Saudi Arabia Forging a New Sunni State?

[Excellent analysis of Saudi power play in Middle East.]

BY 

NICK OTTENS

Is Saudi Arabia conniving with the United States to unseat the Assad regime in Syria? The possible smuggling of satellite phones into the country suggests so but the kingdom’s ultimate aim may not necessarily align with American policy in the region—the creation of a new Sunni state between Syria and Iraq.  [ed.--SEE:  US, Saudi Arabia Smuggle Satellite Phones to Syrian Rebels]

Iranian intelligence experts in Damascus attempted to disrupt the Syrian opposition’s telephone and Internet connections in recent weeks, making it all the more difficult for news of the uprising to reach the outside world. To help the rebels, Saudi Arabia and the United States reportedly smuggled thousands of satellite phones into Syria. Other than that, there’s little the Americans can do short of military intervention. President Bashar al-Assad may have lost the “legitimacy to lead” but he doesn’t need Washington for anything, rendering sanctions virtually useless.

Protests erupted in Syria in March after the “Arab spring” deposed veteran dictators in Tunisia and Egypt. In Bahrain, Shī’ah Muslims also took to the streets to pressure their largely Sunni government into enacting reforms but Saudi troops quelled the uprising before it could pose a serious threat to the small Arab Gulf state’s monarchy.

The oil kingdom is now rooting for the protesters in Syria, or at least some of them. Besides supposedly supplying the anti-government forces with satellite phones in conjunctions with the Americans, Saudi Arabia privately and clandestinely poured money and arms into the country in the hopes of stiffening the resistance and buying the loyalty of desert tribes.

The ultimate aim could be the erection of a new state encompassing not only the Euphrates’ river valley in Syria roughly corresponding with the southeastern Deir ez-Zor Governorate but Iraq’s central Al Anbar province as well. Both are overwhelmingly Sunni and home to more than a couple of million people. Such a country would put a natural geostrategic ally of Saudi Arabia’s in the heart of the Arab world—a “forward operating base” for Riyadh from where to watch Syria, Turkey and Iraq, three Middle Eastern states that are increasingly assertive, and from where to counter Iranian influence.

Riyadh blamed Tehran for stirring the uprising in Bahrain even if there was little evidence of Iranian involvement. The accusation and Saudi led military action nevertheless demonstrated just how worried the Saudis were about Iran extending its influence in the region.

They have ample reason to be concerned. The Saudi backed government in Lebanon was undermined by Iranian ally Hezbollah earlier this year while two of the kingdom’s allies in containing the Islamic Republic, Egypt and Iraq, have been rocked by internal unrest. With Iraq now a democracy—ruled by a Shiite prime minister—and Hosni Mubarak out of office and facing trial, Saudi Arabia and Iran are the only two powers still standing in the Middle East.

A political disintegration of Iraq and Syria, prompted by the creation of another Saudi client state, would weaken both a friend of Iran’s and one of its traditional foes. The United States, after spending considerable blood and treasure stabilizing Iraq, might rather not see its experiment in multiethnic Arab democracy fall apart. It’s anyone’s guess what will happen to Syria after Assad moreover. But the development could bolster the club of pro-Western regimes in the region.

Neighboring Jordan conveniently joined the Gulf Cooperation Council two months ago which formally sanctioned March’s intervention in Bahrain. Whether Morocco also joins the organization or not, it is a moderate Islamist bulwark against Iranian encroachment in West Asia, providing Saudi foreign policy with extra legitimacy and sometimes an alternative to dollar diplomacy. Whatever the emirates contribute in funding, the Saudis are obviously in the lead. And they’re disappointed about their American ally’s reluctance to support them.

The Saudis didn’t particularly care for President Barack Obama’s championing of human rights and reform in the face of the Arab spring and blamed him for forcing Mubarak out of power.

From Washington’s perspective, the alliance with the Wahhabi kingdom is one of convenience. It regards its religious intolerance and backwardness as an embarrassment even if the two countries share interests in the region. Both want to keep the oil flowing, the Gulf free of Iranian influence and neither wants the ayatollahs to go nuclear and embolden their terrorist proxies in the Levant. The clear strategic rationale of the relationship tends to be overshadowed by moral objections on America’s part however. Saudi nation building abroad is likely to raise more than a few eyebrows in the State Department therefore.

Actually, sponsoring the foundation of a brand new republic (presumably) in the Middle East wouldn’t be such a stretch for the United States ideologically. It’s not as though today’s national boundaries in the Middle East necessarily reflect cultural and religious divides—let alone encompass specific peoples or nations. Rather, a Sunni polity separate of multicultural Syria and Shī’ah majority Iraq conforms much better to notions of sovereignty and self determination than the status quo.

It’s not often that American interests and ideology coincide in the Middle East. The risks of too overtly endorsing the Saudi effort—if it is a serious effort to begin with—are clear. America could be perceived as once again meddling in the internal affairs of Arab states. Success, on the other hand, could leave Iraq, then virtually a Shiite homeland, much stabler and Saudi Arabia, a pivotal Western ally, in an enhanced position to balance against Iranian intrigue. Now Washington has only to recognize the opportunity.

TAGS: Gulf Cooperation Council, Iraq, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Syria

Nick Ottens is an historian from the Netherlands who researched Muslim revivalist movements and terrorism in nineteenth century Arabia, British India and the Sudan for his Master’s thesis. He also studied the history of transatlantic relations and is currently a contributing analyst with Wikistrat. Nick blogs about politics and economics at Free Market Fundamentalist.

A guerrilla war in the making?

PV Vivekanand
Muammar Qadhafi and his inner circle have mysteriously disappeared from their stronghold, Tripoli. Thousands of soldiers and mercenary forces that Qadhafi was supposed to have mobilised to defend his capital have melted away overnight. And no seems to know what happened to Qadhafi’s weapons of mass destruction, mainly a large stockpile of chemical weapons, raw nuclear materials and some 30,000 shoulder-fired rockets that can threaten aircraft, US intelligence officials say.

The problem is that no one knows where they — or at least part of them — are stored.

Western officials are also worried that militant groups like Al Qaeda could lay their hands on part of the arsenal. British Foreign Secretary William Hague has warned that it is possible that someone in the regime who might have access to mustard gas and might try to use them for whatever reason.

Libya joined the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in 2004, but, according to US sources, the country’s plans to end production of chemical weapons and destroy those already in its possession were stalled because of disputes between Libya and the US over funding and logistics.

The best bet is that Qadhafi had anticipated that the rebels would be able to get into Tripoli and pose a serious challenge that would eventually find them in control of the capital, given the committed support that the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) and others were (and are) giving them. So he had prepared an alternative: Moving somewhere from where he could launch a guerrilla war against the regime that replaces him and take revenge on those who helped the rebels topple him.

That could also explain why Qadhafi explained through media that he controls that he had staged a “tactical” withdrawal from his Bab Aziziya compound and his war against his foes would continue.

Qadhafi and his people are believed to have used tunnels under the six-square kilometre Bab Al Azizia compound to get out of Tripoli.

Regional observers believe that Qadhafi and his forces could regroup in Sebha in southern Libya where he enjoys the support of the local tribes. Sebha was where he was building nuclear facilities that he agreed in 2003 to dismantle under an agreement with the US. He also built underground military facilities and bunkers there to make Sebha an ideal place for shelter when the need arose.

