Il litigio sulla Libia colpisce la Nato/Gli alleati si scontrano sullo stallo libico
SAM DAGHER, CHARLES LEVINSON e JOHN W. MILLER/ ALEX DELMAR-MORGAN, NATHAN HODGE e CHARLES LEVINSON
– Mercoledì 13 aprile, vertice a Doha, Qatar, del cosiddetto “gruppo di contatto”, composto da rappresentanti di 20 paesi, di Nato, Onu e Unione Africana, governi regionali per discutere sullo stallo del conflitto libico. Rappresentanti dei ribelli a Bengasi ritengono che Doha faciliterà loro il rifornimento di armamenti.
– Accordi sulla costituzione di un fondo per aiuti umanitari ai ribelli, che dichiarano di aver bisogno di $1,5MD per cibo e medicinali, e cercano di accedere ai fondi congelati del governo.
– Il segretario per la stampa del Consiglio di transizione libico ha chiesto agli Usa di riprendere un ruolo di primo piano nel conflitto e bombardare di più, richiesto subito respinta dall’Amministrazione Obama.
– A Doha si è recato anche l’ex ministro degli Esteri e ex capo servizi segreti libici, (per 30 anni al servizio di Gheddafi su sua ammissione) Moussa Koussa, di recente fuggito in GB, per incontrare i rappresentanti del Consiglio Nazionale di Transizione libico.
o Wsws dice che Moussa Koussa è uno strumento usato dalla GB per accrescere la propria influenza; sarebbe stato un agente dei servizi britannici MI6; è stato lasciato partire nonostante formalmente indagato sul bombardamento di Lockerbie.
– Italia e Qatar chiedono di nuovo di armare i ribelli libici. Il Qatar, uno dei principali sostenitori arabi dei ribelli libici, riferisce di aver fatto vendere ai ribelli oltre $100mn. di greggio e di aver fonito combusti bel a Bengasi.
o Nato: armare i ribelli è una questione che riguarda i paesi singoli; ma la Nato sta imponendo un embargo sulle armi … da revocare?
– Rappresentanti dei ribelli chiedono alla conferenza la revoca delle sanzioni internazionali sulla Libia orientale, per poter accedere ai conti bancari libici all’estero, e consentire alle banche dell’Est di ricevere denaro e di trasferire denaro all’estero.
– Francia e GB, i primi paesi a proporre l’intervento militare delle potenze nel conflitto libico, e i leader dei ribelli libici hanno chiesto alla Nato maggiore aggressività in “difesa dei civili”, in particolare a Misurata; chiedono agli alleati di aiutare maggiormente i ribelli e i civili sul terreno. Comandanti dei ribelli dicono di aver ricevuto spedizioni di armi leggere, vogliono armi pesanti;
– Le richieste di Francia, GB, Italia e Qatar hanno messo sulla difensiva l’Amministrazione Obama, che mercoledì aveva lasciato aperta l’opzione di armare i ribelli, e rivelato che l’aviazione americana ha continuato gli attacchi aerei, in misura ridotta, anche dopo il trasferimento del comando alla Nato; il 35% delle sortite sono state fatte dagli aerei Usa;
o I’attacco alle forze del regime sul terreno presuppone una richiesta specifica da parte della Nato, finora non avanzata.
o Previsto un incontro a Washington tra diplomatici, rappresentanti della Difesa e politici Usa con il ministro Esteri de facto libico, Mahmoud Jibril, per concordare come aiutare ai ribelli.
– I comandanti Nato difendono il loro operato. In realtà la missione Nato in Libia non riesce a sconfiggere l’avversario limitandosi ai soli attacchi aerei, soprattutto quando questi mettono a rischio i civili.
– Dopo la diminuzione degli attacchi aerei americani la scorsa settimana, la Francia ha aumentato le sortite e il UK ha impegnato un maggior numero di aerei.
– Il ministro Esteri francese, Juppé, ha chiesto anche alla UE maggiori aiuti umanitari.
– Germania e Belgio, più altri paesi, sono contrari ad accrescere l’intervento militare.
