- In his book, "Winning Modern Wars," General
Wesley Clark said Pentagon sources told him two months after 9/11 that
war plans were being prepared against Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Somalia,
Sudan and Libya. Months earlier, they were finalized against Afghanistan.
-
- Clark added:
-
- "And what about the real sources of terrorists -
US allies in the region like Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia? Wasn't
it repressive policies of the first, and the corruption and poverty of
the second, that were generating many of the angry young men who became
terrorists? And what of the radical ideology and direct funding spewing
from Saudi Arabia?"
-
- "It seemed that we were being taken into a strategy
more likely to make us the enemy - encouraging what could look like a 'clash
of civilizations' - not a good strategy for winning the war on terror."
-
- Since insurgency in Libya began, reports of a ground
invasion circulated despite no UN authorization and official denials.
-
- On April 1, they gained credence after release of an
EUFOR Libya (European Union Force) decision from Brussels, saying:
-
- "The Council has adopted today the decision, underpinning
the mandates of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1970 and
1973, establishing an operation, called 'EUFOR Libya' in order to stand
ready to support humanitarian assistance in the region, if requested by
the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)."
-
- In fact, "humanitarian assistance" is code
language for aggression, invasion, colonization, and balkanization for
profit and imperial control of the entire Mediterranean Basin. Libya, Syria,
and Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon are the last links to complete it, suggesting
after Libya's conquest, Syria and perhaps Lebanon may be next.
-
- The Council's decision established a framework, subject
to UN or NATO authorization, NATO meaning Washington's running everything
in Libya and the region.
-
- Headquartered in Rome, "Rear Admiral Claudio Gaudiosi
has been appointed as (EUFOR) Operation Commander."
-
- In fact, AFRICOM head General Carter Ham runs operations
under EUCOM (the Pentagon's European Command). In a recent interview, Middle
East/North African analyst Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya said:
-
- "AFRICOM is still very much attached to EUCOM and
dependent on (it) in many ways....AFRICOM's role is currently latent or
concealed. It is EUCOM....based in Europe (as is AFRICOM), which is currently
running the operations against the Libyans."
-
- In fact, Admiral James Stavridis heads EUCOM and NATO,
EUCOM's web site calling him "Commander of European Command and....NATO
Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (since) early summer 2009."
-
- In recent testimony, he told the Senate Armed Services
Committee that America is running Odyssey Dawn with NATO "stabilization
operations" troops, adding that sanctions and bombing accomplished
nothing.
-
- In other words, invasion is planned, suggested by NATO'S
commander. Expect it in days or weeks, masquerading as enhanced "humanitarian
intervention."
-
- Nazemroaya added that AFRICOM's "mission is to help
secure a new colonial order in Africa that the US and its allies are working
to establish. In many ways, this is what (hostilities are) all about."
-
- Washington is very much in charge, planning to carve
up Libya and Africa for profit - Britain, France and other key co-belligerents
to share the spoils.
-
- Invasion Plans Solidifying
-
- On April 6, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton
told the European Parliament that plans for military intervention were
being considered. On April 7, the German Press Agency DPA said she wrote
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, "telling him about the EU's readiness
to act."
-
- An unnamed official said, "Everybody is aware that
something has to be done. You can expect that there will be a mobilization
of the international community in the coming days." In other words,
planned invasion will use humanitarian intervention as a pretext.
-
- Despite abstaining from UN Resolution 1973 and withdrawing
its ships from embargoing Libya, expect German participation if it comes.
On April 8, Chancellor Merkel's spokesman, Steffen Seibert, said German
forces would join a "humanitarian" mission if requested by the
UN.
-
- According to Defense Ministry spokesman, Christian Dienst,
German involvement includes "hav(ing) their boots on the ground in
Libya," as well as redeployed ships participating. In other words,
Germany wants its share of the spoils like other co-belligerents.
-
- Expect UN Resolution 1973's no-fly zone, including "all
necessary measures," to be used as invasion authorization, no matter
its lawlessness as a previous article explained, accessed through the following
link:
-
- http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/03/lies-damn-lies-and-humanitarian.html
-
- The UN Charter explains under what conditions violence
and coercion (by one state against another) are justified. Article 2(3)
and Article 33(1) require peaceful settlement of international disputes.
Article 2(4) prohibits force or its threatened use. And Article 51 allows
the "right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack
occurs against a Member....until the Security Council has taken measures
to maintain international peace and security."
-
- In other words, justifiable self-defense is permissible,
not preemptive intervention in another nation's internal affairs, especially
on bogus humanitarian grounds, masking imperial aims.
-
- Moreover, under the UN Charter, Article 2(3) and Article
33(1) require peaceful settlement of international disputes, not "shock
and awe" attacks. Article 2(4), in fact, prohibits force or its threatened
use, including no-fly zones that are acts of war.
-
- Further, Articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 absolutely prohibit
any unilateral or other external threat or use of force not specifically
allowed under Article 51 or otherwise authorized by the Security Council
- that may not violate its own Charter. In fact, Washington bullied enough
members to do so, planning naked aggression in response.