Today, Sebha could be turned into a place from where he could launch a guerrilla war to keep Libya unstable for a long time.

Some reports indicate that thousands of fighters from his own Qaddafa tribe and other tribes loyal to Qadhafi have been moving to Sebha in recent weeks. Notwithstanding the freeze of Libyan funds and assets outside the country, Qadhafi should have enough resources to sustain a guerrilla war and pay his sleeping agents in Europe and elsewhere to Nato countries and allies to punish them for having supported the rebels.

For all we know, Qadhafi could have moved himself to Sebha (or any other place) days or weeks earlier. He was not seen in Tripoli since and his audio rhetoric came through telephone calls, some of them caught in bad connections, indicating that they could have been long-distance communications. Qadhafi’s last public appearance was on June 12 with the visiting president of the World Chess Federation, Kirsan N. Ilyumzhinov.

If he had been planning a guerrilla war, then Qadhafi would most definitely would have equipped himself well.

It is very alarming that despite the close surveillance and intelligence gathering that the US and Nato allies maintained on Libya using satellite, drones and other aircraft, they have not been able to locate the poison gas and rockets or intercept their transfer to wherever Qadhafi chose to move them.

US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice has said that the US was taking steps to prevent the weapons from falling into the wrong hands. Two teams of US weapon experts are reportedly working to secure the sites of weapons of mass destruction in rebel-held areas.

Qadhafi located his chemical weapons facility in Rabta, south of Tripoli, where he is believed to have produced some 10 tonnes of various chemical agents which can inflict grave damage. Libya was also believed to have Scud-B missiles and mass quantities of conventional weapons.

Against that backdrop, it is frightening to even to imagine how these could come in handy for Qadhafi in a guerrilla war if he has made sure he could have them when and where he wants them, particularly if he decides to make a last-ditch stand. He could even slip in a tonne or two of mustard gas to Al Qaeda and other extremist groups with no end-use conditions attached except that it should not be used against him and his loyalists.

If that is indeed the case, then the fall of Tripoli and Qadhafi’s disappearance are definitely not the last we have heard of the Libyan conflict.

Viktor Bout Statements to U.S. Agents Coerced, Judge Rules

(Updates with prosecutors’ statement in fifth paragraph.)

Aug. 24 (Bloomberg) — Viktor Bout, a Russian accused of conspiring to sell weapons to a Colombian terrorist group, won a bid to bar from his trial statements he made after U.S. authorities threatened to abandon him in a Thai prison.

U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin in Manhattan today granted Bout’s request to exclude his comments to Drug Enforcement Administration agents after his arrest in Bangkok, saying the agents ignored Bout’s request for more time to decide whether to talk. Bout, 44, said he was told that if he didn’t speak immediately, he’d be left in a Thai jail to face “heat, hunger, disease and rape,” Scheindlin wrote in her ruling.

“When coupled with the agents’ deceptive suggestion that if Bout ‘cooperated’ he could come back to the United States with them (rather than be ‘abandoned’ in a Thai jail), I find that this credible threat of violence also materially induced Bout to make statements,” Scheindlin said.

Albert Dayan, one of Bout’s attorneys, didn’t immediately return a telephone message left at his office seeking comment on the decision.

“We respectfully disagree with the judge’s opinion and plan to request that it be reconsidered,” Ellen Davis, a spokeswoman for the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s office, said in a statement.

Rocket Launchers

Bout was arrested on March 6, 2008, in a sting operation. The government said undercover agents told Bout they wanted to buy weapons for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, including surface-to-air missiles, armor-piercing rocket launchers and machine guns. His trial is set for Oct. 11.

Scheindlin, who this month denied a second request by Bout to have the charges dismissed, said in today’s ruling that his “dramatic arrest,” during which he was handcuffed and walked in front of reporters and photographers, along with denial of his requests for an attorney and contact with his embassy, led him to make involuntary statements.

According to Bout’s version of events, he was taken into custody by 15 to 20 officers at the Sofitel Hotel in Bangkok, and then strip-searched as police looked for evidence in his hotel room, Scheindlin wrote in today’s order. He was then transferred to police headquarters, where he was confronted with 40 to 50 members of the media who took pictures of him, Scheindlin said.

Thai Police Official

A Thai police official then told Bout that U.S. agents wanted to speak with him, and Bout responded that he didn’t want to talk to them, saying that he wanted to meet with an attorney and see a representative of the Russian embassy, requests that were denied, Scheindlin said.

About an hour after his arrest, Bout was placed in a room with six or seven U.S. agents and was advised of his rights, which he said he understood, Scheindlin said. During a 20-minute interview that followed, Bout told the agents several times that he was “not in a very good state of mind” and needed more time before he could speak with them, the judge said.

Bout was handcuffed throughout the interview and repeatedly asked the agents if he could speak with them the next day, Scheindlin said.

Two of the agents said during a May court hearing that they weren’t aware that Bout had asked for an attorney or a representative of the Russian embassy, the judge said. One of the agents, Robert Zachariasiewicz, denied telling Bout that he wouldn’t be able to survive in a Thai jail or that he would be subject to “heat, hunger, disease and rape,” Scheindlin said.

Waive Extradition

Zachariasiewicz admitted that he told Bout that the conditions in a Thai jail may not be “pleasant,” and that he told him he was facing 25 years to life in prison if convicted of the charges, the judge said. Zachariasiewicz also denied that any of the agents asked Bout to waive extradition and said that Thai authorities made it clear he wasn’t coming with them, Scheindlin wrote.

The agents acknowledged that Bout told them he wasn’t in a good frame of mind and needed more time before he could speak with them, and also that Bout asked for them to come back the next day, Scheindlin said.

“Both agents testified that they told Bout that it was unlikely that the Thai police would permit them to speak with him tomorrow,” the judge said. “I find that the agents’ representation on this point was false and find that it is likely they knew that they would have been permitted to see Bout the next day if they had made that request of the Thai police.”

The agents also weren’t credible when they denied insinuating that Bout might return to the U.S. with them if he cooperated and waived extradition and denied telling Bout that he would face “disease, hunger, heat and rape” in Thai jails, the judge said.

‘Credit Them Fully’

“To the extent that the statements in Bout’s affidavit are uncontradicted I obviously credit them fully,” Scheindlin wrote. “To the extent the statements are contradicted they would ordinarily be entitled to less weight than sworn testimony. However, based on Bout’s uncontradicted description of the events surrounding the arrest, I find his version of the interview more credible than the version advanced by the agents.”

The case is U.S. v. Bout, 08-cr-0365, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

–Editor: Fred Strasser, Mary Romano

South African Government Position On the Unfreezing of Libyan Assets

[SEE:  Washington Tried To Snatch $1.5 billion to Pay its NTC Employees]

press release

South Africa reiterates its concern about the dire humanitarian situation in Libya brought about by the ongoing civil war and NATO’s military campaign. We are fully aware of the humanitarian needs on the ground and are conscious of the urgency to alleviate the suffering of the Libyan people.

Today, the United Nations Security Council Sanctions Committee approved the release of Libyan assets amounting to $1.5 billion to respond to this humanitarian crisis.