– La Croce Rossa Internazionale vuole negoziare con Gheddafi l’accesso a Misrata, dove da settimane sono accampati 7 000 lavoratori immigrati.
– Sulla questione libica, previsto giovedì un incontro a Berlino, dei ministri dei paesi Nato, e della Lega Araba al Cairo, che dovrebbe essere presieduta dal segretario generale Onu per coordinare ONU, UA, Lega Araba, Organizzazione della Conferenza Islamica e UE (WSWS).
– Si riuniscono lo stesso giorno anche i Bric (astenuti sulal risoluzione ONU sulla guerra libica) + Sudafrica.
Divisioni al vertice UE sull’intervento libico
– Il conflitto di interessi tra le grandi potenze già prima del vertice UE del Lussemburgo sulla Libia,
o Francia e GB hanno accusato gli alleati europei di non far valere il loro peso militare nella Nato.
o Il vertice, che doveva essere una affermazione di potenza e influenza dell’Europa, è stato una nuova occasione di divisioni e recriminazioni tra le potenze europee.
o La Spagna ha respinto le critiche e la richiesta di Francia e Gb di maggior impegno militare;
o la Svezia ha espresso riserve sul piano di operazioni (Conops) per Eufor Libia;
o la Finlandia ha messo in guardia dall’instaurarsi di una situazione di stallo sul modello Kosovo, che durò 78 giorni.
– L’Onu ha respinto l’offerta UE di dispiegare la sua missione navale EUFOR Libya per aiutare Misurata, sotto assedio.
o per timore di rimanere esclusi dall’influenza in Libia e nelle regioni petrolifere di Nordafrica e MO, ribaltando la precedente opposizione all’operazione a guida Usa-Francia-UK,
o venerdì 8.4.2011, il governo Merkel ha offerto la partecipazione tedesca a qualsiasi “missione umanitaria” richiesta dall’Onu.
– Il rifiuto ONU è stato denunciato da un diplomatico UE come “opposizione ideologica che si scontra con la realtà”.
– Eufor, costituita il 1° aprile, è un’operazione del costo di €7,9 mn., che dovrebbe aver base a Roma ed essere comandata dall’ammiraglio italiano Gaudiosi.
o Benché legata dall’impegno di non inviare soldati sul terreno, la missione mira ad una prima mobilitazione dei due gruppi di battaglia della UE, per 1500 soldati in totale.
– Il ministro spagnolo per gli Affari UE ha dichiarato che il vertice del Lussemburgo approverà ugualmente il piano dell’operazione militare per scopi umanitari.
– Finora nessuna reazione ufficiale dagli Usa, né sulla proposta UE, né sul rifiuto Onu.
– Segnali di reazione negativa da parte di UK e Francia sul tentativo tedesco di assumere un ruolo di primo piano in una forza militare UE. UK e Francia vogliono maggior impegno miliare UE, ma alle loro condizioni e non con una forza a guida tedesca.
– Gli Usa desiderano che i paesi europei assumano una parte maggiore dei costi della guerra; dopo il trasferimento del controllo alla nato, hanno ridotto da 11 a 3 le navi da guerra e da 170 a 90 gli aerei, che di solito operano al di fuori delle strutture di comando Nato.
– Il Consiglio nazionale di transizione libico ha respinto, appoggiato da Usa, UK e Italia, la proposta di una tregua concordata tra UA e Gheddafi, e chiesto che Gheddafi e figli se ne vadano dalla Libia.
La possibilità di stallo in Libia pone l’accento sulla politica Usa
– La scelta per Obama è:
o una guerra civile che può continuare anche per anni, con costi umani in aumento,
o o un maggior coinvolgimento in una terza guerra con un paese musulmano, direttamente o con la Nato.
– la domanda è: Obama potrà sopravvivere ad una situazione di stallo nella guerra in Libia?
o e questo a sole tre settimane dalla prima “guerra umanitaria” di Obama che sperava, grazie agli attacchi aerei, in un veloce ribaltamento degli equilibri, e i ribelli avrebbero fatto il resto.
