Libya - civil unrest & now NATO involvement

[Random]

On another blog someone has said the TNC has agreed to wide scale privatisations, I wonder who with and why it is deemed so necessary, well, the Washington Consensus is clearly still alive and well, a lot of the rebels won't be too happy about this...

Do you have a link, or the blogger's source?

 

[elbows]

France, UK, Italy & Qatar will all be salivating over the spoils and are at the front of the queue, and some others too.

Unfortunately the TNC privatisation agenda has been on the radar for a good while, we shall see if forces opposed to this make their presence felt at some point. I will try to remember where I read about this stuff in the past.

 

[belboid]

It doesn't have to be about strength, but rather about the weakenss of the TNC, that they will turn to Western advisors rather like a time-stressed MP turns to lobbyists for info and support.

Perfectly possible (and a nice analogy), but it does also seem a little patronising, that they'll need western advice. I'd suspect that, if they need that external support, they'd turn first to more local sources, if only because they wont want to look like they are pawns of the west.

 

[Random]

it does also seem a little patronising, that they'll need western advice. I'd suspect that, if they need that external support, they'd turn first to more local sources, if only because they wont want to look like they are pawns of the west.

Egypt and Tunisia are probably hoping to get stuck in. But I'm happy to patronise politicians, even 'revolutionary' ones.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the people who've risen to the top of the TNC are surely the ones who've been best at making friends with NATO? I'd like to see a strong revolutionary Lybian government, based in trades unions and community association, etc. but it seems to me they're more like technocrats, isolated intellectuals, royalists and former Ghadaffiists. So not people with much of a base that will help them be independent.

But that's just speculation; we'll have to wait to see how the TNC behaves over the next few months and years.

 

[dylans]

Egypt and Tunisia are probably hoping to get stuck in. But I'm happy to patronise politicians, even 'revolutionary' ones.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the people who've risen to the top of the TNC are surely the ones who've been best at making friends with NATO? I'd like to see a strong revolutionary Lybian government, based in trades unions and community association, etc. but it seems to me they're more like technocrats, isolated intellectuals, royalists and former Ghadaffiists. So not people with much of a base that will help them be independent.

But that's just speculation; we'll have to wait to see how the TNC behaves over the next few months and years.

Mahmoud Jibril, the now effective Prime Minister of Libya served the Gaddafi regime as head of the national Economic Development Board specialising in promoting privatisation and economic liberalisation

A leaked US diplomatic cable from November that year (2009) described Mr Jibril as "a serious interlocutor who 'gets' the US perspective". An earlier US diplomatic cable described Mr Jibril as "reform-minded".
Gene Cretz , the US ambassador to Libya, wrote that he "highlighted the need to replace the country's decrepit infrastructure and train Libyans", calling on American public and private assistance to do so.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rofile-of-Mahmoud-Jibril-head-of-the-NTC.html

 

[dylans]

Perfectly possible (and a nice analogy), but it does also seem a little patronising, that they'll need western advice. I'd suspect that, if they need that external support, they'd turn first to more local sources, if only because they wont want to look like they are pawns of the west.

Lol. The Libyan economy is about to be looted and if you think the TNC and its NATO sponsors are going to brook any serious opposition you are more naive than I thought.

 

[goldenecitrone]

Mahmoud Jibril, the now effective Prime Minister of Libya served the Gaddafi regime as head of the national Economic Development Board specialising in promoting privatisation and economic liberalisation
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rofile-of-Mahmoud-Jibril-head-of-the-NTC.html

Finally, Gaddafi's wish for Libya to be part of the United States will come true. Almost.

 

[dylans]

Finally, Gaddafi's wish for Libya to be part of the United States will come true. Almost.

The TNC has also signalled that it will recognise Israel which I am sure will go down well with the population

 

[goldenecitrone]

My early optimism about the future of Libya is quickly fading. NATO out of Libya NOW!!

 

[treelover]

'As I said from the beginning socialists should have argued for a plague on both their houses, and focussed on defending the interests of the small Libyan working-class against both/all their enemies. Instead, we had some on the left like the AWL adopting a “My enemy’s enemy is my friend” approach, allowing their hostility to Gaddafi to essentially drive them to forget about the interests of workers, and to align themselves with the workers enemies, whilst others followerd the “idiot anti-imperialist” line that Gaddafi isn’t Imperialism so he he must be one of us!!!

on dave oslers blog, always baffled by this notion of 'support' what on earth can tiny UK left groups do about anything at all in Libya, the internet has a lot to answer for, its delusional..

