by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
Global Research, March 17, 2011
Rebellion - 03/14/2011
is fast approaching eighth anniversary of the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in 2001.
Many ask, have you learned anything?
Senior officials in the U.S. foreign policy and the European Union have indeed "learned some lessons," but not those that are highly regarded in most Americans and Europeans.
Speaking in the context of international law, U.S. leaders and the EU have learned to "leave no trace" effectively. These leaders have learned from the various attempts and initiatives to bring to justice to George W. Bush Jr., Tony Blair, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and his co-conspirators for having initiated internationally illegal war against Iraq.
U.S. leaders and the EU are building up the legal basis to justify the implementation of their plans for war against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
The Council of Hypocrisy
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is an organization formed by petro-emiratos/reinos of Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Oman, and Saudi Arabia. They have betrayed Palestine, worked against Iraq, gave back to Lebanon, and now conspire against Libya, along with Washington and Brussels.
In a blatant act of hypocrisy, the leaders of these emirates and kingdoms have announced that Qaddafi's regime is "illegitimate." Forbes said the following about the announcement of GCC:
"The nations of the Gulf, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have withdrawn all support for Muammar al-Gaddafi to declare "illegitimate" the regime ... "[1] Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, UAE, and Kuwait withdrew their recognition of the Gaddafi regime as the legal government of Libya.
addition, the GCC announced: "On the situation in Libya, the Council denounced the crimes committed against civilians through the use of live ammunition and heavy weapons and recruitment of mercenaries, killing a large number of innocent victims and the formation of gross violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. " [2]
What is striking in these statements and the statement of the petro-kingdoms, emirates and that Gaddafi's government is not the legal government of Libya is its extreme hypocrisy. These convictions are expressed by the same leaders who use violence and murder against their own populations. Are also the same Arab leaders who use mercenaries and violate themselves openly and continuously for human rights and international humanitarian law.
Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, and Bahrain all recently used violence against peaceful civilian demonstrators in many cases people asking basic human rights such as equality and legal recognition. In Bahrain, tanks fired on protesters Pearl Plaza in Bahrain, something that most mainstream media try to hide. In addition, the GCC also demands ironically the establishment of a zone of "no-fly" on Libya to protect civilians: "The Gulf Cooperation Council demands that the Security Council the UN take all necessary measures to protect civilians, including the imposition of a zone of "no-fly". [3]
These autocratic leaders are among the biggest hypocrites. They are not in position, themselves, to speak on the basis of any form of legitimacy. Nor do any of these autocrats is elected. According to the same principles intended to support, they should ask the UN to intervene also in their states. Consider that also led the movement to stop Libya from the Arab League in Cairo. These leaders have also pressured the Arab League to support any confrontation with Libya in the form of no-fly zones. [4]
Qatar Orwellian
iconic Otherwise, Doha has approved a so-called "law of freedom of the media." Since the laws of media freedom in Israel, the law effectively restricts the freedoms of the media using a logic and Orwellian doublespeak. The Peninsula newspaper in English Qatar, said:
"A new media law [in Qatar] is being prepared preliminary draft of which suggests that journalists have the freedom to write about, with the exception of having to do with national security and countries friends. " [5]
Meaning Qatari law is a restriction of press freedom. Qatari law indicates that journalists are free to report anything "except" in subjects related to political allies and friends, or national security matters in Qatar. The "friendly countries" would include Bahrain and Oman, which would explain why Al-Jazeera network barely covers the protests in those countries and ignores the killing of peaceful demonstrators at the hands of the Bahraini military and foreign mercenaries under the command of the Al-Khalifa. The Peninsula
also reports:
"Some journalists Qataris see the initiative as a ploy to return 'in a new avatar' the disbanded Ministry of Information that press censorship imposed until 1995.