– Il tergiversare della segretaria di Stato Clinton sul cessate il fuoco proposto dall’Unione Africana, che avrebbe di fatto lasciato a Gheddafi il controllo di parte del paese,
o riflette il limbo in cui si trova l’Amministrazione:
o i ribelli non riescono da soli ad attuare un cambio di regime;
o Usa e alleati Nato non osano infilarsi più a fondo in una guerra civile.
– L’intervento militare deciso da Obama potrebbe essere un fallimento se il primo risultato è il caos o la divisione del paese.
– Se continua la guerra civile, Obama dovrà affrontare critiche crescenti …
o Il senatore rivale di Obama alle presidenziali 2008, McCain, Arizona: lo stallo era già insito nella strategia; no-fly zone decisa troppo tardi. Prezzo di sangue troppo alto per la popolazione libica a causa del non aver agito e della priorità data all’intervento multilaterale.
– Parte delle difficoltà di Obama derivano dal fatto che l’obiettivo americano per la Libia al di là delle dichiarazioni di protezione dei civili,
o è un cambio di regime, condiviso dalla Francia e dall’Italia;
– mentre l’Onu non ha autorizzato il rovesciamento di Gheddafi.
By SAM DAGHER, CHARLES LEVINSON and JOHN W. MILLER
– France and the U.K. called on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to more aggressively defend civilians, particularly in the besieged Libyan city of Misrata, from Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s forces, but NATO officials said the allies were doing a good job and reported strikes in the area.
– The signs of friction came on the eve of an international meeting of the so-called Libya contact group, which brings together Western and regional governments, in Doha, Qatar, on Wednesday. Ministers from NATO countries are also scheduled to meet, on Thursday and Friday in Berlin.
– On Tuesday, troops loyal to Col. Gadhafi pounded Misrata, in western Libya, with artillery and mortar rounds, and continued attempts to make incursions into the city, Libya’s third-largest.
– Ayman Abu Shahma, a doctor with the rebels, who have been in control of parts of the city since late February, said there were also clashes between rebels and government forces along a road leading to the port, the rebels’ only outlet in the weekslong siege by Col. Gadhafi’s troops.
– French Foreign Minister Alain Juppé said Tuesday that NATO wasn’t doing enough to stop Col. Gadhafi’s forces from killing civilians in rebel areas. "NATO has to play its role in full," Mr. Juppé said.
– After 42 years under Moammar Gadhafi’s rule, it’s hard to imagine what Libya could look like without the dictator in power. WSJ’s Neil Hickey reports from Washington on the cloudy outlook for the north African nation.
– Britain’s Foreign Secretary William Hague said the allies must "intensify" their efforts.
– Mr. Juppé, speaking on France-Info radio, also urged the European Union[e] to do more to get humanitarian aid to Misrata.
– Brig. Gen. Mark van Uhm, chief of allied operations, said NATO was doing a good job protecting civilians against the regime’s "hit-and-run tactics" in Misrata. Later Tuesday, NATO said its aircraft had destroyed five tanks that were threatening the civilian population in Misrata, in addition to strikes elsewhere in the country.
"The enemy knows if they use tanks, they are going to be hit," he said.
A rebel leader said coalition airstrikes destroyed several tanks belonging to Col. Gadhafi’s troops in an area known as al-Dafiniyah on the western outskirts of Misrata.
– France and the U.K. were early proponents of international military intervention in the conflict in Libya. After the U.S. withdrew its strike aircraft last week, France ramped up sorties and the U.K. committed more aircraft capable of striking ground targets.
– Mr. Hague suggested Tuesday that more aircraft would be beneficial, citing the U.K.’s contributions. "Of course, it will be welcome if other countries also do the same. There is always more to do," he said.
"I think with the assets we have we do a great job," NATO’s Gen. van Uhm said. "If you get more, you can do more."
– A Pentagon spokesman Tuesday said NATO hadn’t asked it to resume flying raids. The White House said from the start of the mission it intended to hand the leading role in military operations to allies after the first week of airstrikes took out the bulk of Col. Gadhafi’s air defenses.