 

[dylans]

There has also been very little mention of Khalifa Hifter, who was nominated to lead the rebel army after the "mysterious" death of General Younis last month. Hifter was a former Gaddafi commander who fought in Chad before falling out with Gaddafi and fleeing the country to live in Virginia for 20 years. By strange coincidence he only lived 5 miles from the CIA headquarters.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/07/2011728215485843.html

 

[belboid]

Lol. The Libyan economy is about to be looted and if you think the TNC and its NATO sponsors are going to brook any serious opposition you are more naive than I thought.

Aah, more fact free postings, cracking.

 

[dylans]

Aah, more fact free postings, cracking.

Fact free my arse.The political leadership is led by the former regimes most rabid neo liberal and the military is led by a CIA plant and you think the TNC is going to be anything but a NATO poodle? Don't make me laugh.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

reports coming through that Gadaffi and his sons have been surrounded in an apartment block

 

[elbows]

Here's one for Peter Dow!

the latest discovery is a photo album filled with page after page of pictures of Condoleezza Rice.

http://photoblog.msnbc.msn.com/_new...d-with-photos-of-his-darling-condoleezza-rice

In a 2007 interview with al-Jazeera television, Gadhafi spoke of Rice in glowing terms. "I support my darling black African woman," he said. "I admire and am very proud of the way she leans back and gives orders to the Arab leaders ... Leezza, Leezza, Leezza. ... I love her very much. I admire her and I'm proud of her because she's a black woman of African origin."

 

[phildwyer]

Here's one for Peter Dow!

Has he been heard from since the revolution?

 

[elbows]

TNC bloke says the same kind of thing as was discussed here earlier. Not surprising as they have made similar noises before. The following version is from BBC updates page.

1640:Foreign countries which backed Libya's revolt will be rewarded with contracts in the country's post-war reconstruction, rebel chief Mustafa Abdel Jalil is quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

 

[belboid]

Tell me, when NATO dropped the no fly zone after the first gulf war, allowing Saddam to bomb the he'll out of the popular uprising against him, did you argue they were right?

any chance of a reply on that dylans?

 

[dylans]

TNC bloke says the same kind of thing as was discussed here earlier. Not surprising as they have made similar noises before. The following version is from BBC updates page.

Qatar hope for returns after backing rebels

Analysts say Qatar — which has little significant financial interests in Libya — could be hoping for a front seat in its economic development planning.

“There is likely to be a significant advisory role for Qatar and probably prime investment opportunities for Qatar, should they choose to follow up on their courageous initial decision to stand against Qaddafi,” said David Roberts of the London-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI).
Most intriguing perhaps is what Qatar, which hosts a US military base, might be hoping to achieve in the energy sector.
Libya is a major oil producer but had not yet engaged in large-scale natural gas exploration and development. Qatar is the world’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG) with the world’s third-largest gas reserves — the wealth that has transformed a state of only 1.7 million people into a major regional power.
Now Qatar will be on hand to influence the emergence of a potential new natural gas competitor, said an Arab writer familiar with Qatar.
“They won’t stop it but want to have a stake in what is done. They couldn’t have done that with Qaddafi, though the Emir was a personal friend,” the newspaper columnist said.
“Either the country will be torn apart in a protracted low-intensity conflict, in which case there won’t be any gas, or it settles down and the Libyans look at their gas reserves, in which case the Qataris will be there.”
Analyst Samuel Ciszuk of IHS Global Insight said Libya’s limited LNG facilities were in a bad state before the war, but saw potential for joint projects such as marketing Libya’s oil and gas.
“The Libyans now will have to focus on rebuilding, not on launching new projects, and Qatar can help with that. They can likely coordinate a lot of things together,” Ciszuk said.
Qatar’s forward position was evident in media coverage. Al Jazeera, the pan-Arab broadcaster described in US diplomatic cables as a “bargaining tool” in Qatari foreign policy, was among the first with images at each stage of the battle over Tripoli.
Qatar “appears to be becoming, and definitely want to be seen as, leaders of an Arab renaissance, rather than an Arab Spring,” said Nuseibeh.
“Now all the pieces are coming together, whether it’s political, economic or cultural.”
David Roberts of RUSI, one of a number of think tanks invited to open branches in Doha, said Qatar’s leaders had the right to bask in the success of their Libya decision given the risks it carried.
“One must never forget that this was a risky decision, for no one was at all certain that the rebel’s cause would lead ultimately to success and their failure would have had serious, likely security-related repercussions for Qatar,” he said.

http://arabnews.com/economy/article493221.ece?service=print

 

[dylans]

any chance of a reply on that dylans?

