Afghan Drawdown, Libyan Murder 83

Could anyone watch Jeremy Bowen’s piece on BBC News last night, which showed a grieving father hugging the wrapped bodies of two tiny children killed in a NATO bombing? The fact the tiny childrens’ grandfather was a Gadaffi minister seemed to Jeremy Bowen a possible justification – he posed a dichotomy that by killing these children, more civilian lives could be saved.

But how could this warping of utilitarian judgement work in practice? Bowen quoted NATO as saying there were command and control structures in the house as well as the Minister’s family. So bombing it saved civilian lives elsewhere. What constitutes a command and control structure in these circumstances? A mobile phone? A computer? And how does destroying that little bit of infrastructure save lives so directly that it could atone for our killing of tiny children? Jeremy Bowen, who interviewed me in Tashkent and I like, should be ashamed of himself. But he did get the tiny dead children on the ten o clock news for two minutes, which has done something to undermine the pro-war propaganda pumped out everywhere.

NATO is not saving civilian lives. It is killing civilians.

Meanwhile, Obama announces the beginning of the end of the utterly pointless occupation of Afghanistan. The Afghan war was was not as illegal as the Iraq war, as it did have a connection to 9/11. But we have achieved nothing after ten years we had not achieved after one year. There is still no non-fraudulent democracy, no rule of law, no women’s rights and no economic development outwith the narcotics sector. Nor will there be, and we will have made as little societal change as the Anglo-Afghan Wars or the Soviet occupation.

We have, however, killed an awful lot of small children. And lost many of our own who were little more than children,

83 thoughts on “Afghan Drawdown, Libyan Murder

1 2 3
  • evgueni

    you are being incredibly naive. Testimony of those wronged by the Gaddafi regime can say nothing about the feelings of those who have not been wronged by it. Stalin murdered millions and yet was revered by millions more. People of my generation were discovering this truth even as our grandparents absolutely refused to listen to any of it.
    So, Stalin was a murderous tyrant and (most of) his people ought to have hated him for it but didn’t. It’s the human condition..

  • mark_golding

    I am a pessimist and I have extracted part of a very long speech by Dr. Asad Ghanem. It is frank, it is realistic and it is important to future generations because we have failed. My generation has failed and my son’s generation will also fail; We have failed – to resolve the hardship, the discrimination, the suffering and pain, to prevent the smashing of little innocent bodies, to allay the tormenting depression or the agonizing grief of an orphaned child, or ease the mental suffering of a mother holding her dead child; we have failed – to secure life, to covet existence. Why? Because the leader(s) of the most powerful country on this earth are impotent, weak, prostrate and powerless; chained to history and thus incapable of change.

    Dr. Asad Ghanem makes this clearer – it is a bedtime story that awaits the unborn, I hope you will read it in full.

    If you want to talk about the political situation of Palestine, of Palestinians, following this, we will have a very mixed, not clear-cut conclusions. I will tell you what I mean exactly. First, in the political level, the relationship with Israel. I mean you all heard what [Israeli Prime Minister] Netanyahu said in the Congress and before the Congress in the Knesset. I’ll guess that you wrote something about it. He said, he just said that, do not believe him that, he is not a two-state guy, he is not for two state. This is for sure, one hundred percent. But he knows that this is part of the propaganda, the agenda, the international, Obama, all over. What’s going on, so he said, “Okay I’ll go for it, I know that there is not chance for such an option. Let’s do it, say it.” But on the other side, “we will insist that this state should be accepted as a Jewish state. This is one. Second, we are not going to return to ‘67. Third, we are not going to let the refugees return. Fourth, we are not going to withdraw from Jerusalem. Fifth, we are going to hold the valley Jordan. What else?” This is enough.

    So this is not the peace, I mean this is war. But what is the explanation behind that. The explanation, and this is also related to people that believe that Obama will say to Netanyahu, “Just withdraw from the West Bank” and they will withdraw. They have misunderstanding to what is going on. Israel politics is derived first and foremost from internal consideration, not Obama, not the United States, not Europe, not the Arabs and not others. And the political situation in Israel, could not and cannot allow Israel to make historical compromise in this period in Israel history. There is no chance Israel will accept a real and genuine – to consider a solution. So it is fine to continue to say that this is solution and two-state, et cetera, et ceteraand whatever you want. This is not realistic, this is something else.

    So there is no change in the Israeli concept, what is peace, but I tell you what is important to say. That is important to say that there is no change in Israel, still Israel is in much sophisticated, complicated situation after this Arab Spring. And if this will succeed in Syria, in Egypt, Israel will have troubled times, difficult times. I’m not saying that there will be war; I am saying Israel will face the Arab nations, not only Mubarak and Bashar Al-Assad. This will be serious in this regard. Any election in the Arab world will bring more people, those who will be elected they will hold much ‘extreme,’ quote unquote stance towards Israel. This is clear. The Arab nations don’t like Israel. They don’t think it is legitimate and they want to see something else in the area. So Israel would be in big trouble, in a big situation, this is maybe another Israeli failure, not to adopt the Arab initiative and to say you are ready to go for Arab reconciliation.