– On Tuesday, the White House expressed faith in NATO’s ability to carry out the mission, while the State Department dismissed talk of discord in the alliance.
– Meanwhile, the International Committee for the Red Cross, which formally established a presence in Tripoli on Monday, said it was negotiating with the Gadhafi regime to get access to Misrata by land to deliver humanitarian assistance. The ICRC was particularly concerned about an estimated 7,000 migrant workers marooned in Misrata’s port for weeks, said spokesman Christian Cardon.
Dr. Abu Shahma, the rebel doctor, said hundreds more workers flocked to the port Tuesday after hearing that more ships were on the way.
– A 1,000-passenger ship chartered by the International Organization for Migration left southern Italy on Tuesday for Benghazi, en route to Misrata, the IOM said. It said it would load up humanitarian assistance in Benghazi before sailing for Misrata.
– A Turkish ship evacuated about 950 Egyptians from Misrata on Monday, according to Dr. Abu Shahma.
– In another development, former Libyan Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa, who recently defected to the U.K., traveled to Qatar for Wednesday’s meeting, Britain’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office said.
– Mr. Koussa planned to meet representatives of the Libyan rebel administration, the Transitional National Council, a person familiar with the matter said.
– Hafiz Abdel Goga, the spokesman for the council, said the rebel leadership had no contact with Mr. Koussa. Rebel officials said a priority at the conference would be to convince the international community to lift sanctions on eastern Libya. Such a step is necessary to free up cash in Libyan bank accounts abroad and allow banks in eastern Libya to obtain foreign currency and transfer payments to banks overseas, in order to import basic commodities and other goods.
"We are hoping the international community will agree to our demand. We don’t want to face a food shortage crisis," said Abdallah Shamia, a senior economic official in the rebel government.
– Mr. Koussa, the former foreign minister and intelligence chief, arrived in the U.K. late last month. On Monday he released a statement to the British Broadcasting Corp. saying he had been "devoted" to his work for 30 years under Col. Gadhafi but that after recent events "things changed and I couldn’t continue."
"I know that what I did to resign will cause me problems, but I’m ready to make that sacrifice for the sake of my country," he said in a statement in Arabic translated by the BBC.
– Mr. Koussa also warned against the risks of civil war and the possibility of his country becoming "a new Somalia."
– Libyan authorities in Tripoli refused to comment on Mr. Koussa’s statements. Ibrahim el-Sharif, minister for social affairs, called Mr. Koussa a "longtime friend" and refused to acknowledge that he had defected. "Maybe he was kidnapped," he said.
—Alistair MacDonald and Adam Entous contributed to this article.
Write to Sam Dagher at sam.dagher@wsj.com, Charles Levinson at charles.levinson@wsj.com and John W. Miller at john.miller@dowjones.com
Nations at Doha Summit Seeking Breakthrough Find Little to Agree On; Some Call for Arming Rebels
By ALEX DELMAR-MORGAN, NATHAN HODGE and CHARLES LEVINSON
– Italy and Qatar revived calls to give Libya’s rebels the means to fight off Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s forces, as allies at a summit on the crisis argued about what to do next.
– Calls to arm Libya’s rebels and ramp up airstrikes have put the Obama administration on the defensive, after the U.S. dialed back its role in the military campaign last week. On Wednesday, Washington left open the option of arming the rebels, and revealed that after turning command over to NATO last week, U.S. aircraft continued to attack Libyan air defenses, though at a scaled-back level.
At a meeting with European foreign ministers in Qatar, there was division among several leaders over whether to arm rebels trying to overthrow Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.
– Officials from 20 countries and representatives of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the United Nations and the African Union[e] met in Doha, Qatar to discuss the stalemate. Going in to the meeting, France and the U.K. called on allies to do more to help the rebels and civilians on the ground; NATO commanders defended their performance.
– The NATO mission faces a problem common to past air campaigns: the difficulty of defeating an adversary using air power alone, particularly when airstrikes put civilians at risk.
– Maurizio Massari, a spokesman for the Italian foreign minister, said allies should help rebels "get the materials necessary to defend themselves and protect civilians." Qatari officials also urged more support for Libyan self-defense.