South Africa had earlier expressed reservations on the unfreezing of these Libyan assets in a manner that could suggest that the Security Council had recognized the National Transitional Council (NTC), while neither the United Nations nor the African Union had made such a determination. South Africa has always supported the approach of the African Union to pursue an all-inclusive peaceful political solution to the Libyan crisis and rejects any narrative towards regime change.

Consequently, after intensive negotiations, the United States withdrew any reference to the NTC in their letter requesting the unfreezing of the assets, thus excluding any form of recognition of the NTC through this proposal. With these changes, after consultations within the AU and considering that the interests of the Libyan people are paramount, South Africa agreed to the release of these funds.

South Africa hopes that the funds released by the Security Council will contribute towards easing the humanitarian situation and will be used directly for the benefit of the people of Libya as they embark on a difficult and yet necessary road towards and an all-inclusive transition to peace, unity and democracy.

In this context, South Africa will continue to support the people of Libya in meeting their legitimate aspirations for democracy, justice, peace and security. For sustainable peace to be achieved, it is critical that the Libyans themselves assume full ownership of their future.

Badly beaten journalist in Osh ignored by Kyrgyz medics

	Shokhrukh Saipov; photo: facebook.com

Badly beaten journalist in Osh ignored by medics

Shokhrukh Saipov, 26-year old publisher of the website Uzpress.kg, was brutally attacked on the evening of 10 August in the city of Osh in southern Kyrgyzstan. Shokhrukh is the brother of Alisher Saipov, the journalist who was killed in Osh in October 2007.

Shokhrukh was found unconscious at the opposite end of town from his parents’ house in the Aravan district. People who found him were able to find out his details and called a taxi which delivered him at his home at about 8pm.

Doctors described Shokhrukh’s condition as serious. He had been concussed, several teeth had been knocked out, his nose broken and his face so badly beaten that he was barely recognisable. “Half his face was missing,” Shokhrukh’s father Avas says. The victim has also suffered partial memory loss since the incident.

Despite Shokhrukh Saipov’s terrible injuries he was denied essential medical help. Although he was seen by a duty doctor that evening as he was admitted to the emergency department of Osh city hospital, the following day, the next doctor on shift and his medical staff ignored the journalist.

When Shokhrukh’s father, Avas, asked them to examine his son,

	Journalist Alisher Saipov (1981-2007); photo: ferghananews.com

the doctor answered that if he was dissatisfied with the care Shokhrukh was receiving in hospital he was welcome to take his son home, which he duly did.

Avas Saipov says that he hates to think that his son may have been denied professional care because of his nationality.

The Saipovs are ethnic Uzbeks, and in the south of Kyrgyzstan different ethnic groups are still not reconciled since the pogroms and killings which engulfed Osh and Jalalabad in June 2010.

On 24 October 2007, Shokhrukh’s older brother Alisher Saipov, who was 26, was shot dead in the centre of Osh not far from his office. Alisher was a well-known journalist on the Uzbek-language Siesat (Politics) newspaper.

Most acquaintances of Alisher Saipov believe he was killed because of his journalistic work. He was critical of the Uzbek government many suspected the Uzbek authorities of involvement in his killing.

However, investigators in Kyrgyzstan quickly dismissed Saipov’s journalistic and political activity as grounds for his killing. Subsequently, a man named Abdufarid Rasulov from the Batkent region of Kyrgyzstan was found guilty of the crime and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

During his trial Rasulov said that before his arrest in February 2009 he had never heard of the journalist Saipov, that he had been tortured during his investigations and had been shown to an eyewitness of the killing prior to an identification parade.

“Rasulov was a scapegoat,” the father of the murdered journalist said of Rasulov’s trial.

Today Avas Saipov says that he is grateful that he has the chance to nurse Shokrukh, overjoyed that he is at least alive. But he is very anxious about what the future holds for his family.

Uznews.net

Drones Dropping Out of the Sky–4 In One Week

US reconnaissance drone crashes in Chaman

The drone crashed in Chaman, is believed to have been on a surveiillance mission. PHOTO: FILE/MOHAMMAD NOMAN/EXPRESS

CHAMAN: A US spy plane crashed into Pakistani territory in Chaman, near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border in Balochistan, on Thursday evening.

According to Express 24/7 correspondent, Mohamamd Kazim, the drone was surveying the border when it crashed near a cantonment area in Chaman, 300 meters inside Pakistani territory.

Frontier Constabulary officials confirmed the crash and said that they had taken custody of the drone and would attempt the uncover the reason for the crash.

The official went on to say that the drone was not carrying any weapons systems and was probably for surveillance purposes.

The US, which owns and operates much of the drones in this region flies both, armed and unarmed drones for a number of reasons. The Predator and Reaper models of their drones are armed with hellfire missiles, used to attack and destroy targets on either side of the border.

Pakistan and the US have been at odds with each other over the operation of drones, with Pakistan repeatedly asking US to stop flights of armed drones into its territory and that Washington either sell or transfer technology for drones to Pakistan in order to conduct effective campaign against militants in areas bordering Afghanistan.

This is the fourth US drone crash this week with two reconnaissance crafts going down in northern Afghan city of Balkh, while another drone went down to “technical fault” in Ghazni.

NATO/State Dept. Knocking-Down Arab Regimes To Set-Up Islamist Ones

Did NATO help pave the way for Sharia law in Libya?

KPCC

AFP/Getty Images

A reprodution of a leaflet dropped by NATO forces over the Libyan capital Tripoli. The leaflet reads in Arabic, ‘ Warning: You are not a match or equal to the superior weapons systems and airpower of NATO and pursuing your deed will lead to your death.’

It’s just a few short lines in a draft of the new Libyan constitution that is circulating around on the internet but it’s enough to have some people worry about the shape and ideology of the new Libyan government that will ostensibly soon be taking over the country. The draft constitution says “Islam is the Religion of the State, and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence,” and that’s enough to raise fears of Islamic law, or Sharia, being the foundation for a new Libyan government and legal system once Muammar Qaddafi’s regime falls. Before we all get carried away it’s worth noting that several Middle Eastern countries, with democratic governments, have similar language deferring to Islamic law principles in their constitutions—among them are Indonesia, Turkey and even Iraq. It’s also important to point out that there are no obviously Islamist elements in Libya’s transitional government, and indeed representatives of the rebel group have gone to great pains to play down any fears of a new religious theocracy taking over in Tripoli. But as street battles rage in the Libyan capital we should be looking ahead to the formation of a new government and the consideration challenges that government would face, from rebuilding a shattered economy to pulling together a very fractured country. What will a new Libyan government look like and will it have an Islamist bent to it?

NATO’s Libya War: A Nuremberg Level Crime

by Stephen Lendman

The US/UK/French-led war on Libya will be remembered as one of history’s greatest crimes. It violates the letter and spirit of international law and America’s Constitution.

The Nuremberg Tribunal’s Chief Justice Robert Jackson (a US Supreme Court Justice) called Nazi war crimes “the supreme international crime against peace.”

His November 21, 1945 opening remarks said:

“The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant, and so devastating, that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being repeated.”

He called aggressive war “the greatest menace of our times.”

International law defines crimes against peace as “planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing.”

All US post-WW II wars fall under this definition.

Since then, America waged direct and proxy premeditated, aggressive wars worldwide, killing millions in East and Central Asia, North and other parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, as well as Central and South America.