    I want to tell you something about the Americans. I know that some people won’t like what I am going to say about the American administration, the Obama. I was here last year when he was elected. My friends they were trying to convince me that Obama is something different. He will make it clear to Israel that it must withdraw from the West Bank. There will be a Palestinian state, and he promised. No no, he promised! In one year there will be a Palestinian state. Politics in our area is not a reflection of what Obama thinks or dreams. This is a very complicated situation, but at least he’s not the major role, the major player in this. But I want to tell you something else. Something else that people come up with is this idea, I read it in several places, that the Arab Spring, the Arab revolution, the Arab democracy or potential of democracy, it is a historical moment for the American administration to come up with its ideas and to say to Israel, you see, “now, Arabs, they have more dignity, they are more democratic, you are not going to survive their demands. Let’s make the peace; this is the right time to do the peace.” And we have Arabs like us because they support our intervention in Libya. We need to use it; we need to continue with the momentum of having and returning the support of the Arabs after the big failure, after his speech in Cairo. And this is the right moment to do it.

    There are many explanations for this idea, that this is the right time. But, in fact, what happened is that Obama in his two speeches – you don’t need his two speeches, I mean you may also refer to other things – he made it clear that basically he is adopting the Israeli right-wing stance on the conflict. I know that people don’t like this. If we want to expect to learn from history and to try to protect what’s coming on, you know. I mean the first administration that was involved after Oslo, after the reconciliation between the PLO and Israel, was [former U.S. President Bill] Clinton. What he did was he brought over Netanyahu to [late PLO Chairman Yasser] Arafat and he told them, “This is serious. You need to sign the agreement. I am not going to give up!” And he declared in 2000, in Camp David, that is for the division of Jerusalem, re-dividing Jerusalem, and he is going for the territorial swap of 3-4 percent, and that’s it, he’s really serious. And then, Netanyahu was in a very difficult situation because of one aspect, because of Clinton.

    Then came [former U.S. President] George W. Bush, with his own ideas about how to fix the world. But he came with a specific idea that called the Road Map, and he told [former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon, “You must stop and freeze the settlements! And I, the President of the United States, in the first time in the history of the United States, I expect that we are going to wield a Palestinian state.” This is what he said. I’m saying I know that people will say that he didn’t do anything. I’m talking about what he declared, what he said. And now, what we have is a deterioration of the American stance. Just imagine that the American, United States president who should say clearly as a president, as the president, to say clearly to Netanyahu, this is what we want, “Look, this is what we want, and we can do it.” And he can do it! But, instead of that, he went to the [American Israel Public Affairs Committee] AIPAC after his first speech, after he had been attacked by right-wing, pro-Israeli lobbies, and he said, “I’m sorry. I didn’t mean what you think that I meant. I mean that Israel will not return to ’67, Jerusalem will not be divided, refugees will not return, I accept Israel.” He didn’t say that I accept Israel as a Jewish state, he just said the same words that he was demanded by Netanyahu. He said, “I accept Israel as the state of the Jewish nation.” This is something new by Netanyahu, only by Netanyahu, and he said the same words. He followed Netanyahu 100 percent. And he said to [Palestinian President Mahmoud] Abbas, “Don’t play with me. Don’t go to this General Assembly and declare a state.” What is this? Is this American policy? This is the Israeli stance; this is the right-wing Israeli government stance! Israel is divided. The left in Israel supports this declaration. Not the left, the right. The center in Israel supports it. But he followed Netanyahu in this regard.

    But one thing he said very important to us as Palestinians – I don’t know if we took care of it – he said that this conflict is not resolvable. We cannot resolve the conflict. We will keep two issues, Jerusalem and the refugees for the next generations. And this I am saying for many years. This conflict is not resolvable; we cannot resolve this conflict between Israel and Palestine. It is very pessimistic but I think you can also look at it as a realist, with the hope that the next generation will have something to do in life. They will continue to do something with this conflict. Relatively, to our expectations, based on our analysis of political developments, there is a deterioration in the American stance toward the Palestinians by Obama. This is a fact. This guy is pro-Israeli, a full 100 percent, and he refused! Why did [former U.S. Special Envoy for Middle East Peace] George Mitchell withdraw, resign? Why, because he is tired? He came to a conclusion that there is no hope with Obama. That’s it.