– Qatar has been a lead Arab supporter of the rebels, and said it oversaw the rebels’ sale last week of more than $100 million in crude oil, and has delivered fuel to Benghazi.
– NATO diplomats said the question of arming the rebels was one for individual nations. But because NATO is enforcing a U.N. arms embargo, allies debated whether such a move would need legal clearance from the U.N. sanctions committee.
– U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner, asked about Italy’s suggestion, said, "All options are on the table."
British Foreign Secretary William Hague called for allies to do more to help the air campaign, and said Britain wasn’t supplying arms to the Libyan rebels, but giving "non-lethal assistance" such as telecommunications equipment.
– Others, including Germany and Belgium argued against ramping up military measures.
– Rebel commanders and political leaders have said that they have received some light arms shipments, but want heavier weaponry capable of matching Col. Gadhafi’s arsenal.
– The U.S. has resisted calls to arm the rebels, citing their lack of training and the risk that weapons will end up in the hands of Islamist extremists.
– U.S. envoy Chris Stevens has been meeting with rebel leaders in Benghazi "to evaluate what their needs are, how we can be most effective," Mr. Toner said
– To that end, U.S. diplomats, defense officials, and lawmakers are scheduled to meet in Washington this week with Mahmoud Jibril, the de facto foreign minister of the Libyan opposition.
– Rebel officials in Benghazi said they thought the Doha talks would make it easier for them to obtain arms from abroad.
– Libya’s finance minister and interim central bankerAbdel-Hafidh Zlitni told reporters in Tripoli expressedalarm at talk of arming the rebels and suggestions that the country’s frozen assets be used to finance the interim government in Benghazi.
– "The outright aim of the occidental coalition is to overthrow the leader," Col. Gadhafi, he said, calling it "contrary to the spirit and aim" of the U.N. resolution authorizing international military intervention in Libya.
– In Doha, Mahmud Awad Shammam, press secretary for the rebel Libya National Transitional Council, called on the U.S. to resume a greater role in NATO’s bombing campaign.
– The Obama administration, which has built its Libya policy around the notion that after the initial strikes the U.S. would play a limited military role, immediately rejected the rebels’ request, and the White House expressed faith in NATO’s ability to manage the campaign.
– At the same time, the Pentagon said that, since the transition of the operation to NATO command began on April 1, the U.S. has flown 35% of the sorties over Libya, contributing to the enforcement of the no-fly zone.
– Pentagon spokesman Col. David Lapan said U.S. strikes on regime ground forces would require a special request from NATO, and none had been made.
– The contact group in Doha did agree on looking into setting up a fund to meet the humanitarian needs of the rebels. Mr. Shammam, the rebel official, said they needed $1.5 billion in aid to cover food and medicine, and were seeking access the government’s frozen assets.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused the Gadhafi regime of "renewed atrocities" in Misrata, including indiscriminate attacks and efforts to starve the population into submission. She said the U.S. was keeping track to ensure "that those who committed these atrocities are held accountable."
In Tripoli, some residents privately expressed hope that the Doha talks were a step toward the demise of Col. Gadhafi’s regime. A shopkeeper in the city center was watching news from Doha on a TV set in his back office. "Everyone is in a wait-and-see mode," he said. "The regime can’t last forever."
– NATO foreign ministers meeting in Berlin at a regular meeting Thursday and Friday will begin by discussing Libya. The topic will also be taken up Thursday by the Arab League in Cairo.
—Sam Dagher, Laura Meckler and Keith Johnson contributed to this article.
Published by the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)
By Chris Marsden
– The European Union’s Luxembourg summit on Libya was dogged by conflicting great power interests even before it officially met.
– The United Nations had rejected the EU offer to deploy its proposed naval and military mission, EUFOR Libya, to relieve the besieged city of Misrata.
– EUFOR, set up April 1, is a 7.9 million-euro operation to be based in Rome and led by Italian Rear Admiral Claudio Gaudiosi. Though wrapped in pledges that there are to be no soldiers on the ground, the mission is aimed at an initial mobilisation of the EU’s two battle groups, made up of 1,500 troops.