Arguably they exceed the worst of Nazi and imperial Japanese crimes combined, including genocide, torture mass destruction of nonmilitary related sites, colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation.

Third Reich criminals were hanged for their crimes. America’s remained free to commit greater ones, notably today against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Palestine, and the ongoing Libya atrocity – a scandalous “supreme international crime against peace,” demanding justice not forthcoming.

In fact, US war criminals are considered hostis humani generis – enemies of mankind. War crimes are against the jus gentium – the law of nations. Established international law addressed them, including the UN Charter. It’s unequivocal explaining 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. However, Charter Articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 absolutely prohibit any unilateral threat or use of force not:

– specifically allowed under Article 51;

– authorized by the Security Council; or

– permitted by the US Constitution only amendments ratified by three-fourths of the states can change.

In addition, three General Assembly resolutions also prohibit non-consensual belligerent intervention, including:

– the 1965 Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty;

– the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations; and

– the 1974 Definition of Aggression.

Moreover, various post-WW II Conventions, including the four Geneva ones and their Common Article 1 obligate all High Contracting Parties to “respect and ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances;” namely, to apply its principles universally, requiring High Contracting Parties “search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts.”

At Nuremberg, the concepts of individual and command criminal responsibility were addressed, the Tribunal Principles holding that “(a)ny person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment….(c)rimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit (them) can the provisions of international law be enforced.”

The Rome Statute’s Article 25 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) codified this principle, affirming the culpability of persons committing crimes of war and against humanity.

In addition, commanders and their superiors are specifically culpable if they “either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes, (and) failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecutions.”

Moreover, Nuremberg established that immunity is null and void, including for heads of state, other top officials, and top commanders. Further, genocide, crimes of war and against humanity are so grave that statute of limitation provisions don’t apply.

As a result, every living past and present US president, top and subordinate officials, and Pentagon commanders involved in war(s) should be prosecuted for their crimes before a special Nuremberg-type tribunal, holding them fully accountable.

Genocide, other forms of mass murder, targeted and indiscriminate destruction, and other crimes of war and against humanity are too intolerable to go unpunished.

Nonetheless, America and its conspiratorial allies commit them – today, horrifically against Libya, a small nonbelligerent country being terrorized, destroyed, and plundered lawlessly in the name of “liberation.”

America is the lead offender, committing what its 1996 War Crimes Act calls “grave breaches,” defined as “willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological (or other illegal) experiments, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.”

As a result, Libya is an ongoing atrocity, a Nuremberg level crime, one of history’s greatest.

Yet on August 22, Obama had the audacity to say America, its “allies and partners in the international community (are committed) to protect the people of Libya, and to support a peaceful transition to democracy.”

In fact, unspeakable war crimes are being committed to “protect the people of Libya.” Included are civilians being terror bombed daily, to break their morale, cause panic, weaken their will to resist, and inflict mass casualties and punishment.

However, Geneva and other international laws forbid the targeting of civilians. The Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (1907 Hague IV Convention) states:

– Article 25: “The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited.”

– Article 26: “The officer in command of an attacking force must, before commencing a bombardment, except in cases of assault, do all in his power to warn the authorities.”

Article 27: “In sieges and bombardments, all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes.”

The besieged should visibly indicate these buildings or places and notify an adversary beforehand. Given today’s intelligence and high-tech capabilities, belligerents can easily identify civilian and military targets.

Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians in time of war. It prohibits violence of any type against them and requires treatment for the sick and wounded.

In September 1938, a League of Nations unanimous resolution prohibited the:

“bombardment of cities, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings not in the immediate neighborhood of the operations of land forces….In cases where (legitimate targets) are so situated, (aircraft) must abstain from bombardment” if this action indiscriminately affects civilians.

Long ago Washington trashed international and constitutional laws, planning for Libya what’s ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan – conquest, colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation, excluding any form of democracy it reviles, including at home.

Major Media Scoundrels Lead Role in America’s Wars

When America goes to war, its media are key, reporting disinformation, propaganda, managed news, and straight Pentagon handouts instead of real information, commentaries and analysis people deserve.

In the lead, The New York Times operates as the equivalent of an official information and propaganda ministry, posing as independent journalism.

August 24 was no exception, writers David Kirkpatrick and Alan Cowell headlining, “Qaddafi Defiant After Rebel Takeover,” saying:

“Rebel fighters scoured Tripoli on Wednesday in their continued search for an elusive and defiant” (Gaddafi) after NATO landed them on Tripoli’s shores with orders to terrorize and loot. They’ve taken full advantage, what Kirkpatrick and Cowell didn’t explain.

Instead they gloated about a “rebel victory” very much not won, especially because nothing from Times or other major media reports is credible. Repeatedly they’ve been caught lying.

Other same day Times reports headlined:

“Libyans Rejoice in a Castle Filled With Guns and the Trappings of Power,” referring to Gaddafi’s Bab al-Aziziya compound they reportedly stormed with no verification of precisely what’s going on.

“Waves of Disinformation and Confusion Swamp the Truth in Libya,” referring mainly to what it calls “a republic of lies,” not its own shameless daily propaganda, making everything it reports suspect, unreliable, or falsified.

“Airstrikes More Difficult as War Moves to Tripoli,” ignoring NATO’s ongoing terror bombing, including Apache helicopter gunships machine-gunning civilians on Tripoli streets, making it unsafe to be out when they’re flying.

“After the Revolution, Hurdles in Reviving the Oil Sector,” leaving unexplained Western plans for Libya’s oil, excluding rivals China and Russia, as well as falsely calling Washington’s insurgency a “revolution.”

It’s standard New York Times policy to represent wealth and power interests, betraying readers in the process who deserve better.

Fabricating Celebratory Tripoli Street Euphoria

On August 23, Metro Gael’s Global Research.ca’s article headlined, “The Libya Media Hoax: Fabricating Scenes of Jubilation and Euphoria on Green Square,” providing another example of media lies, saying:

It “will surely go down in history as one of the most cynical hoaxes committed by corporate media since the manipulated pictures of Iraqis toppling Saddam Hussein’s statue” after America’s 2003 invasion.

Shamefully, Al Jazeera committed the latest fraud, airing fake live Green Square celebrations, its reporter, Zeina Khodr declaring, “Libya is in the hands of the opposition.”

She lied and knew it. In fact, Al Jazeera’s footage was “an elaborate and criminal hoax. The report had been prefabricated in a” Doha, Qatar studio.

Qatar is a NATO coalition member, its troops on the ground aiding insurgents along with US and UK special forces.

Libyan intelligence knew about the fake footage in advance, warning about it ahead of its release on “Rayysse state television.”

The idea is old and familiar – to create an illusion of non-existant mass support for NATO and insurgents Libyans revile. It’s done to diffuse popular resistance against them.

The full article can be read through the following link:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26155

It explains a classic PsyOps deception, this time aired by an alleged trusted source, showing it’s as corrupted as the rest, lying instead of reporting accurately.

A Final Comment

Mahdi Nazemroaya is a friend, a Middle East/Central Asian analyst, a Center for Research on Globalization (CRG) research associate, and a regular Progressive Radio News Hour contributor.

Providing accurate reports from Tripoli, he got death threats. Two other friends – Lizzie Phelan and Franklin Lamb, as well as other independent journalists also faced recriminations for doing what corporate media scoundrels don’t – their job.