You know my answer, I was against the no fly zone just as I was against the first gulf war.

 

[claphamboy]

Here's one for Peter Dow!

Has he been heard from since the revolution?

Tea splattered!

 

[belboid]

You know my answer, I was against the no fly zone just as I was against the first gulf war.

so you cheered when it was lifted, and let saddam destroy the opposition and rule for another decade?

 

[dylans]

so you cheered when it was lifted, and let saddam destroy the opposition and rule for another decade?

yes of course I did.

What is this bullshit about the lifting of the no fly zone anyway? When was it dropped? As far as I recall the US continued a no fly zone in Northern and Southern Iraq until the 2003 invasion and never dropped them. Operation Southern Watch began in 1991 and continued until 2003 and operation provide comfort 1 and 2 which ran from 1991 to 1997 when it was replaced by Operation Northern Watch which no longer included France but continued ahead anyway. In fact it actually became more aggressive and expanded to include widespread unprovoked attacks on Iraqi ground facilities. It was also declared illegal by the UN.

So, unless I have got my history awfully wrong, the US never lifted its no fly zones over Iraq until the invasion was complete.

Your argument puts you to the right of George Bush senior. It puts you alongside the right wing neo cons who argued that Bush should not have stopped with the "liberation" of Kuwait but should have continued on to Baghdad. Be consistant. If NATO bombs and US led no fly zones and are such a good idea in Iraq and Libya then you should support them in Syria and Iran.

 

[Cid]

What would your solution be then?

 

[dylans]

What would your solution be then?

No Intervention by Western forces

 

[Lock&Light]

We can now compare the the 'NATO solution' in Libya with the 'non-NATO solution' in Syria.

 

[belboid]

yes of course I did.

Your argument puts you to the right of George Bush senior. It puts you alongside the right wing neo cons who argued that Bush should not have stopped with the "liberation" of Kuwait but should have continued on to Baghdad. Be consistant. If NATO bombs and US led no fly zones and are such a good idea in Iraq and Libya then you should support them in Syria and Iran.

And your argument puts you alongside the idiot Stalinists.

Once again you are having to make things up in order to support your argument. You are, quite astoundingly, unable to see the distinction between self-liberation and that carried out by imperialist troops. If you can see the difference, you know that you above statement is an explicit lie. It was absolutely clear to everyone, that were the No Fly Zone lifted,it would lead directly and unavoidably to the bombing and destruction of the anti-Saddam uprising. By callnig for its lifting, you are actually putting yourself alongside both the imperialists and the Saddamites! Well done.

I'm sure you were also perfectly consitent and opposed Solidarnosc in 1980. After all Walesa was praised by the pope and Reagan ,and called for privatisations. The cunt.

None of which is actually to support the NATO intervention, its merely recognising that it hasnt managed to obliterate the rebel fighters at the front and pro democracy forces in the liberated towns and cities who made the revolution.

 

[dylans]

And your argument puts you alongside the idiot Stalinists.

Once again you are having to make things up in order to support your argument. You are, quite astoundingly, unable to see the distinction between self-liberation and that carried out by imperialist troops. If you can see the difference, you know that you above statement is an explicit lie. It was absolutely clear to everyone, that were the No Fly Zone lifted,it would lead directly and unavoidably to the bombing and destruction of the anti-Saddam uprising. By callnig for its lifting, you are actually putting yourself alongside both the imperialists and the Saddamites! Well done.

I'm sure you were also perfectly consitent and opposed Solidarnosc in 1980. After all Walesa was praised by the pope and Reagan ,and called for privatisations. The cunt.

None of which is actually to support the NATO intervention, its merely recognising that it hasnt managed to obliterate the rebel fighters at the front and pro democracy forces in the liberated towns and cities who made the revolution.

When did NATO supposedly drop its no fly zone over Iraq? As far as I recall they ran until 2003 as did crippling sanctions that killed a million kids. Did you support them too?

(and no I didn't support the crushing of Solidarnosc. I argued that the fact that their leadership was reactionary didn't make them any different from most unions here.

 

[nino_savatte]

Democracy is a whore. At least ours is.

Come again? Now if you'd said, "democracy is a figment of the imagination" that would have made more sense.

 

[belboid]

When did NATO supposedly drop its no fly zone over Iraq? As far as I recall they ran until 2003 as did crippling sanctions that killed a million kids. Did you support them too?

It dropped it for Southern Iraq - y'know where the uprising was - in '91. As I am sure you well remember. Piss poor attempt at dodging the point.