  • ingo

    I saw the bit by Bowen and had to switch it off, equally yesterdays resumee of our war upon Afghanistan, utter tripe that left out important messages. No word about the utterly destructive seasonal change of the overall brief, the title should have read ‘from hearts and mind to oblivion in ten violent years, a tale of many stories.’

    fact is that we are approaching the limits ot our unsustainable systems, whether its banking, the enviornment, our financial probety, as well as our arguments over what course to take, our sense of fairness has long gone, so has respect for each other.
    Diplomacy is being replaced by sheer brute force.

    The only person talking sense and knew what implications are likely to happen on the ground was the Finnish adviser to the UK contingent, but then she was easily overuled, a woman in Afghanistan could not possibly change the policies of men at war.
    Not a word of the assisted drugs tarde through the norther territories, the Uzbek connections and most likely the reason why Richard Conroy was killed by our allies (read murder in Samarkand:), not even the slightest peep.
    Whatever the negotiations with the Talibs come up with, they will want Karzai out, he has compromised himself too much. I’m sure that UNOCAL will have an ample pension set aside for him.

    Last weekend saw roughly 1 million demonstrating for Ghadaffi on the streets of Tripoli, even if that is not the true figure and he has managed to pay 10.000/100.000 to attend, it is still a strong backing after such hardship.
    I agree with the general direction, NATO has strayed far away from its brief aims and objectives, now is the time time to talk, the bombing is illegal, however far fetched a scenario one might want to conjour up, it is an abomination that must be halted.

    Thanks for all the excellent links, this blog is humming allright.
    I’m in Edinburgh next week, bar my little trip to Glasg’ee for a day, so if anybody would like to meet somewhere for a chat and a drink of sorts, I’d love to. I will be living in Warriston road near the Botanical Garden, suggest any pub near cannon mill and I’m all yours… Vronsky? let me buy ya a drink… (that usually works with a scotsman:)

    • Clark

      Oh look, my avatar picture has returned; I wonder how and why… And I’ve worked out how to reply to a comment – the option is in the little drop-down menu beneath the “Submit Comment” button. That menu also shows the times that each comment was posted.

  • johnm

    The statement below is lifted from the lower link, I first saw this on..
    not bad for a venal military dictator, cant see this being allowed to continue under any european/usa imposed democratic dictatorship
    We are Ukrainians, Russians and Belarusians, the people of various professions (mainly doctors), working in Libya for more than a year (from 2 to 20 years). During this time, we became well acquainted with the life of the Libyan people and state with few citizens of other nations living in this social comfort, as the Libyans. They are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious. Today, the people are suffering. In February, the peaceful life of the people was violated by gangs of criminals and insane drugged youth – whom the Western media for some reason called “peaceful demonstrators”. They used weapons and attacked police stations, government agencies, military units – resulting in bloodshed. Those who direct them, pursue a clear objective – to create chaos and establish control over Libya’s oil. They misinformed the international community, and said that the Libyans are struggling against the regime. Tell us, who would not like such a regime? If such a regime were in Ukraine or Russia, we would not have been here and worked and enjoyed the social comfort at home in our own countries and in every possible way such a regime would be maintained

  • ingo

    Clark, you’re a star + and thanks for that link, it was always too good to be true, how can anybody expect those who own the oil bearing strata of the middle east, would be left in charge of their resources, without being cajoled into our ‘oil junky agendas’, that would be naive.
    We should expect equal strains/wars over other rare resources.

    I know that nobody sleeping in Glastonbury tonight will think of saving water, with heavy rains forcast, but in the middle east its the stuff wars are made off.
    We could easily see a scrap for the eastern Mediterranian gas fields, one sitting right underneath the coast of Ghaza with a capacity that would supply a future Palestinian state with its own independent energy source for decades, most likely the real reason for the usurpation and violence metted out by the IDF to fishermen and foreign flotillas alike.
    But there are many more friction points, the most northerly arctic seas, claimed by Russia,Cannada, Norway and the US, or the Atlantic ridge, a truly amazing environment akin and ecologically diverse as our djungles, facing more frust over deep water drilling in pristine waters.

    • Clark

      Ingo, I know you’re anti-nuclear, but do some exploring from the link below. I have been, but there is so much to take in, counter-arguments to be considered. If LFTRs really can do all the things that their proponents claim, they’re a godsend technology for our times.

  • Ruth


    Libya has a very small population of six million people; and a family is not just defined as husband, wife and children. If someone’s cousin is wronged then the wrong applies to the whole family.

  • angrysoba

    David: “The islamophobic content is to agree with the pretence that 9/11 was in any way connected to cave-dwelling islamists as we are instructed to believe.”
    That’s not “Islamophobic”. All it means is that some people who happen to be Muslims of a particularly radical and politicized kind wanted to fly planes into buildings because they hated the country or the policies of that country.
    But perhaps you think that those people who were responsible were not Muslim or were not Islamists. Okay, then who were they, David? What creed did they believe in?
    Of course, while you witter away about Mossad being involved there actually are suicide bombers in Pakistan and Iraq blowing themselves and others up because of bizarre differences in theology. Is it “islamophobic” to point that out? Do you think that Christianity and Judaism never did the same thing? Stop being a silly arse.