In an email, Mahdi said: “I am afraid I will be executed in cold blood.”

That’s been the NATO-wrought danger in Libya, notably in Tripoli, being carpet bombed and strafed by helicopter gunships, machine-gunning civilians in cold blood.

On August 24, CRG Director Michel Chossudovsky wrote about Mahdi, saying:

In Libya for over two months, he was dedicated to “honest factual reporting, with a concern for human life, in solidarity with those Libyan men, women and children who lost their lives in bombing raids on residential areas, schools and hospitals.”

He literally risked his life doing it, telling this writer he had to stay supportively for the people he so much cares about. That commitment goes way beyond good journalism and analysis. It’s an expression of character too few others have.

Mahdi has it, so do Lizzie, Franklin, and other honest journalists who went to a war zone to report truths – fully, accurately, and courageously, “challeng(ing) the lies of the mainstream media,” said Chossudovsky.

In so doing, they “threaten the NATO-media consensus,” in the process jeopardizing their own safety.

NATO wants to make Libya an Orwellian society in which “War is peace. Freedom is slavery,” and “Ignorance is strength.” Orwell also said: “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

It’s also a courageous one when done at great personal risk. Mahdi, Lizzie, Franklin, and others reporting accurately are true heros, supporting Libyans and free people everywhere while putting themselves in harm’s way.

It doesn’t get any more heroic than that!

Note:

On August 24 at 4PM Tripoli time, the International Red Cross rescued (or negotiated the release of) over 30 journalists trapped inside the city’s Rixos Hotel. A ship heading to Tripoli’s seacoast will take them out of the country.

Reports from the London Guardian, CNN, and other corporate media sources falsely claimed Gaddafi loyalists held them hostage, when, in fact, they were threatened by insurgent hooligans.

Hopefully they’re now safe, but won’t fully be until heading home out of harm’s way. Further updates will follow.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen [at] 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/.

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com

S. African Deputy President Urges ICC To Charge NATO Commanders With War Crimes

[S. Africa also in the news for blocking US attempts to seize $1.5 billion in frozen Libyan assets.  Though foreign occupation is forbidden in the US-sponsored resolution, NATO Special Forces have continued to lead the assault on Tripoli.]

“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,

Nato ‘guilty’ of crimes: Motlanthe

Deputy president Kgalema ­Motlanthe. Source: AFP

 

Siyabonga Mkhwanazi

Deputy president Kgalema ­Motlanthe on Wednesday voiced his disapproval of the Nato war against Libya calling on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to charge the allied commanders for committing war crimes in that country.

Motlanthe told Parliament yester­day that the Nato alliance was creating an impression that the Libyan rebels were acting on their own, without any military support on the ground.

He said while the ICC targeted Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and his commanders for war crimes, the prosecutors should also charge Nato for bombing innocent civilians.

His comments may be interpreted as another indication that South Africa was going to have a cold relationship with the rebel movement that is poised to take over the government in Libya.

Motlanthe was in the National Assembly to answer questions from MPs. He said Nato’s bombing of Libya had set a precedent in the functioning of the UN Security Council.

While the US, Britain and France had pushed for the adoption of resolution 1973 at the council, these countries had abused the resolution. “It creates a problem for future ­interventions,” Motlanthe said. “As you are aware, the ­situation in Syria is also of great concern, but precisely because of this precedent created in Libya the Security Council is not being able to agree on how to intervene there.

“In Libya, those who did not vote for resolution 1973 abstained, which allowed the resolution to go through. But this precedent has created very serious doubt (among) the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

“If the ICC is to act on the basis of concrete information against those who would have been responsible for loss of life of civilians it will be difficult for Nato to justify why and how it came to (bomb Libya).”

Motlanthe said despite Nato’s attempts to hide its role on the ground, the military assault on Tripoli showed that there were clear links and coordination plans by the military alliance. The rebels were receiving ­support from Nato on the ground.

“The question is whether the ICC would have the wherewithal to unearth that information and bring those who are ­responsible to book including Nato ­commanders on the ground,” Motlanthe said. This criticism of Nato comes a day after President Jacob Zuma blasted the Western nations of undermining the AU in its mediation efforts in Libya.

siyabongam@thenewage.co.za

What Is the Taxpayer’s Cost for America/NATO Liberating Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and Somalia?

[Has anyone bothered adding-up the bill for conquering all of these little countries, then creating governments for them, to be supported on the US dole?  This shit will end whenever the taxpayers and the jobless figure-out that  money which should be used here is being used to prop-up the New World Order.]

US Military Intervention in Libya Cost At Least $896 Million

ABC News’ Luis Martinez (@LMartinezABC) reports:  The cost of U.S. military intervention in Libya has cost American taxpayers an estimated $896 million through July 31, the Pentagon said today.

The price tag includes the amounts for daily military operations, munitions used in the operation and humanitarian assistance for the Libyan people.

The U.S. has also promised $25 million in non-lethal aid to the Libyan Transitional National Council, half of which the Defense Department has already on MRE’s (military lingo for Meals, Ready to Eat).

The military delivered 120,000 Halal MRE’s to Benghazi in May and a second shipment that included medical supplies, boots, tents, uniforms, and personal protective gear in June.

While Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi appears on the way out, NATO says flight missions over Tripoli will continue, with the U.S. playing a role in helping to keep a tight window over the area that’s been in effect for weeks.

Over the past 12 days, U.S. planes have flown 391 sorties for a total of 5,316 since April 1, according to figures provided by the Defense Department.  That total includes 1,210 airstrike missions over the same three and a half month period. The U.S. has also conducted 101 Predator drone strike missions in Libya.

A U.S. official credited NATO flight cover over the past many months with allowing the Libyan rebels enough time to eventually regroup and begin their pushes.

One significant offset to the cost of U.S. involvement in the flights worth noting is the sale of military equipment to allies also involved in the cause.  Pentagon officials say the sale of ammunition, replacement parts, fuel, and technical assistance to allies since March has totaled $221.9 million.

Muslim group seeks U.S. probe of New York police

Reuters

NEW YORK: A U.S. Muslim civil liberties organization on Wednesday called for a federal investigation and Senate hearings into a report the CIA was helping New York City police gather intelligence from mosques and minority neighborhoods.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) suspects the joint CIA-police intelligence-gathering described in an Associated Press report violates the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Privacy Act of 1974 and a presidential order banning the CIA from spying on Americans, CAIR attorney Gadeir Abbas said.

“This is hearing-worthy,” Abbas said, requesting aSenate Intelligence Committee review as part of its oversight of the Central Intelligence Agency.

The AP report said undercover New York Police Department officers known as “rakers” were sent into minority neighborhoods to monitor bookstores, bars, cafes and nightclubs, and police used informants known as “mosque crawlers” to monitor sermons.

“The NYPD operates far outside its borders and targets ethnic communities in ways that would run afoul of civil liberties rules if practiced by the federal government,” wrote the AP, which described the collaboration between the CIA and a U.S. police department as unprecedented.

A police spokesman said “we don’t apologize” for aggressive techniques developed since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. He said those techniques have helped thwart 13 plots on the city.

“It (the AP report) shows that we’re doing all we reasonably can to stop terrorists from killing even more New Yorkers,” NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne said in an email. “We commit over a thousand officers to the fight every day to stop terrorists who’ve demonstrated an undiminished appetite to come back and kill more New Yorkers.”