"is too well known the role that information and culture ministry had in the past (a reference to censorship of the media)," said Al Athbah Abudulla, a prominent writer and columnist Qatari. "[6]
Qatari
This law also embodies the politics and interests that govern the Al-Jazeera. If supposedly "friendly states" should not be criticized, it means that Libya is "an unfriendly state." This says that the media itself can be used as a weapon. It is worth noting that Hillary Clinton has spoken in support of Al-Jazeera. [7]
legal recognition of the Libyan opposition
U.S. Officials EU and work to create a pretext for a conflict with Libya, are also creating a blanket to prevent future legal prosecution. While GCC leaders declared the government of Colonel Gaddafi is not legitimate, France said legal recognition of the opposition based in Benghazi Libya. Forbes reported: "The initiative comes as many western nations have raised the tone of its rhetoric, France officially recognized the rebel ruling council, and encourages discussion on a no-fly zone in the Security Council and the UN NATO. "[8]
The French initiative is also a demonstration of more hypocritical behavior, because France offered help to the dictatorship in Tunisia Tunisian crush the demonstrators. [9] The European Union as a whole has also granted de facto recognition the leadership in Benghazi, calling it "political party." [10] Deutsche Presse-Agentur (German Press Agency) reports that the EU stated that "no longer willing to negotiate with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and instead hold talks with his opponents, based in the eastern city of Benghazi. " [11] The Arab League has acted in the same way, removing legal recognition of the Gaddafi regime. [12]
None of this is coincidence. These actions are part of an internationally coordinated effort. Washington directs these efforts behind the scenes. The U.S. government is deliberately kept in the shade in order to divert attention.
Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, stated that he will meet with Libyan opposition. [13] In an ominous statement, while visiting Chile, Clinton told reporters: "We are in direct contact with members of the opposition, here in the U.S., Libya, other countries, and work with them to determine what assistance [U.S. government] can effectively use [14]
Recognition Transitional Council seeks to justify foreign intervention
Since democracy, international law is a simple matter of convenience and interests for U.S. and major EU powers. Although one might question the moral legitimacy of the regime of Gaddafi, is different according to the terms of international law. [15] Under international law, the regime of Colonel Qaddafi is the legal representative and the government of Libya. Headed for Paris, what they are doing now U.S. and the EU and its allies in the GCC, is to take steps to eliminate the internationally guaranteed rights of the regime in Tripoli to give legal recognition to the opposition.
The purpose of granting official recognition to the opposition based in Benghazi could be used in various ways by the U.S. and its EU allies. The move is part of balkanization strategy for Libya. It also provides what the U.S. and the EU could certainly be used as legal cover for military intervention.
have to listen to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, to understand the meaning of all this. Sarkozy has repeatedly stated that the factors that would justify military intervention: a Security Council resolution authorizing the UN to use force, a broad coalition including the Arabs, and the consent of the "legal government of Libya" [16] is the keeper or enabler.
What is the legal government of Libya as France? Opposition To Paris Libya in Benghazi, the so-called Transitional Council is the legal government of Libya. It is no secret that the Libyan opposition leaders want to establish "no-fly zones." [17] Therefore, the U.S., EU and NATO will try to present a legal argument by saying that the legal representatives of Libya called for international intervention, and use a humanitarian pretext.
The Libyan opposition leaders want action
It should be clear that the reality of the situation is that "no-fly zones" would amount to nothing less than a war of intervention military, which also means it takes soldiers on Libyan soil. The Libyan opposition leaders have also requested military aid. The following is an excerpt on the position of the Libyan opposition in Benghazi:
"We need more than diplomacy. We need a no-fly zone, but we need more than that, "asked Buhaighis Iman, a spokeswoman for the National Transitional Interim Council, the self-declared alternative government in the second city [in size] of Libya. [18]
opposition leaders have been issuing deliberately inconsistent signals. Some say they are opposed to military intervention, but it is fallacious. It should be noted that while the leaders of the opposition Libyan request intervention in Benghazi, Libyan most on both sides oppose the U.S. intervention and NATO.