  • mike

    Cast your mind back to last summer, when every news outlet lambasted those “savage Iranian theocrats” for threatening to stone to death a woman who had committed murder. The condemnation was wall-to-wall.

    Now, within the last few days, we have the beheading of an Indonesian maid in Saudi Arabia: a woman who murdered her employer’s wife after being subjected to prolonged abuse. To compound the misery, the woman’s daughter had, according to The Guardian, been kept prisoner by the employer for 14 years.

    And where are the howls of protest from the media? Have the BBC, Sky or CNN turned the spotlight on the House of Saud and their barbaric practices? Of course they haven’t. Our Governments see no evil; consequently, neither do the media. Soft power, indeed.

  • angrysoba

    “And where are the howls of protest from the media? Have the BBC, Sky or CNN turned the spotlight on the House of Saud and their barbaric practices? Of course they haven’t. Our Governments see no evil; consequently, neither do the media. Soft power, indeed.”
    Quite right. I would really like to see some demos outside the Saudi embassy in London. I take it that these demos are a regular occurrence. Unfortunately there is no consulate here in Osaka. But I do hate and despise the Saudi regime. Sadly, an Egyptian friend of mine was telling me that he thinks the Saudi king is a good guy and that it is merely some wayward sons that sent the army to Bahrain. I told him that I thought this was either untrue or merely shows that King Abdullah is unfit to govern.
    But my Egyptian friend is someone who also used to believe that Susannah Mubarak was a great philanthropist until the Jasmine Revolution at which point he declared the Mubaraks were utterly disgraceful and useless and must be immediately deposed.

  • Tony

    On the balance,Bowen has less to answer for in his coverage than most of his colleagues, who carry British Army and NATO press releases as if they had even the remotest chance of being accurate.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    No attempt to deny that people die in Libya. You gave the figure of 1,200 plus.
    You seem to be reasoning that somehow the Western powers that are doing the bombing have something in store for the people of Libya that will constitute some sort of improvements after Gadaffi is deposed. I make two observations:-
    1. Moral equivalence
    2. Prospects for a brighter future for Libyans.
    On the first limb, I run the following figures, just for starters:-
    Vietnam war – 500,000 Asians dead – some 60,000 US service persons dead.
    Iraq – a country destroyed and over a million lives lost.
    Libya – same powers as just mentioned above, at work again – what prospects based on the proven record in Asia and nearby Iraq?
    When you consider really who should be on trial at the Hague, then, when placing Gadaffi beside the ones who are leaders of the powers that profess to have some higher moral standards of governance awaiting the Libyan people, then upon a consistent standard and by reference to human slaughter and war crimes, the likes of Henry Kissinger, George Bush jr. and Tony Blair come readily to mind far ahead of Gadaffi. Cameron is trying at present to earn himself a place in the dock.
    I consider the standard of living that the Libyans in the majority had before the US/NATO started bombing them – and I weigh what kind of future is in store for them if the US/NATO succeed in their bombing mission.
    If the West changes the government of Libya – better will come to the Libyan people?
    Thus – on the proven record – great future awaiting the Libyan people once the great powers get their way with Libyan oil? Right Ruth?

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Ruth – open your eyes – former colonial powers are bombing the Libyan people and they do not have any international cover. As I said:-
    1. UN Resolution 1973 is a lawfully passed Resolution under international law.
    2. Gadaffi is not in violation of the Resolution ( and – if there are facts to state that he has violated the
    non-fly ban – I await the evidence).

    3. The bombings are not – repeat – not covered by the ambit to which Resolution 1973 extends.
    So, the CIA must be permitted to fund the so-called so that the bombing powers can take control of Libyan oil? Thus, the established government during that period is to stand impotent?

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Resolution 1973 – for all to read:-