Browne added that the CIA does not direct the NYPD in any intelligence gathering activities. He confirmed that the department’s intelligence chief previously worked at the CIA as head of both its analysis and operations divisions.

Referring to CAIR’s assertion that the collaboration with the CIA might be illegal, Browne said, “They’re wrong.”

CAIR also called on the Justice Department to initiate an immediate investigation “of the civil rights implications of this spy program and the legality of its links to the CIA,” said Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR’s chief spokesman.

A spokesman for the Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In response to an inquiry about the CIA’s dealings with the NYPD, a U.S. government official told Reuters on condition of anonymity: “If anyone is suggesting that CIA is overstepping its legal bounds and spying on Americans, they are just plain wrong. Lawful interactions on counterterrorism make complete sense in today’s world.”

CAIR was preparing a formal request for Senate hearings and a Justice Department probe that it would send out in the coming days, Abbas said.

Chinese Press Thinks That Russia Is the Only State That Will Lose-Out In the New Libya

Russian interests in Libya hanging in balance

English.news.cn

MOSCOW, Aug 24 (Xinhua) — As the rebel National Transitional Council (NTC) moves closer to power in Libya, Russia’s interests in the North African country are facing a precarious future.

Russia abstained in March from the U.N. Security Council vote on Resolution 1973, which authorized international military intervention in Libya to protect civilians.

Yet Moscow obviously toughened its stance on the Libyan government of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in early August, as President Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree backing the U.N. resolution.

Commenting on the latest developments in Libya on Wednesday, Medvedev struck a cautious tone, saying that Russia’s position on the Libya issue is “accurate.”

Moscow, the president added, might establish relations with the next Libyan government if it could unite the nation on the democratic platform.

Russian experts said Moscow’s “double thinking” during the six-month-old conflict might be considered by the Libyan opposition as an attempt to seat in two chairs at once.

Such an approach might result in considerable losses for Russian companies in Libya should the NTC form a capable government, they predicted.

“Russia would be eager to participate in the post-conflict reconstruction of Libya and restoration of its infrastructure. The question is, if Russia would be allowed to do so,” Yevgeny Satanovsky, head of Russia’s Middle East Institute, told Xinhua.

Even if Moscow recognizes the Libyan opposition right now, it is still a bit late for Moscow to win sympathy from the rebels-turned rulers, said Yuri Krupnov, an expert at the Institute of Demography, Migration and Regional Development in Moscow.

“If NATO wins in Libya, Russia will not be allowed to develop oil and gas fields, to build railroads or to sign arms deals with Tripoli’s new regime,” Krupnov said.

“Russia effectively betrayed Gaddafi by not vetoing U.N. Resolution 1973 and now Moscow reaps what it has sown,” the expert added.

For Russian companies, Libya could have been lost forever, said Aram Schultz, head of the Russia-Libya Business Union.

“Let’s don’t lull ourselves. Gazprom, Gazprom Neft, Tatneft are doomed to lose hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars they have invested in Libya,” he said, referring to three Russian energy giants.

According to Konstantin Eggert, a Russian expert on Middle East affairs, even now the Kremlin could not stand aside with the Libyan rebels due to Russia’s domestic political reasons, but this explanation would prove a hard sell to the Libyan opposition.

“Russia cannot expect the new Libyan government to embrace these explanations with joy. Moscow has been siding with Gaddafi for too long,” Eggert told Xinhua.

“The chances for Gazprom and other Russian energy and military-industrial companies to retain their contracts with Libya are slim,” the expert added.

On the other hand, Eggert said, Moscow may still have the chance to be a “secondary” friend of the Libyan opposition, and Russian companies could return to Libya in the long term.

Mikhail Margelov, Medvedev’s envoy on the Libyan issue, noted Tuesday that the Libyan opposition has promised to honor the contracts signed between the Gaddafi government and Moscow.

“However, so far there is nobody (in Libya) to negotiate with,” the envoy admitted.

Still, some experts voiced different opinions. Alexei Malashenko from Moscow Carnegie Center regarded the situation as not so hopeless for the Russian business in Libya.

“The NTC is not a single monolithic block, so the future of Russian interests in Libya depends on which part of the NTC prevails in the new government,” Malashenko told Xinhua.

He stressed that Libyan opposition leaders were not so naive to expect that Moscow would switch sides immediately after the conflict began.

“So Russia has got a chance to retain its position in Libya, but Moscow currently has few tools to influence the NTC’s decisions,” the expert said.

“Moscow’s politics in the Libyan conflict could not be called a complete failure, but also could hardly be considered a success. As a result, the Kremlin now can only wait and see,” he said.

Editor: yan

Major Asian News Source Confirms Voltairenet Report On US Move On Frozen Libyan Funds

[Thierry Meyssan from Voltairenet broke this story on Aug. 18 (SEE: Washington Tried To Snatch $1.5 billion to Pay its NTC Employees ).]

US wants UN to free US$1.5b of Libya aid

Libyan children pose for a photo at a seaside of the rebel-held town of Benghazi. (AP Photo/Alexandre Meneghini)

UNITED NATIONS: The United States called an urgent meeting of the UN Security Council on Wednesday to press for an easing of Libya sanctions so that it can send $1.5 billion of humanitarian aid.

The 15-member council will meet from 3:00 pm (1900 GMT) to discuss a proposed US resolution on Libya amid growing US frustration over the blocking of special aid.

The United States first asked the committee for permission to send $1.5 billion of frozen assets to Libya’s opposition transitional government on August 8, a Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP.

The US administration responded to questions from other nations but South Africa has continued to block the move on the committee, the diplomat added.

Diplomats said South Africa wanted to wait until after an African Union summit on Thursday and Friday before taking decisions on measures to help Libya.

“Now it is urgent. This money is needed for fuel for generators in hospitals, desalination plants and other facilities where it could run out in days,” said the western diplomat.

If South Africa maintains its opposition after the consultations on Wednesday, the United States will press for a full vote on easing sanctions at the Security Council on Thursday or Friday, the diplomat said.

The Security Council imposed sanctions, including freezing the assets of Libyan state entities, in resolutions passed in February and March to put pressure on Muammar Gaddafi’s government.

The United States and its allies say that the UN must now quickly move to change the sanctions to help the opposition Transitional National Council, that many Western governments now recognise.

The UN special envoy to Libya, Abdul Ilah al-Khatib and Ian Martin, the leader of a UN team planning for post-conflict Libya, are in Doha holding talks with the rebel government.

- AFP/de

Asian Devel. Bank Funding Uzbek Project To Upgrade Ferghana Valley Highway

View Larger Map

“Under the Second CAREC Corridor 2 Road Investment Program, the Project will comprise civil works of about 74 km of the Uzbekistan Section of CAREC Corridor 2 Road (between Km 116 and Km 190 of A373 highway, from Quqon to Andijon).

The second investment program will finance the reconstruction of the Uzbekistan section of CAREC Corridor 2, which connects Uzbekistan to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan.”  

ADB $500 Million Investment Program Aids Uzbekistan’s Push for Increased Trade, Growth

Date

23 Aug 2011

MANILA, PHILIPPINES – The Asian Development Bank (ADB) is providing a multitranche financing facility of up to $500 million to help Uzbekistan reconstruct around 230 kilometers of poor quality roads, which will improve road connectivity and safety, and boost trade along a key regional transport corridor linking Asia to Europe.

