutions on Libya and to continuing military action to enforce them. The statement claimed that the military intervention in Libya has so far been “successful in protecting countless civilians from Gaddafi's forces and ineffectively wiping out Gaddafi's air capability." Hague added that possible sanctions will be pursued at the UN and regional organizations.US and Saudi proxy Qatar which has recognized the rebels was cautious. PM Hamad BinJassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani said, "We are not talking here about invading Libya, nor we are inviting any military ground (troops) to be, but we have to evaluate the situation, because we cannot let the people suffer for so long, we have to find a way to stop this bloodshed." 

Libyan Rebels, A Work in Progress –Hillary Clinton 

Hillary Clinton acknowledged that the US-led coalition doesn't know as much as it would like about the rebels, whether they include al-Qaida or other extremists. She said, "We are picking up information, a lot of contact is going on... so we're building an understanding, but at this time obviously it is, as I say, a work in progress," she told reporters. Clinton said the conference is taking place at a moment of transition, as NATO takes over as leader of the coalition mission, an undertaking in which the US will continue to play an active supporting role. She says there is no timeline and it appears Gaddafi has made no decisions yet about his future.

If Ms. Clinton had her way, she will try for a regime change in Syria too, except that massive demonstrations took place in Damascus supporting president Bashir Assad. Syrians know what the West is up to, having seen it across the border in Iraq.

Of course these combative and charming ladies do not talk about repression and protests in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. Ms. Clinton, having had her ambition thwarted to sleep in the White House in her own right, still believes that Washington remains the hyper power as it was claimed when she lived there with Bill Clinton. But that was before 2003 and the unraveling of US military and economic power since then.

Another London Conference!

It will be a repeat of what happened to and in Iraq, if Western powers are not stopped, right now.

It is necessary to recapitulate what western powers promised and what they achieved. 

More than a millions Iraqis have been killed, a million widows added, 5 million orphaned, 4 million refugees in and outside Iraq and a country and a civilization destroyed. The country has been divided into Shia, Sunni and Kurdish sectors.

Let me quote from my article dated 17 February, 2003, just before the March 2003 invasion,

“MIDDLE EAST- Iraqi Mosaic in Pandora's Box;
Saddam’ heirs, proxies and pretenders.” 

"Just you wait until we have democracy in Iraq, and I'll throw you in jail!" one lifelong opponent of Saddam Hussein to another at the December 2002 Iraqi opposition conference in London. 

“The Anglo-Saxons organized a conference of Saddam Hussein’s opponents in London in mid-December 2002 to back their claim aired from time to time that they wanted to usher in stability and democracy as part of the regime change in Iraq. It was held after many postponements and much prodding. That the conference finally took place was an achievement itself. Many a times the proceedings looked like the scene from the film "Lawrence of Arabia" starring PeterO’Toole, with the Arab tribes squabbling and fighting after taking over Damascus following the withdrawal of the Ottoman troops. The French had chased them out.

“The conference brought together north Iraqi Kurdish parties, KDP and PUK - who are  at each other’s throat inside Iraq , Iranian-backed Shia group SAIRI , the Constitutional Monarchy Movement and the National Accord Movement. One of the prime movers of the conference was the Iraqi National Congress (INC), headed by Ahmad Chalabi, on the run from Jordan’s law, but now a creature of Washington. Those who did not participate were the Iraqi Communist Party, the Socialist Party and the pro-Syrian branch of Iraq's ruling Ba’ath party. The Shia Muslim al-Daawa Party also did not attend, as the purpose of the conference implied an US attack on Iraq and installation of a pro-US regime. 

“The only apparent agreement reached was that after Saddam Hussein USA should not run Iraq (like making an advertising film without the product and the message). There was no agreement on the kind of political system or general frame work for a Constitution. The only common denominator to emerge was some vague form of federalism. The Kurdish parties argued for a bi-national model with an Arab and Kurdish state, (like Cyprus!) while others called for geographic and not ethnic decentralization.

“US favorite Chalabi of INC wanted a government in waiting (with himself of course at the head); a political authority to provide legitimacy against political power vacuum after the fall of the present regime .The US strongly opposed the formation of a government-in-exile, arguing that it would  alienate serving Iraqi generals and others who might mutiny once a war starts. Then Saddam Hussein, his government and people would fight till the bitter end, which left little flexibility with USA. But those wanting to come over to US side might well consider the fate of two highly placed sons-in-law of Saddam Hussein, who had defected to Amman a few years ago. They were rebuffed by the west. Unwanted and turned into pariahs, they returned but were brutally disposed off soon after crossing into Iraq.