-
- Gaddafi Accepts Ceasefire Plan
-
- On April 11, A Jazeera headlined, "African leaders
in Benghazi for peace talks," saying:
-
- After meeting with Gaddafi on Sunday, they "announced
that he accepted a roadmap to peace, but he refused to say whether the
deal included his resignation - a key demand for rebels....Jacob Zuma,
the South African president, said Tripoli had accepted the African Union's
plan," including an immediate halt to hostilities, effective ceasefire
monitoring, delivering humanitarian aid, and protecting foreigners.
-
- At the same time, Reuters reported "no let-up in
NATO attacks," an official saying, "It does not appear that this
indication of a peace deal has any substance at this point." Indeed
not, as long as NATO keeps bombing and spurns peace.
-
- On April 11 at 12:02 EDT, Reuters unsurprisingly said:
-
- "Libyan rebels rejected an African Union peace plan
on Monday because it did not address their main demand that (Gaddafi) quit
and because it proposed reforming a ruling system they want removed."
-
- National Transitional Council head Mustafa Abdul Jalil
(former Libyan Justice Minister) said:
-
- "The African Union initiative does not include the
departure of Gaddafi and his sons from the Libyan political scene, therefore
it is outdated. The initiative speaks of reforms from within the Libyan
system and that is rejected."
-
- Western leaders also rejected peace unless Gaddafi's
ousted, saying bombing will continue until he's removed.
-
- Turkish Invasion Plan
-
- On March 1, the World Tribune.com headlined, "Obama
said to back Turkey offer to invade Libya," saying:
-
- Turkey offered to lead a NATO "effort to overthrow
(Gaddafi) by invading Libya, but with strings attached. Diplomatic sources
said....Prime Minister Erdogan (suggested) a plan in which the Turkish
Navy would send ships and troops to Libya," wanting EU membership
in return.
-
- According to an unnamed Western diplomat, "It was
not clear if Turkey could actually do the job, but Erdogan did make this
offer."
-
- Unnamed sources said Obama and Saudi Arabia endorsed
the plan. Brussels, however, appeared cold, including French President
Sarkozy. He and other EU leaders "regarded Erdogan's plan as a means
to exploit the revolt in Libya."
-
- The same unnamed diplomat said, "The feeling is
that Turkey is looking to become the Ottoman Empire, and most of Europe
does not want to go through that history again." Also at issue is
Turkish support for Iran, tensions with Israel, EU reluctance to include
an Islamic member country, (even a secular one), and having another spoils
of war partner, meaning less to key co-belligerents wanting them all.
-
- A Final Comment
-
- As part of its anti-Gaddafi disinformation campaign,
a New York Times CJ Chivers "At War: Notes From the Front Lines"
blog features regular commentaries, including an April 10 one headlined,
"Libyan Rebels Take Risks With Makeshift Arms," saying:
-
- Rebel weapons "are, in a word, a sight. They are
also a fright....In truth, the men who fire them have little idea of how
far these (makeshift) rockets fly, a limited ability to change their elevation,
and....often have no ability to traverse them left or right."
-
- One fighter complained that "we have almost no other
weapons, and Qaddafi has all the lethal weapons available in the world."
-
- A March 30 Mark Landler, Elisabeth Bumiller and Steven
Lee Myers article headlined, "Washington Debates Idea of Arming Libyan
Rebels," saying:
-
- Administration officials, including Secretary of State
Clinton, said no decision had been made, but Washington "had a right
to do so, despite an arms embargo...."
-
- Obama told NBC News, "I'm not ruling it out, but
I'm also not ruling it in. We're still making an assessment...." He
also pledged no US ground troops.
-
- Concern over the lightly armed rebels prompted an unnamed
European diplomat to say rebels should be more heavily armed. "We
strongly believe that it should happen."
-
- Even if concerns are resolved, Pentagon "officials
said it was unclear to them how an effort to arm rebels would be carried
out. They said the arms most likely to be of use were relatively light....not
especially sophisticated, (and it would take) months, if not years, of
on-the-ground training" to instruct rebels on their use.
-
- On April 10, Global Research.ca reported:
-
- "Libyan rebels from the Feb. 17 armed coup attempt
to overthrow the Libyan government had brand new weapons since the first
day of the uprising. These weapons were of non-Libyan origin and had already
been secretly imported into Libya in advance of Feb. 17."
-
- Involved "are millions of dollars worth of technically
advanced light and heavy weaponry." The report suggested "secret
foreign benefactors giving state-of-the-art weapons to Benghazi terror
gangs in the coup attempt," video evidence showing "Western trainers"
instructing them on their use.
-
- The rebels "appear to be paid mercenaries and Libyan
expatriates," as well as students and Al Qaeda elements, a CIA/MI
6-enlisted alliance to oust Gaddafi.
-
- Despite genuine internal opposition to his rule, the
current uprising was externally manufactured, not spontaneous for democratic
change as major media reports suggest, including BBC and Al Jazeera backing
rebels, abandoning honest journalism and independent reporting in the process.
-
- Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com
and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the
Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays
at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs
are archived for easy listening.
-
- http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/
|