military to defeat the Libyans, who remain under the command of the Gaddafi regime, the opposition forces need weapons and foreign military intervention. The Globe and Mail had this to say about it:
"Even Abdul Jalil Mustafa, leader of the rebel transitional council, agrees that the rebels can not win by military means," Everyone should know that there is a balance between our capabilities and those of Muammar Gaddafi, "said the former justice minister who defected to the top of the rebellion. [19]
U.S., EU, and NATO will simply try to keep a balance of power between the parties, as the U.S. and its allies did with Iran and Iraq during the Iraq-Iran War. Could do to strengthen its case for military intervention. They could even contemplate while opposition forces are defeated and then impose a regime of sanctions and stiff penalties against Libya. Or they may wait until the opposing forces have been almost completely eliminated and then step through a large-scale air campaign. Towards
Libyan oasis: Another imperial adventure unborn
Behind the smokescreen of so-called diplomacy, U.S. makes its EU allies lead the attack on the international level, due to its international image as an aggressor. What is really at stake is a regime change operation. In the mouth of an unnamed European diplomat quoted by Associated Press (AP): "We are talking about military intervention to get rid of a government [in Libya] and put another in his place [and] only has to do with it." [20 ]
is not really democracy. An unelected interim government will be replaced by another unelected government, which also consists of characters of the system who have deserted. It is also worth noting that one of the key talking points of the European Union for Libya after the conflict is the increased cooperation between Tripoli and Brussels. Simply put, the U.S. objective EU and Libya is to transform into a modern colony.
What takes place is a repeat of Iraq and Yugoslavia. This time, however, the U.S. government and its EU allies are not only creating a humanitarian pretext for confrontation, but also a smart legal cloak lest they be accused of violation of international law as in the case of George W. Bush Jr. and Tony Blair. Washington and Brussels have fanned the flames Libya and want the country by cracking of civil war, and use a sophisticated media disinformation campaign. Are themselves crimes will also be brought to light sooner or later.
... ... ... .... Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
specializes in the Middle East and Central Asia. Is associate researcher at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Translated from English
Rebellion by Leyens Germain.
NOTES [1] Augustine Fontevecchia, "Saudi Arabia, UAE Call Gadhafi's Regime 'Illegitimate,'" Forbes, March 11, 2011.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Wissam Keyrouz, "Gulf States back-fly zone in Libya," Agence France-Presse (AFP) March 8, 2011.
[4] Press Trust of India, "Gaddafi's forces set is Benghazi, AL backs 'no-fly' zone, March 13, 2011.
[5] The Peninsula, "Draft law Promises freedom to average," March 10, 2011.
[6] ibid.
[7] Michael Corcoran and Stephen Maher, "Al-Jazeera, the Endorsed by Hillary Clinton," The Guardian (UK), March 10, 2011.
[8] Fontevecchia, "Saudi Arabia, UAE," op. cit.
[9] Kim Willsher, "French minister defends security forces to Offer of Tunisia, The Guardian (United Kingdom), January 18, 2011.
[10] Joshua Chaffin and Roula Khalaf, "Arab League prepare to back no-fly zone," Financial Times, March 11, 2011.
[11] Deutsche Presse-Agentur (DPA) / German Press Agency, "EU ditches Gaddafi for opposition," March 11, 2011.
[12] Tim Pearce ed., "Libya" crime "strip it of Legitimacy - Arab League," Reuters, March 12, 2011.
[13] Reuters, "Clinton to Meet Libya opposition, Warns of next steps," March 10, 2011.
[14] Ibid.
[15] This does not mean that laws are legitimate, because in many cases the laws were created to protect and entrench the foundations power, privilege, and legitimacy. Things to consider in this case is the enforcement and lack of consistent principles.
[16] Nicolas Sarkozy, Conseil européen extraordinaire sur la situation in Libye et en Méditerranée (Extraordinary European Council on the situation in Libya and the Mediterranean) (Press Conference, Brussels, Belgium: March 11, 2011): http:/
/ www.elysee.fr/president/les-actualites/conferences-de-presse/2011/conseil-europeen-extraordinaire-sur-la-situation.10882.html "
[17] Paul Koring," Obama rules out Libyan air strikes, "The Globe and Mail, March 11, 2011.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Raf Caset et al. "Ahead of summit, European Union downplays likelihood of no-fly zone over Libya," Associated Press (AP), 9 de marzo de 2011.
Global Research Articles by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23750
0 comments:
Post a Comment