Editor’s Note:
Muammar Gaddafi was given the title of “Brother Leader of the Revolution” and stepped down from all official duties in 1977.Libya’s former Prime Minister was Baghdadi Mahmoudi.
NATO – Operation Unified Protector
A.V.
Shenali Waduge
Asian Tribune
In Yugoslavia, NATO targeted the civilian economy: airports, government buildings, manufacturing infrastructure, ancient buildings and the country’s historical and cultural heritage. In Libya, NATO’s targets were bridges, roads, hospitals, tv stations, factories, schools and even hospitals.
It is estimated that the civilian deaths in Libya as a result of NATO air strikes amount to over 30,000. Will these ever be investigated is the biggest question.
The US and NATO mission became complete with the killing of Gaddafi on 20th October 2011 – a death these nations should feel ashamed of.
This shame is heightened by the fact that a white flag truce was negotiated for Gaddafi with Hillary Clinton. It has also been reported that journalists were not immediately allowed to report from the site of the US drone attack on Qaddafi’s convoy until the rebels had the opportunity to dispose of any remaining evidence of the white flags which were clearly connected to the convoy vehicles.
Did we not say that these military interventionists would remain unscathed to continue their next targets – Syria and Iran…and now it appears the next sojourn is Asia…
Libya extends over 1,759,540 square kilometres (679,362 sq mi) and is home to 6.4 million people. On 17 March 2011, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1973 on Libya proposed by France, Lebanon and the UK. Regime change in Iraq took eight years and a trillion dollars, the liberating of Libya took just seven months but NATO is accused of thousands of civilian deaths which they refuse to admit or compensate.
Are we looking at a future of military interventions by powerful nations (international gangsters) that falsely create the ground situations in these targeted countries and then officially obtain a mandate to militarily intervene?
What makes the death of Gaddafi and the fall of a sovereign nation alarming is that none of these uprisings were natural events but have been “planted” to facilitate and promote the need for a military intervention. Thus, the UN clauses are worded in such a way as to permit varied interpretations and by the time the world realizes the truth the damage has already been done and the leaders all silenced forever.
…Libya…functioned without a single loan from the IMF or World Bank and its central bank was 100% owned by the Libyan government. In short, Libya was a debt-free nation under Gaddafi. In 1951 Libya was the poorest country in the world. Before the US/NATO invaded Libya it had the highest standard of living in Africa and a literacy rate of 83%. It was also called the Switzerland of the African continent. One of the first things the “rebels” have done is to change the Libyan central bank to a Western-type one. We can now assume who the real instigators of these military interventions are. Ironically, global leaders are merely tools themselves!
How did these “rebels” suddenly emerge? Were they really Libyans or hired mercenaries and would they have achieved the success they did if not for NATO air strikes? These questions are important because the US and the West openly declared they were arming the rebels. International laws do not permit a military intervention to remove a man from power. But who is there to stop such a state of affairs happening when even international media owned by the West were distorting every incident taking place in Libya?
Western media are far more dangerous than even politicians because it is their news that we “trust”. Did any of these Western channels relay how on 1st July 1.7m (95% of Tripoli population and 1/3 the entire population of Libya) people gathered in Tripoli to oppose the NATO bombing of Libya? Libya and Gaddafi were pretty much taken by shock at the magnitude of the assault and the nature of the attack.
The media continuously relayed various reasons to attack Libya – from the potential of a massacre by Gaddafi to liberating the people from a dictator to the memories of Lockerbie. How many of us know that the US paid $4m to each witness to testify against the accused Libyan men? Most of the real truths come out only much later. On 18 March 2011 Gaddafi did announce a ceasefire but NATO began its military intervention the next day, 19 March 2011.
Why did the West decide to topple Gaddafi, having watched him be a “dictator” for 42 years? A popular view is Gaddafi’s plan to conduct oil transactions in gold instead of the dollar. Libya has over 140 tons of gold. Gaddafi’s proposal to nationalize Libya’s oil did not stick too well with the West either. Guatemala’s decision to nationalize fruit processing resulted in a US coup. Libya’s invasion was sponsored by the West by arming Libyan “rebels” most believe to be al-Qaeda radicals transported to carry out the plan. So if it had been a plan it had to have been thought out by the same set of people that planned other invasions.
War & Decision, a book by Douglas Feith, former undersecretary of defense for policy, reveals that former US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld sent a paper to the US president in 2001 on establishing “new regimes’. This is further confirmed in a book in 2003 by General Wesley Clark who commanded the NATO bombing of Kosovo, that Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz had included Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia and Lebanon among those targeted for “new regimes”. That list is now complete except for Syria and Iran. What should worry us is the likelihood of these two states also eventually falling.