The ADB Board of Directors today approved the multitranche financing facility for the Second Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) Corridor 2 Road Investment Program. The first tranche of $130 million will be used to rehabilitate a 74-km section of A373 highway running through the Fergana Valley, where a third of all Uzbeks live and a large proportion of the country’s agricultural goods are produced. Assistance will also be given for road safety and asset management improvements.

“The road reconstruction work with up-to-date safety features will result in safer and faster travel, and greater access to social services and lower transport costs,” said Shakeel Khan, Principal Portfolio Management Specialist at the Central and West Asia Department. “It will also open up new trade, business and investment opportunities for people both domestically and in neighboring countries.”

CAREC Corridor 2, which connects the Caucasus and Mediterranean to East Asia, is one of a number being built under the cooperation program. This initiative aims to help Central Asian countries take economic advantage of the region’s strategic location at the crossroads of Asia and Europe. Rehabilitating roads in Uzbekistan will allow the country to take a central role in CAREC’s development plans.

“There is an unprecedented opportunity for Uzbekistan to emerge as a center for trade and commerce in Central Asia and to achieve rapid and sustainable economic growth,” said Hong Wang, Director at the Central and West Asia Department.

Road passenger and freight traffic are booming in Uzbekistan, with vehicle fleets projected to double every five years. The Government of Uzbekistan spends 1% of annual gross domestic product on roads but is gradually increasing the amount. ADB’s assistance will help the government raise the capacity of oversight agencies to manage and maintain roads and implement a national road safety strategy and action plan.

The financing facility will release loans for three separate projects under the investment program. A total of $320 million will come from ADB’s ordinary capital resources and up to $180 million from its concessional Asian Development Fund. The first tranche loan will have a 24-year term, with a 4-year grace period and annual interest determined in accordance with ADB’s LIBOR-based lending facility.

The Government of Uzbekistan will extend counterpart funds of $100 million for a total program cost of $600 million. The Ministry of Finance-controlled Republican Road Fund will be the executing agency for the program which is due for completion in March 2017.

Tripoli Port Notes–Libya Update

Tripoli Port Notes

 Libya Update

Tuesday- August 23, 2011

Franklin Lamb

Tripoli Port area

This observers tentative appraisal of Tuesdays events along the North Tripoli Port area as of late afternoon 8/23/11 is that the “65,000 well trained and well-armed troops” hyped Sunday by the Gaddafi government don’t in fact exist and that the pockets of government troops here in Tripoli and across Libya that do, will continue to resist what it views as NATO aggression designed to usurp the country’s oil and add Libya to Africom.  NATO is widely viewed as having violated the three main terms of UNSCR 1973, to wit, NATO did engage in regime change, it did take sides in a civil war, it did arm one side, and it did refuse to allow a negotiated diplomatic settlement which many here and internationally believe could have been achieved by early April, thus saving hundreds Libyan lives.  NATO’s  more than 160 days of bombing are seen as egregious violations of UNSCR 1973, Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter and numerous provisions of  international law,  all  part of its campaign to secure Libyan oil and this rich countries geopolitical cooperation  for the US, UK, France, Italy and their NATO allies.

I am advised that some Gaddafi loyalists are headed to the colonel’s home town of Serte to prepare to defend it. Some of my reasons for these tentative conclusions include the no show government troops, the intensifying NATO bombings of Tripoli, which is the only reason the rebels have not negotiated an end to this conflict last April, and my tentative conclusion that there is no reason for massive numbers of government troops, if they existed, not to challenge the increasing numbers of NATO rebels who appear to be sitting ducks as they tool around Tripoli’s troops. According to journalists who arrived at this hotel yesterday from the west, south and east, there appear to be no government forces moving toward Tripoli to join in an Alamo type last stand battle.  Obviously, I could be very mistaken but subject to correction I expect a “rebel victory” without defining that term, late this week.

During the early afternoon of 8/23/11, power and Internet were cut from our hotel and again the sealed windowed rooms heated up fast and had to be essentially vacated unless one stayed in the bathtub filled with tepid tap water. We currently have no local or international phone service or information from outside Libya or any knowledge of what is being reported internationally about Libya.

On Monday night August 22, 2011 this observer met with Saif al Islam.  He was not captured and he is not dead. At least not as of 11 p.m. 8/22/11 or roughly 24 hours after the NTC and the ICC claim he was captured and was being prepared for transport to The Hague. Saif was defiant and he gave assurances that his family was safe and that NATO would be defeated politically for its crimes against Libyan civilians.

Saif took western camera man and reporter on a short tour of Tripoli showing them that NATO was not in control—not 95% in control of Tripoli  as the NTC rep in London has been claiming since Sunday night and not 80% in control of Tripoli as the White House & NATO’s “Operation protect the  Libyan civilians” CEO, Rasmussen, has claimed. But the rebels do appear to currently control large swatches of Libya’s capitol.  A journalist named “Kim” S.  from the UK Independent who has been with the rebels for the past more than two months and who  seemed to literally  sort of stumble into our hotel yesterday told me this morning that  NTC claims made during the period he was with them were “complete bullshit.”

Saif, Colonel Gaddafi’s onetime heir apparent, was in good spirits and exuded confidence. In conversation with one Yankee who he knew earned his PhD at the London School of Economics, that contrary to media reports last spring that Saif bought his PhD from LSE, that it’s not true and he in fact worked hard for nearly three years researching and writing his doctoral dissertation on community development. He was offended by reports than he did not.  I tend to believe him because I found the LSE academically tough and my advisor Professor David Johnson and his Thesis Examination Committee trio, to my chagrin, went over my dissertation, Pollution as a Problem of International Law, for nearly three hours, paragraph by paragraph during my oral Thesis defense, more than two decades ago.  I am thinking and assuming that LSE has not lowered its academic standards since the days of Harold Laski and David Johnson.

My new “office” is located in the outside patio area above the swimming pool and gardens of the “7 star” Corinthia hotel.  Wonderful sea view overlooking Tripoli harbor to the north and the old city of Tripoli to the south. When a bomb hits or sustained gunfire erupts the office quickly moves just inside the glassed in restaurant which features the ONLY ‘hot’ electric plug among the more than 6000 currently dead ones in this hotel. Nobody knows when the hotel generator will crash ending the last of the wattage here and exhausting laptop and mobile phone batteries.

The inside of the hotel is sweltering having had no A/C for more than 48 hours. Wanting some fresh air, I prop open a door to the former Japanese Sushi Bar on the outside patio, but Miss Lorraine, the hotel manager, scolds me.  “You bloody American”, she seethed at me yesterday. “First your bloody government brings NATO to bomb us to pieces and now you fill my hotel with birds!  Damn all of you!”

It’s true that Lorraine sometimes gets a little upset when a bomb goes off and some of the birds from the hotel garden fly into the hotel’s  two level grand lobby complete with lots of plants and palm trees where the poor frightened birds seek safety.  They seem to like it inside our hotel.