    The Security Council,
    Recalling its resolution 1970 (2011) of 26 February 2011,
    Deploring the failure of the Libyan authorities to comply with resolution 1970 (2011),
    Expressing grave concern at the deteriorating situation, the escalation of violence, and the heavy civilian casualties,
    Reiterating the responsibility of the Libyan authorities to protect the Libyan population and reaffirming that parties to armed conflicts bear the primary responsibility to take all feasible steps to ensure the protection of civilians,
    Condemning the gross and systematic violation of human rights, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions,
    Further condemning acts of violence and intimidation committed by the Libyan authorities against journalists, media professionals and associated personnel and urging these authorities to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law as outlined in resolution 1738 (2006),
    Considering that the widespread and systematic attacks currently taking place in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya against the civilian population may amount to crimes against humanity,
    Recalling paragraph 26 of resolution 1970 (2011) in which the Council expressed its readiness to consider taking additional appropriate measures, as necessary, to facilitate and support the return of humanitarian agencies and make available humanitarian and related assistance in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
    Expressing its determination to ensure the protection of civilians and civilian populated areas and the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance and the safety of humanitarian personnel,
    Recalling the condemnation by the League of Arab States, the African Union, and the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law that have been and are being committed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
    Taking note of the final communiqué of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference of 8 March 2011, and the communiqué of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union of 10 March 2011 which established an ad hoc High Level Committee on Libya,
    Taking note also of the decision of the Council of the League of Arab States of 12 March 2011 to call for the imposition of a no-fly zone on Libyan military aviation, and to establish safe areas in places exposed to shelling as a precautionary measure that allows the protection of the Libyan people and foreign nationals residing in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
    Taking note further of the Secretary-General’s call on 16 March 2011 for an immediate cease-fire,
    Recalling its decision to refer the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya since 15 February 2011 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and stressing that those responsible for or complicit in attacks targeting the civilian population, including aerial and naval attacks, must be held to account,
    Reiterating its concern at the plight of refugees and foreign workers forced to flee the violence in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, welcoming the response of neighbouring States, in particular Tunisia and Egypt, to address the needs of those refugees and foreign workers, and calling on the international community to support those efforts,
    Deploring the continuing use of mercenaries by the Libyan authorities,
    Considering that the establishment of a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya constitutes an important element for the protection of civilians as well as the safety of the delivery of humanitarian assistance and a decisive step for the cessation of hostilities in Libya,
    Expressing concern also for the safety of foreign nationals and their rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
    Welcoming the appointment by the Secretary General of his Special Envoy to Libya, Mr Abdel-Elah Mohamed Al-Khatib and supporting his efforts to find a sustainable and peaceful solution to the crisis in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
    Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
    Determining that the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security,
    Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
    1. Demands the immediate establishment of a cease-fire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;
    2. Stresses the need to intensify efforts to find a solution to the crisis which responds to the legitimate demands of the Libyan people and notes the decisions of the Secretary-General to send his Special Envoy to Libya and of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union to send its ad hoc High Level Committee to Libya with the aim of facilitating dialogue to lead to the political reforms necessary to find a peaceful and sustainable solution;
    3. Demands that the Libyan authorities comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, human rights and refugee law and take all measures to protect civilians and meet their basic needs, and to ensure the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance;
    Protection of civilians
    4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council;
    5. Recognizes the important role of the League of Arab States in matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security in the region, and bearing in mind Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations, requests the Member States of the League of Arab States to cooperate with other Member States in the implementation of paragraph 4;
    No fly zone
    6. Decides to establish a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians;
    7. Decides further that the ban imposed by paragraph 6 shall not apply to flights whose sole purpose is humanitarian, such as delivering or facilitating the delivery of assistance, including medical supplies, food, humanitarian workers and related assistance, or evacuating foreign nationals from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, nor shall it apply to flights authorised by paragraphs 4 or 8, nor other flights which are deemed necessary by States acting under the authorisation conferred in paragraph 8 to be for the benefit of the Libyan people, and that these flights shall be coordinated with any mechanism established under paragraph 8;
    8. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban on flights imposed by paragraph 6 above, as necessary, and requests the States concerned in cooperation with the League of Arab States to coordinate closely with the Secretary General on the measures they are taking to implement this ban, including by establishing an appropriate mechanism for implementing the provisions of paragraphs 6 and 7 above,
    9. Calls upon all Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to provide assistance, including any necessary over-flight approvals, for the purposes of implementing paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above;
    10. Requests the Member States concerned to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General on the measures they are taking to implement paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above, including practical measures for the monitoring and approval of authorised humanitarian or evacuation flights;
    11. Decides that the Member States concerned shall inform the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States immediately of measures taken in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above, including to supply a concept of operations;
    12. Requests the Secretary-General to inform the Council immediately of any actions taken by the Member States concerned in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above and to report to the Council within 7 days and every month thereafter on the implementation of this resolution, including information on any violations of the flight ban imposed by paragraph 6 above;