The other theory is that both Gaddafi and Saddam fell because they challenged the dollar and Western banks. Gaddafi wanted to unite the African continent with over a billion people using a single currency. Libya’s Central Bank is 100% state-owned, allowing Libya to create its own money. To do business with Libya, investors had to go through the Libyan Central Bank, giving them no means to monopolize deals. Libya had $150 billion in foreign reserves which are now frozen. Gaddafi had even contributed €50m to Sarkozy’s 2007 presidential election fund.
NATO air strikes have created such colossal damage to both people and infrastructure that even the International Criminal Court head voiced the possibility of investigating NATO for war crimes. This was in November 2011 – four months on there is no mention of that happening. NATO used 26,000 sorties and 9,600 strike missions against 5,900 targets – what were these and how many of them fell upon civilians?
Let’s look at some key events:
• February 15, 2011 – uprising in Libya against President Gaddafi
• February 22, 2011 – UN Human Rights Chief Navi Pillay claims 250 people had been “killed” in Libya…she claims there is “widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population” which may amount to “crimes against humanity”. Thus the mood was created that Gaddafi forces were indiscriminately killing and giving a picture that a Rwanda type situation is likely to arise.
• March 18, 2011 – UN Security Council authorizes action against Libya. Quotes from the Resolution – these wordings are often repeated:
• “grave concern at the deteriorating situation, the escalation of violence, and the heavy civilian casualties”
• “the gross and systematic violation of human rights, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions”
• attacks against civilians “may amount to crimes against humanity”
• pose a “threat to international peace and security”.
• “a group of up to eight experts” to oversee the implementation of the resolution
In Yugoslavia, NATO targeted the civilian economy: airports, government buildings, manufacturing infrastructure, ancient buildings and the country’s historical and cultural heritage. In Libya, NATO’s targets were bridges, roads, hospitals, tv stations, factories, schools and even hospitals.
It is estimated that the civilian deaths in Libya as a result of NATO air strikes amount to over 30,000. Will these ever be investigated is the biggest question.
A few of NATO’s civilian targets (NATO aircraft flew a total of 17,939 armed sorties in Libya):
• March 25, 2011 – Al-Tajura Hospital was hit as was Saladin Hospital in Ain Zara.
• April 18, 2011 telecommunications tower in the city of Sirte
• 30 April 2011 NATO air strikes hit Libyan Down’s Syndrome Society
• June 12, 2011 Libya’s Nasser University bombed by NATO
• July 18, 2011 the radar tower at Tripoli International Airport was bombed by NATO
• July 22, 2011 NATO warplanes attacked the pipe making plant at Brega
• July 23, 2011 a facility that makes pipes for the Great Man-Made River was bombed (world’s largest irrigation project, known as the Great Man-Made River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country)
• July 25, 2011 a hospital in Zliten, near the city of Misrata, was also bombed by NATO warplanes
• July 26, 2011 NATO bombs a hospital in West Libya, killing civilians & damaging food supply depot and a medical depot
Libyan children killed by NATO bombs
Cluster bombs used by NATO
The US and NATO mission became complete with the killing of Gaddafi on 20th October 2011 – a death these nations should feel ashamed of.
This shame is heightened by the fact that a white flag truce was negotiated for Gaddafi with Hillary Clinton. It has also been reported that journalists were not immediately allowed to report from the site of the US drone attack on Qaddafi’s convoy until the rebels had the opportunity to dispose of any remaining evidence of the white flags which were clearly connected to the convoy vehicles.
Did Secretary Clinton use this information to prepare a US drone attack on Qaddafi’s “white flag” convoy since she was in Libya on 19th March 2011, the day before Gaddafi was killed? If Secretary Clinton and the US administration were aware of a white flag truce, then the US drone attack on Gaddafi’s convoy was in direct violation of the Geneva Convention and constitutes a war crime as the US drone attack enabled rebels to sodomize Gaddafi before killing him.
None of these truths will have any bearing on any of these powerful nations so long as people remain silent and watch crimes against humanity take place. The UN Human Rights Council did appoint an investigation that concluded that NATO “conducted a highly precise campaign with a demonstrable determination to avoid civilian casualties. On limited occasions, the Commission confirmed civilian casualties and found targets that showed no evidence of military utility”.
Thus, the Commission found NATO did not deliberately target civilians in Libya.
Did we not say that these military interventionists would remain unscathed to continue their next targets – Syria and Iran…and now it appears the next sojourn is Asia where the resolution against Sri Lanka’s has been the FIRST such resolution against a country where a conflict has been concluded and a country that has been enjoying peace without bombs or terrorists for three years! Generally resolutions are related to “Ongoing Conflict Situations,” thus the US-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka is a precedent and that is what other countries need to be mindful of. India was aware of this and that is why India should not have been party to agreeing to the resolution.
How far will these Western imperialists decide to go back to use for the future resolutions upon other Asian countries is the next question…India should also be worried, but then India thinks it is a friend of the West and does not need Asian friends any more.
It is time UN member nations unite to oppose this new world order that is taking shape.
¡VIVA LIBYA! 