– The leading player in the proposed operation is Germany, which contributes 990 troops. The government of Angela Merkel last Friday offered to participate in any “humanitarian mission” asked of it by the UN.
– This is a reversal of Berlin’s opposition to the US-French-UK-led operation, prompted by a fear of being excluded by its rivals from influence in Libya and the oil-rich regions of North Africa and the Middle East more generally.
– EUFOR’s mobilisation is legally dependent on an appeal from the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
– But EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton’s offer to mount a naval convoy to Misrata was rejected, except “as a last resort,” according to Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger, recounting a conversation with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
– The UN stance was denounced as “an ideological opposition which clashes with reality” by one unnamed EU diplomat, speaking to the German Press Agency.
– Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb complained, “OCHA very often sees humanitarian aid as black and white, (it doesn’t) want any military involvement, where sometimes as we know there is need for military assistance to get aid in.”
– Spain’s minister for EU affairs, Diego Lopez Garrido, said that the Luxembourg summit meeting would still “approve the military operation concept to protect the humanitarian work that the UN is carrying out in Libya.”
– There has so far been no official statement from the United States on either the proposed mission or the UN’s refusal to give the go-ahead.
– But there are indications from the UK and France that they were not happy with the attempt by Germany to assume such a prominent role within an EU force.
– British Foreign Secretary William Hague stated, “Naturally, assistance is being delivered to Libya, including Misrata. So far, this has not required the deployment of military support.”
– Both London and Paris want greater EU military involvement, but on their terms and not as a German-led force.
– The US too is keen that the European powers shoulder more of the cost of the Libyan offensive. Having transferred operational control to NATO, it has cut its naval presence from eleven to three warships and the number of its planes involved from 170 to 90. These planes also generally operate outside of NATO’s command structures.
– France and the UK spent the run-up to the summit denouncing their European partners for not pulling their weight militarily within NATO. Referring obliquely to the other European powers, French Foreign Secretary Alain Juppé insisted, “NATO must fully play its role, and it is not doing so sufficiently… It wanted to take the operational lead, we accepted that.” But currently, he added, the intensity of the air campaign was “not enough.”
– Hague said, “We must maintain and intensify our efforts in NATO. That is why the United Kingdom has in the last week supplied additional aircraft capable of striking ground targets threatening the civilian population of Libya. Of course it would be welcome if other countries also do the same.”
– Hague reiterated the UK-US demand that “to have any viable peaceful future for Libya, Colonel Gaddafi needs to leave.”
– These criticisms come despite a dramatic stepping up of the air campaign by the NATO alliance since Saturday, and solicited a rebuttal by NATO.
“NATO is conducting its military operations in Libya with vigour within the current mandate. The pace of the operations is determined by the need to protect the population,” it said in a statement.
– With the public support of the US, UK and Italy, Libya’s opposition Transitional National Council (TNC) on Sunday rejected ceasefire proposals agreed between the African Union[e] and Gaddafi, demanding that he and his sons leave the country.
– The EU summit, meant as an assertion of European power and influence, instead once again became an occasion for divisions and recriminations between the European powers. Spain rejected the criticisms of France and the UK and their demands for greater military commitments. “NATO’s action is proceeding well. There is nothing to revise for now,” said State Secretary for European Affairs Diego Lopez Garrido.
– During discussions on the concept of operations (CONOPS) for EUFOR Libya, Sweden reportedly voiced reservations about the move.
– Finnish Foreign Minister Stubb warned of the development of a “stalemate” producing “more of a Kosovo situation, I would argue, and Kosovo lasted 78 days.”
– Invoking NATO control is entirely self-serving on the part of France and the UK and is seen by Washington as a means of maintaining its own de-facto leading role.
It will not stop any of their own attempts to secure controlling influence over events through other channels. Possible military intervention on the ground under a humanitarian cover is by no means off the agenda. Instead, there a competition for the franchise under which it will proceed.
– Today, Britain and Qatar are hosting a meeting in Doha of the Libya Contact Group, where plans for international humanitarian relief for Misrata and other besieged cities will be discussed. Around 20 countries will be represented by foreign ministers.