    Enforcement of the arms embargo
    13. Decides that paragraph 11 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall be replaced by the following paragraph : “Calls upon all Member States, in particular States of the region, acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, and on the high seas, vessels and aircraft bound to or from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 or 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, calls upon all flag States of such vessels and aircraft to cooperate with such inspections and authorises Member States to use all measures commensurate to the specific circumstances to carry out such inspections”;
    14. Requests Member States which are taking action under paragraph 13 above on the high seas to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General and further requests the States concerned to inform the Secretary-General and the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) (“the Committee”) immediately of measures taken in the exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 13 above;
    15. Requires any Member State whether acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, when it undertakes an inspection pursuant to paragraph 13 above, to submit promptly an initial written report to the Committee containing, in particular, explanation of the grounds for the inspection, the results of such inspection, and whether or not cooperation was provided, and, if prohibited items for transfer are found, further requires such Member States to submit to the Committee, at a later stage, a subsequent written report containing relevant details on the inspection, seizure, and disposal, and relevant details of the transfer, including a description of the items, their origin and intended destination, if this information is not in the initial report;
    16. Deplores the continuing flows of mercenaries into the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and calls upon all Member States to comply strictly with their obligations under paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011) to prevent the provision of armed mercenary personnel to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;
    Ban on flights
    17. Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft registered in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or owned or operated by Libyan nationals or companies to take off from, land in or overfly their territory unless the particular flight has been approved in advance by the Committee, or in the case of an emergency landing;
    18. Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft to take off from, land in or overfly their territory, if they have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the aircraft contains items the supply, sale, transfer, or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, except in the case of an emergency landing;
    Asset freeze
    19. Decides that the asset freeze imposed by paragraph 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply to all funds, other financial assets and economic resources which are on their territories, which are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or by individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or by entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and decides further that all States shall ensure that any funds, financial assets or economic resources are prevented from being made available by their nationals or by any individuals or entities within their territories, to or for the benefit of the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and directs the Committee to designate such Libyan authorities, individuals or entities within 30 days of the date of the adoption of this resolution and as appropriate thereafter;
    20. Affirms its determination to ensure that assets frozen pursuant to paragraph 17 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall, at a later stage, as soon as possible be made available to and for the benefit of the people of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;
    21. Decides that all States shall require their nationals, persons subject to their jurisdiction and firms incorporated in their territory or subject to their jurisdiction to exercise vigilance when doing business with entities incorporated in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or subject to its jurisdiction, and any individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, and entities owned or controlled by them, if the States have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that such business could contribute to violence and use of force against civilians;
    22. Decides that the individuals listed in Annex I shall be subject to the travel restrictions imposed in paragraphs 15 and 16 of resolution 1970 (2011), and decides further that the individuals and entities listed in Annex II shall be subject to the asset freeze imposed in paragraphs 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011);
    23. Decides that the measures specified in paragraphs 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply also to individuals and entities determined by the Council or the Committee to have violated the provisions of resolution 1970 (2011), particularly paragraphs 9 and 10 thereof, or to have assisted others in doing so;
    Panel of experts
    24. Requests the Secretary-General to create for an initial period of one year, in consultation with the Committee, a group of up to eight experts (“Panel of Experts”), under the direction of the Committee to carry out the following tasks:
    (a) Assist the Committee in carrying out its mandate as specified in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution;
    (b) Gather, examine and analyse information from States, relevant United Nations bodies, regional organisations and other interested parties regarding the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;
    (c) Make recommendations on actions the Council, or the Committee or State, may consider to improve implementation of the relevant measures;
    (d) Provide to the Council an interim report on its work no later than 90 days after the Panel’s appointment, and a final report to the Council no later than 30 days prior to the termination of its mandate with its findings and recommendations;
    25. Urges all States, relevant United Nations bodies and other interested parties, to cooperate fully with the Committee and the Panel of Experts, in particular by supplying any information at their disposal on the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;
    26. Decides that the mandate of the Committee as set out in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall also apply to the measures decided in this resolution;
    27. Decides that all States, including the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, shall take the necessary measures to ensure that no claim shall lie at the instance of the Libyan authorities, or of any person or body in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, or of any person claiming through or for the benefit of any such person or body, in connection with any contract or other transaction where its performance was affected by reason of the measures taken by the Security Council in resolution 1970 (2011), this resolution and related resolutions;
    28. Reaffirms its intention to keep the actions of the Libyan authorities under continuous review and underlines its readiness to review at any time the measures imposed by this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011), including by strengthening, suspending or lifting those measures, as appropriate, based on compliance by the Libyan authorities with this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011).
    29. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