“Naturally USA did not want to tie its own hands in advance concerning Iraq’s rulers and its political fate. More importantly about the economic status of its oil reserves. Of course US’s dear wish, proclaimed from the White House  press room and by others, remains that someone would assassinate Saddam Hussain or there would be a  coup d’état. From time to time, Donald Rumsfeld, Jack Straw and others, have talked of amnesty to Iraqi officials and generals and political asylum to Saddam Hussein and family, in Saudi Arabia or somewhere else.  

War & Chaos All Around 

“Every party i.e. "heirs, pretenders and proxies" remains worried about the ambitions of the others. Chalabi is rightly worried about the Kurdish plans. While there is little official version to go by but there would be a mad scramble for power. Kurds with their peshmar gas and other groups would try to fill in the vacuum. Chris Kutschera of Middle East Report magazine and others have written that high-level Kurdish military personnel admitted that it was not just the oil-rich city of Kirkuk - the so-called Kurdish Jerusalem - that the Kurds sought, but they wanted a share of power in Baghdad. "We have an agenda for all possibilities." 

Western Propaganda 

Government controlled BBC and US corporate media (80% in USA) are gleefully showing states with nearly US $ trillion annual military expenditure bombing Libya with a defense expenditure of less than $ one billion only. West’s usually lying media trills that a level playing ground is being created for the unknown, mysterious and shady rebels in Bengazi.

The message is that after the Fall of the Berlin Wall, the law of jungle has descended on the earth.

Has UNSC Become a Tool for NATO’s Expansionist Policies?

United Nations Security Council dominated by five nuclear armed bullies with Veto power has disgraced itself first by passing resolution 1973 and then allowing the crusader nations to interpret it as they did the treaties with natives in 19th and 20thcentury. Moscow and Beijing have allowed the violation of UN charter, invasion of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Libya. 

They could have stopped it. Have they made deals with US!

And reports suggest that now NATO will coordinate the military operations against Gaddafi’s forces. Since when has NATO been designated the military arm of UNSC. Without UNSC or General Assembly approval! What is the role of UN now?

And who are the deserving rebels needing protection. The unholy axis of Washington, Paris and London and other hangers-on have little to say about them as Ms. Clinton confessed at the London conference. There are reports that British special forces are already active inside Libya. But the axis is already talking of helping the ragtag rebels even with arms to take over oil producing areas and refineries and then invite in European and US oil companies.

Remember that it was for Iraq’s oil and its strategic location that US carried out 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' which it continues to occupy. The Iraqis have not allowed oil production to reach level of President Saddam Hussein era. The US army lies broken and is caught in a quagmire in Iraq; 

What does UN Stands for?

It is time to expose the claim and the myth that the United Nation Organization represents the will of the states or peoples of the world. More often than not in recent past, the so-called international community is nothing but Washington with poodle London and a small coalition of the coerced, bribed and not so willing. But this time around two of the armed nuclear powers, Russia and China with veto in UNSC have allowed the western warmongers to have their way. If this does not denote the demise of the UN like its predecessor the League of Nations then what else would. Tomorrow, Washington, which already has an Africa Command, with Paris and London, could start, protecting civilians in other African states with minerals and energy resources.

Except during the Cold War, when fears of retaliation and the Mutual Assured destruction (MAD) maintained a kind of armed to high destruction level truce, international law was often violated, mostly by Washington. Will brute military power, with the capability to deliver nuclear arms and inflict unbearable destruction be the only safe guard a country? Will it remain the main currency in the world pecking order and the strategic equations where the big powers can accommodate each other and smaller nations like north Korea are forced to acquire nuclear and missile capability for their very survival? 

UN, a Legacy of the WWII

The current pecking order with the Gang of the Five at the top is a legacy of the outcome of the WWII. So let us be clear about the concept and the evolution of the United Nations. It did not begin with the signing of the Charter in 1945. This agreement was the culmination of complex military and political efforts and maneuvering of big WWII military powers that commenced in 1941. 