– The informal group was set up at the March 29 London conference on Libya and was initially France’s choice to lead the military campaign, not NATO as demanded by the US and UK.
– It was agreed that it would “provide leadership and overall political direction to the international effort, in close coordination with the UN, AU (African Union), Arab League, OIC (Organisation of the Islamic Conference) and EU (European Union) to support Libya.”
The Libyan opposition TNC (Transitional National Council)will directly address the contact group in Qatar, as opposed to its less prominent role in London, at which time only France had recognized it as the official government of Libya. Since then, the TNC has been recognised by Italy and Qatar.
French Foreign Ministry spokesman Bernard Valero was euphoric. “Not only will they be there, but–and this should be checked with the Qataris–unlike London, where they were on the sidelines, they will appear before the contact group.”
– The TNC has been allowed to set up Libya TV by Qatar, which is the most fulsome supporter of the US-led offensive against Gaddafi.
– Britain is seeking to establish its leadership role through the prominent Libyan defector Moussa Koussa. Formerly Gaddafi’s intelligence chief and foreign minister, he has since been identified by some sources as a long-time MI6 agent.
– He was allowed to leave Britain on Tuesday, despite being formally questioned over possible involvement in the Lockerbie bombing. A spokeswoman for the British Foreign Office, speaking in return for anonymity under departmental rules, said on Tuesday that Mr. Koussa had been able to leave because he was “a free individual, who can travel to and from Britain as he wishes.”
– Koussa would “share his insights” on the inner workings of the Gaddafi regime, another spokesman said.
Before leaving, Koussa issued a statement in Arabic asking “everybody to avoid taking Libya into a civil war. This would lead to so much blood and Libya would be a new Somalia.”
– “The solution in Libya will come from the Libyans themselves, and through discussion and democratic dialogue,” he said.
– The New York Times speculated that his remarks “may have indicated that he was seeking to position himself for a position in a successor government in Libya.” But they were not welcomed by the TNC, with media spokesman Mustafa Gheriani replying, “We don’t have ethnic groups waging war against each other. We don’t have political parties waging war against each other. There are two fronts. There are the people of the country, the Libyan people, and Colonel Gaddafi and his regime and his kids.”
– Tomorrow, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is expected to chair yet another international conference on Libya in Cairo, “to ensure close coordination between the United Nations, the African Union, the League of Arab States, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and the European Union.”
– That same day, the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), are also meeting. All abstained on the UN resolution sanctioning the military assault on Libya. Yesterday, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned that the situation in Libya “has already spun out of control.”
Indulging in schadenfreude, he said the NATO operation was beset with conflicts: “[E]veryone has different plans in this regard. The Europeans say one thing, the Americans says another thing, one day ‘we will participate,’ another day ‘we will not participate.’”
About the WSWS | Contact Us | Privacy Statement | Top of page
Copyright © 1998-2011 World Socialist Web Site – All rights reserved
April 11, 2011
– WASHINGTON — Three weeks ago, President Obama ordered American troops into the first “humanitarian war” on his watch, vowing to stop the forces loyal to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi from massacring their own people. Mr. Obama’s hope was that a quick application of power from the air would tip the balance, and the Libyan rebels would do the rest.
– Now with the Qaddafi forces weathering episodic attacks, and sometimes even gaining, the question in Washington has boiled down to this: Can Mr. Obama live with a stalemate?
– Asked on Monday whether the United States could accept a cease-fire proposed by the African Union[e] that would effectively leave Colonel Qaddafi in control of part of the country, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton hedged. First, she said, the Libyan government would have to allow food, water and electricity into cities it has cut off and allow in humanitarian assistance. Then, she added, “These terms are nonnegotiable.”
– But she immediately reiterated that ultimately nothing could be resolved without “the departure of Qaddafi from power, and from Libya.” The statement seemed to underscore the limbo the administration finds itself in, with the rebels unable to achieve regime change on their own, and Washington and its NATO allies hesitant to leap deeper into a civil war.