  • Walk Tall Hang Loose

    The very first demand of the resolution is for an immediate ceasefire. Gadaffi offered it: the rebels and NATO refused it. It is the latter who are in violation of the resolution.

  • Duncan McFarlane

    In case anyone else hasn’t seen it there’s a report in today’s Independent that Amnesty International have found no evidence to support the Libyan rebels’ claims that Gaddafi ordered his troops to rape women and that much of the rebels’ supposed evidence for it was manufactured.

    Rebel claims that Gaddafi was using black African mercenaries have also been found false by amnesty, with those shown to journalists by the rebels being migrant workers. Some black migrant workers in Benghazi were murdered as a result of the rumours.

    Also their investigation found it’s possible some of the protesters killed by Benghazi’s forces in Benghazi and Baidi at the start of the uprising may have been armed (though they’re not certain of this) and that there was no evidence of anti-aircraft weapons being used against the protesters, only kalashnikovs (that last one isn’t a big difference but is more evidence that the rebels’ claims include at least as much propaganda as Gaddafi’s claims do)

  • Ruth


    I contested your statement that the majority of Libyan people support Gadaffi. I did so because I have knowledge of Libya and I know this isn’t true.

    You say that I ‘seem to be reasoning that somehow the Western powers that are doing the bombing have something in store for the people of Libya that will constitute some sort of improvements after Gadaffi is deposed.’

    No, not necessarily though many Libyans do. But you have to bear in mind that the West would want stability in Libya to maintain oil supplies and reap the rewards of their investments. The Libyans have paid a high price for their revolt and will rise up again if they don’t get most of what they ask for. Although money is short in the East of Libya people can speak freely in public now. This is a major improvement.
    You talk about the West and that Libya would be no better off with the Western criminal leaders pulling the strings. Well, if you take a close look, the UK had been present in Libya for a while with Blair’s rapprochement with the Libyan regime in 2004 This was followed by a gradual arming of Gaddafi with the Foreign Office approving in 2007 the sale of water cannon and armoured cars, used against the protestors. Again, Britain approved the export of sniper rifles to Libya just months before Gaddafi’s troops began killing protesters. British police officers secretly trained members of Libya’s force and UK Special Forces trained the Libyan army.
    To my mind the greatest shame is that the people of a country with so much potential have had to resort to the help of the countries that assisted their leader in enslaving and brutalising them.
    Anyhow, here are a few tweets I copied when Tripoli was being bombed a few weeks ago. I can’t say if they’re genuine but I do know they reflect the views of many Libyans I have met.
    “Everyone is cheering and saying Allah Akbar on roofs, We want more and more”

    “I hate that my country is being bombed. I hate that it HAS to be bombed. If you think otherwise, you live in a fairtytale.”

    “Please don’t stop bombing Gaddafi. The ppl of Tripoli are on the rooftops praying for more jets.”

    “Bomb the daylights out of the Gaddafi forces”

    “People in Tripoli are on the roofs cheering NATO strikes. Give the Gaddafi’s more…Get him”

  • Courtenay Barnett


    You sound to me someone who has an agenda ( paid or not – I do not know).

    You are trying to tell me – us on this blog – that people who are being bombed are actually cheering for NATO to shower more bombs down?

    Can you Ruth, conceive during the bombs being showered on London by the Nazi’s that a true Brit who maybe had some fascist sympathies – would welcome the destruction of his/her home, the killing of sons, daughters – loved ones – in service of the greater political cause/good. Isn’t that the line you actually are advancing?

    Anyway – guess the Libyans are “sand niggers” as some call them – and they really would subscribe to Ruth’s logic.

    All the best to you.Bombs away!

    • Clark

      Courtenay Barnett, I believe Ruth’s comment to be genuine; as Duncan McFarlane points out, support for / opposition to Gadaffi is probably a complex mix. Additionally, many will grudgingly accept Gadaffi’s regime in the hope of avoiding further violence and disruption.
      I think the real problem is the propaganda, which constantly condenses the complex messages from real people into simple rallying-cries for one side or the other. Of course, we are mostly presented with just one side of such propaganda.
      Recognising that we are the target of propaganda is a good first step, but it is a mistake to assume that the truth must be the opposite of the propagand; that assumption just places one in the camp of the opposing propagandists. The challenge lies in accepting that the various conflicting opinions all contain valid arguments, and raising the quality of our debate to “What should happen next?” rather than “Which side should win?”

  • Courtenay Barnett

    On the 1st May, 1942, two bombs fell on Saltwell Park, and these had been forecast by Lord haw-haw (William Joyce – some say he was Irish).
    And, as those of another vintage will recall, there was Oswald Moseley with his Black-shirts.
    Well –what’s the point Ruth?
    It really does seem to me, by analogy, that persons of a country who would have their own bombed and decimated are not true patriots, nationalists or defenders of their homeland –are they?
    But – please make your argument – and – say why an immediate peace process mediated under the auspices of the African Union is not a better route forward than the continued fascist bombing of the Libyan people?

  • Duncan McFarlane

    I don’t doubt a lot of Libyans are all for anything to get rid of Gaddafi – and that many other Libyans are supporters of Gaddafi and would fight to keep him in power, with others refusing to take sides.

    Libyan opinion, like Iraqi opinion on the Iraq war and British public opinion on both is divided.

    “The Libyan people” don’t all agree on it any more than “the British people” do

  • ingo

    Sorry for this blatant personal whimsy on this forum of many interesting Scotsmen.
    Care to chew this Afghan/Libya problem over in the ‘Orchard’ Inverleigh road, near cannon mills? ( suggest others and I will get there)
    Advantages of meeting for real

    a) there is ample liquid just in case we ‘re getting too hot on a topic.
    b) there will be no Larry’s or MI’s snooping about trying to infuse obfusion.
    C) and most important, we are taking the internet to a different level, honing solitary communication from the confinements of our abodes to a real setting were comments are not delayed, swayed or rejected.
    Suhayl, Vronsky, Duncan, or anybody else nearby, I will be there tommorrow night, 7pm’ish, for a first peek, can’t miss me, 6’4 grey haired German looking chap, most likely in my white jacket.