The documents and the records of the war years include countless references to UN’s origin as a strategic engine of victory in WWII. The document formalizing the Nazi defeat in the war includes the words: “This Act of Military Surrender is without prejudice to, and will be superseded by, any general instrument of surrender imposed by, or on behalf of, the United Nations on Germany…” US President Truman broadcast on8 May that: “General Eisenhower informs me that the forces of Germany have surrendered to the United Nations”. 

The “United Nations” was the official name for the coalition fighting the axis powers since January 1942, when Roosevelt and Churchill had led twenty-six nations, including the Soviet Union.

The historical records clearly show that Winston Churchill and Franklin D Roosevelt created the United Nations to win the war both militarily and politically, and to create the foundations for a lasting peace. Churchill remarked during the height of the fighting in 1944 that the “United Nations is the only hope of the world”. But the first expression of the Anglo-American policy was in the Atlantic Charter of 1941; this included freedom from want, social security, labor rights and disarmament as well as self-determination, free trade and freedom of religion. How military power corrupts!

Thus the UN is not some liberal organization but a construct structured out of hard, realistic political necessity for the victors of WWII to dominate the post war era, which is now clearly askew and outdated.

Everyone realizes that UN has to be restructured after its being almost irreparably damaged by US administration under George Bush and further infliction of wounds on its moral and legal standing by the US administration in coalition with a bankrupt Britain and Sarkozy in Paris, who hopes to increase his popularity by this imperial undertaking for the presidential election next year. The reverse is most likely to happen.

The world is now reaching a situation when there is clear decline of US and European nations who colonized and exploited the nations of South and East after the Ottoman arms were repulsed from the Gates of Vienna in 16thcentury .The UN had emerged after the demise of the League of the Nations after WWII, though incubated during the war itself as brought out earlier. So sooner than later a change in UN must be brought about .It will depend on the decline of US, whose economy is in disarray and is being artificially kept alive by creation of trillions of dollars on computer screens, which has turned the world bourses into a Casino. The question is when the 2nd shoe will fall; the first fell in September, 2008. The misadventures in north Africa called ‘Odyssey Dawn’ would only hasten that fall like ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ and Operation Iraqi Freedom’.


More by :  K. Gajendra Singh

Top | Analysis

Views: 3384      Comments: 1

Comment It appears that in any situation one can construct a righteous argument to protect oneself or one's interests. At the time it appears sublime in its clarity, and completely justifies the fulfilling action that it defines. Take the situation in Iraq, at both times, preceding each war, of 1991 and 2003, but more decisively in the latter, it was clear Saddam was a brutal dictator; the very unity of Iraq under his dictatorship argued for his removal, when that same unity would be transformed as democratic by a liberated people. It was this sublime estimate that justified the US invasion to itself; never mind the ulterior motives for control of the oil etc. But, in reality, Saddam was the unity of Iraq, as his ubiquitous presence in poster images symbolised. Once he was removed, at huge cost to lives of Iraqi soldiers and civilians, the country far from becoming united in democratic fervour split into the rival power groups now released from their constraint, wreaking havoc in an internecine conflict of all convictions, and worse, with unforeseen disastrous consequence to the liberators, even to blaming them for their liberating war actions! World opinion, too, turned against the US and UK, judging their sublime action as illegal, even though unilateral action was considered justifiable at the time against a threat to world peace such as Saddam appeared to pose.

In Libya, the parallel sublime argument is/was that Gaddafi is a menace to his people, therefore the mob rising against him is/was an epiphany of democracy. There were simple corollaries to this sublime truth - all sublime predictions: that once the rebellion was underway, the Libyan army would rally to cause of the 'rebels' - so called to this day! - as they did in Egypt, next door. The other simple argument for intervention was/is to protect the civilians behind the rebel cause - so sublime in its democratic flavour, that it was promptly executed, again, in the expectation that a few short bursts from raiding hi-tech jets and tomahawks would be sufficient. Wrong again. And how simple to demonise Gaddafi and predict all manner of butchery he would inflict on his people, as yet to be fulfilled. As it stands, once more the quick sublime solution, based on simple predictions, is turning out to be far more complicated, and unexpectedly so.

Oddly enough, it is Russia and China who abstain, as they did in Iraq, from any talk or act of violent intervention: they too have a sublimely simple argument.

30-Mar-2011 22:36 PM

Name *

Email ID

Comment *
Verification Code*

Can't read? Reload

Please fill the above code for verification.