– Mr. Obama’s decision to join the military intervention in Libya may well be judged a failure if the initial result is a muddle or a partition of the country, an outcome that his own secretary of defense, Robert M. Gates, declared less than a month ago would be a “a real formula for insecurity.”
– If the country’s civil war drags on, Mr. Obama will almost certainly have to answer a rising chorus of critics that he entered the battle too late, began to exit too early, and overestimated a very inexperienced, disorganized rebel movement.
– Senator John McCain, the Arizona senator who ran for president against Mr. Obama in 2008, has been the chief critic, arguing that a stalemate was baked into the strategy. “If we had declared a no-fly zone early on, three or four weeks ago, Qaddafi would not be in power today,” Mr. McCain said last week. “So now the Libyan people are paying a very high price in blood because of our failure to act, and because of this overwhelming priority of having to act multilaterally.”
– In interviews, senior administration officials urge patience. The first NATO strikes, they note, were only 23 days ago. Colonel Qaddafi, they say, has been badly wounded by the rebellion and is still reeling from the defection of a few key allies and the loss of billions in revenue that he used buy loyalty.
– Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the National Security Council, argues that the key to ultimate success is “continued messaging to Qaddafi’s inner circle that the writing is on the wall.”
But, Mr. Vietor added: “Unilateral, open-ended military action to pursue regime change isn’t good strategy, and wouldn’t advance American credibility anywhere. Stopping a massacre, building an international coalition, and tightening the squeeze on Qaddafi as a part of an international coalition is in our interest, and that’s what we’re going to do.”
– Over time, that strategy might yet work. But clearly the administration is gambling on catching a break — perhaps an army uprising, the gradual starvation of a regime addicted to cash, maybe a stray bullet or lucky missile strike that ends a dictator’s 40-year rule.
– But as Mr. Obama frequently noted when he was in the Senate criticizing the American approach to Iraq and Afghanistan, hope is not a strategy.
Gary J. Bass, a Princeton professor who ranks among the foremost scholars of humanitarian interventions, noted recently that Mr. Obama’s caution about those two wars applies equally to brief interventions to save lives.
“Humanitarian wars, like all wars, tend to escalate,” Professor Bass said. He expressed sympathy for Mr. Obama’s position, he said, because “all the criticism he gets now is from a world that didn’t see a massacre in Benghazi,” he said, referring to the city that appeared on the brink of slaughter when the no-fly zone was enforced on March 19. “We’ll never know what that might have looked like.”
– But Professor Bass added that the risks were high. “Modern civil wars last years,” he said, “and this could go on for a very long time. And when you intervene, people tend to say you have to intervene more.”
The longer Mr. Qaddafi remains in power, others note, the greater the chance that he will lash out with some attempt at retaliation, perhaps a terrorist attack outside the country that would have echoes of Libya’s bombing of Pan Am 103 more than 22 years ago. One senior counterterrorism official said that “this is a scenario that clearly has us concerned.”
– Part of Mr. Obama’s difficulty has its roots in the fact that the American goal in dealing with Libya is at odds with the United Nations’ goal. Though this White House steers clear of the words “regime change,” officials make clear that is what they want.
-“There needs to be a transition that reflects the will of the Libyan people and the departure of Qaddafi from power and from Libya,” Mrs. Clinton said Monday. That is also France’s avowed goal.
Other key members of the coalition also stood firm on Monday. “The future of Libya should include the departure of Qaddafi,” Foreign Minister Franco Frattini of Italy said in London, where he was meeting with Foreign Secretary William Hague.
– But while it may want Qaddafi out, the White House insists that the military action in Libya is intended solely to protect civilians, noting that the United Nations did not authorize anyone to overthrow Qaddafi.
– And that leaves Mr. Obama with a vexing choice, between living with a civil war that may drag on for weeks, months or years, at a gradually rising human cost,
o and becoming more deeply involved, either directly or through NATO, in a third war in a Muslim nation.
“We’re not in a good place,” an Obama adviser acknowledged last week, on a day when rebel forces seemed particularly hapless and disorganized.
Steven Lee Myers and Eric Lichtblau contributed reporting.