    I will not be holding a copy of anything nor will i wear a red rose in my button hole, but I’d love to meet you in the flesh and share a drink or two, whatever it is, would not want to entice anyone to drink now , would I….

    See you there if you have time to spare.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Thanks, Ingo, that’s lovely of you! So that’s in Stockbridge, Edinburgh, a beautiful part of town (I have very fond memories of working with the Theatre Workshop there!). Are there no spies in Stockbridge, men who bend down to tie their shoe-laces and carry umbrellas with interesting tips? (!) I’d love to meet up for a drink tomorrow, but because of childcare and so on (I’m in Glasgow, of course), I’ll not be able to – but if ever you’re coming to Glasgow, seriously, do let me know and we’ll meet up! Is Vronsky – though obviously with Glasgow connections – not now in Orkney, btw? The St Magnus Festival must be on soon…

  • ingo

    Thanks for that Suhayl as it so happens we are planning in Glasgee for next friday-saturday if we can find a bed somewhere we can fit into.
    Thing is like Vronsky, Jamie, Spencer and Nathan are probably on their summer wreckie somewhere in the world, relaxing after a no doubt busy fair. Might have to go on, but we will come to Glasgow next wekk, period. Love to meet you, we can meet in a pl;ace were you can take the kids, me and my missis are very good with kids of all ages, bring em’, we can meet in a cafe or child friendly pub,
    Suggest a location and time from Friday afternoon-Saturday, we will get there. Who knows you might be able to get a nanny for a few hours and we can go for wee bit of ‘sight seeing’.

  • anno

    Gaddafi tried to change the Qur’an, so that excludes him from being Muslim. He is also mad, so it doesn’t matter if he shares wealth with his people, or not, nobody needs to be ruled by a mad-man. The fact that our own politicians are mad as well, for thinking that they can bale out a ship that has been scuppered by the banks already. Bale you buggers, bale for your lives. No, I’d rather not be on the Titanic when she shortly goes down.

    France loves big diplomacy, hosting Milosevich after he was wanted for war crimes to drink cups of tea with Mrs T. Retch-politick. Gaddafi was not hosted in Paris for his purchasing of arms, but because he had been trading with France instead of USUKIS. Sarkozy like Cameron represents USUKIS before his own country. Even if you’re head of the IMF, you don’t go native by putting your own country’s interests in front of USUKIS hegemony.

    As for children, USUKIS eats them for breakfast, as in Gaza, as in Iraq, as everywhere the USUKIS poke their Masonic world order into. Of all people on earth, children, like Moses, threaten the Pharaoh the most. Every generation springing up with new hope, new resistance to the corruption being subjected by the Masonic world order.

  • Vronsky

    I live near Glasgow, about 20 mins by train. Could be around next Friday, say Cafe Gandolfi about noon?. I’m 6’0, greying hair and beard, usually in biker gear.
    Not in Orkney, Suhayl – what made you think that? Spooky, because I’ve just written a little piece about an archaeological site in Orkney, so it was in my mind (sneaks look over shoulder to see if ‘ud has changed again – readers of Suhayl’s work will get the reference).

  • ingo

    Great Vronsky, we get there. Maybe Suhayl can join us.
    But, at Noon? on my holiday? make that 2 pm if I may, we still have to find a pad for the night there.
    see ya next Friday

  • Courtenay Barnett


    You gave a nuanced and more accurate interpretation.

    To be perfectly frank,none of us can give the accurate percentage indicator for pro or anti Gadaffi factions. All that I can do is reason by inference and deduce from the facts on the ground, namely:-

    1. Over 2 months of very heavy bombing has been going on with no sign of Gadaffi weakning, in the sesnse of massive loss of support, by way of huge military defections or a cohesive opposition group credibly demonstrating majority opposition.

    2. An unwillingness on the part of the US/NATO to permit timely intervention of the African Union with its comprehensive plan for a peaceful solution. This says to me that if it were that the NATO “side” so to speak ( since they are on the side of the rebels) had an upper hand, and the NATO goal was near or close in sight – then the peace process would be moving forward apace.

    I can but wager, and I believe that I would win the bet, that if a credible Libyan election did take place ( say with someone the stature of Jimmy Carter and reputable bodies monitoring) I honestly believe that Gadaffi would be freely voted back in.

    Again, I do not have the benefit of a Gallup poll – and all that I ultimately can do is make an educated ” guesstimate”.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.