Concerning the outdoor hotel garden, for some reason the garden lights are always on (last night the only ones in all of north Tripoli that I could see) and the garden fountains continue pumping which of course uses up quite valuable generator fuel oil.  Lorraine laments:  “As you know Mr. Lamb, the staff has abandoned me and I don’t know where the switch is—I would be ever so grateful if you could find it. I think it’s out there in the garden somewhere, and turn it off. Really I would!”   Well, I did find the switch, turned off the fountains and the garden lights and Lorraine suddenly likes me again. Would that all women were so easy to please.

Yesterday one of the few staff people around here offered me the leaders framed picture (way too big to transport!) and a green flag that had been removed from outside the hotel’s main entrance.  Miss Lorraine became distressed because she thought if I was caught with a green flag I could be in trouble. So as not to cause her more stress I declined with the knowledge that I already have a few packed away as gifts for friends.

The green flags and the gold frame picture of Gaddafi that were removed two nights ago suddenly returned overnight.  There had been a heated discussion by remaining senior hotel management staff— numbering two it appears– about the wisdom of removing them. For now they are back where they were.

9:25 a.m.  Two NATO bombs blast nearby. Three “security guys” from resting on a lobby couch run outside to see what happened. More birds come in and I again move my table away from the patio door.

9:43 a.m. Anti-aircraft gun fire hits the side of the hotel chipping the concrete siding near the garden entrance so I move one flight downstairs to the lobby.

10:20 a.m.  A very long convoy of 237 rebel pickups, some with mounted anti-aircraft guns and filled with young fighters with RPG’s and AK-47’s and heavier guns, pass within 100 yards of me and the hotel balcony above the swimming pool and the seaside road– driving east along the sea front.  They passed in front of the Marriott and Bab al Bahar (“gate to the sea”) hotel complex of five tall buildings, apparently unaware that yesterday at about the same time 22 truckloads of government troops turned right into that same complex and at least some of them went underground.  Last night there was gunfire from the government troop location but as of this moment the government troops are undiscovered (if they did not redeploy overnight) and did not fire on the passing rebel convoy although the rebels slow moving convoy must have presented an attractive target. Again one wonders if the government’s troops are laying an elaborate trap for their enemies or if they have decided to sit out this phase and wait to learn whether Gaddafi’s regime can hang on. Of if they even exist in significant numbers.

The three “battle hardened journalists” who just arrived at this hotel are debating if the rebel’s convoy was in retreat or was advancing.  My own two cents worth is that they were advancing toward the Bab al Azizya (“splendid gate”) Gaddafi barracks which as of this morning NATO has bombed a reported 144 times.  I base my view on the serious looks on the rebel’s faces, their evident adrenalin, the fact that their advance is slow and fairly ordered including five ambulances bringing up the rear and the fact that some of them seem to be checking their weapons and ammunition belts  as if preparing for a firefight. Some fighters eye us sternly seemingly unsure whether we are friend or foe. We wave at them and some wave back. However, moments later we hear gunfire from our rear and it appears that someone is firing at us thinking we are supporting the rebels. Kim and I duck into the hotel foyer but he goes back out.

10:40 a.m. heavy gunfire is heard from the direction of Bab al Azizia Kaddafi barracks.

10:55 a.m. 20 minutes of heavy small arms and mortar rounds erupt and appear to be fired toward Gaddafi’s compound. Maybe it is from the rebel’s convoy that just past but the three battles hardened journalists, including the UK Independent’s Kim, who I have joined up with for the time being, are debating the subject.  Very close AK-47 gunfire.  We come back inside.

12:35 p.m. two “rebel representatives” arrived at the main entrance of our hotel and caused a stir inside the lobby at the front desk.  This hotel has zero security now, the last two uniformed security guys left early yesterday.  The two “rebel” guys offered protection for the handful of us here.  There was shouting as the front desk guys refused their offer. Eventually the “rebels” left. The hotel guys said the visitors were indeed local rebel “criminals” and that they had come to loot the hotel and not to protect it. However, there are exactly 8 rooms currently being occupied and one of the journalist’s claims he was already robbed on route from Zawiyeh yesterday just in front of the hotel. His laptop and his cash were stolen. Front desk hotel staff claims that today the “rebels” stole one car, tried but failed to hot wire two others, and stole ten computers from the hotel office.  They also reportedly set up a rebel checkpoint at Gate Two outside our hotel and replaced the green flags with rebel tricolors. I declined to go check.

The AP’s man, Martin, who also arrived yesterday, just told me that the rebels now control the North Tripoli port area where our hotel is situated. My thoughts move to the 22 truckloads of government fighters who I saw disappear yesterday morning among the seaside hotels near our hotel. Meanwhile, the UK Independent’s men Kim reported that visas are no longer required to enter Libya from Tunisia.

12:50 p.m. a shorter convoy of 47 rebel vehicles passed the hotel.  Maybe part of the earlier group on a victory lap or just patrolling or flaunting their control or perhaps it was a new group.  They did not appear in a hurry or very anxious.  We photographed them without their objection as they waved and drove into West Tripoli.

1:30 p.m. three rockets hit near what appears to be Bab al Azizia.  Heavy gunfire and two more rockets or mortars follow. AP’s Martin and the Independent’s Kim go out to look. Two more mortars appear to hit in the direction of Bab al Azizia. Kim reported that for some reason no one seems to need a visa to enter now from Jerba, Tunisia and he also thinks that perhaps the Kaddafi regime may have set a trap and will close it when his forces see the whites of rebel’s eyes.

One rebel media representative who re-defected back to the Gaddafi regime from the rebels is being interviewed by a journalist this afternoon.  He told us that the NATO office in Naples is writing or vetting all NTC communications and that they have on their staff Israel Defense Ministry of Information psych-warfare specialists who are producing “panic causing leaflets & mobile phone messages” as well as putting out false claims at key moments for maximum impact on  international and local  public opinion.

This observer is not sure if NATO recalls how during the July 2006 war in Lebanon, Hezbollah took IDF and US Israeli lobby psych-war propaganda and wrapped it around Israel’s neck during the 33 day war. However, it appears from here that the West is gobbling up the fake NTC (NATO) “media advisories” being regurgitated by “Libya experts” interviewed ad nausea on CNN, BCC, FOX and other MSM outlets who pontificate about the NTC’s democrats stunning achievement.

The above noted interviewee also claims that he heard rumors that NATO has dropped hit teams to control the messages coming from non MSM reporters who depict NATO and rebel activities in a negative light.  Time may tell.

4:14 p.m. it appears that the hotel generator crashed so there is currently no power whatsoever at the hotel including no elevator. I am not relishing the 18 floor hike up to my room especially given my throbbing right leg.

6:15 p.m.  The young man who let me borrow his bicycle rushed into the Corinthia hotel to tell us that Gaddafi’s compound at Bab al Azizia has been taken by “NATO rebel” forces following the nearly 9 hour battle. A high ranking Gaddafi official advised me last night that he expected Gaddafi’s compound would be taken and that the Colonel will not be easy to locate and will  continue to galvanize a counter revolution in the coming days. He also told me that during the night of Saturday August 20, 2011 Kaddafi issued orders for his troops and supporters not to bomb and fire tanks inside Tripoli for fear of killing civilians and destroying civilian houses.

Franklin Lamb is in Libya and can be reached c/o fplamb@gmail.com

Putin and Medvedev Reveal True Loyalties In Iranian Double-Crosses

Russia Damaging Iranian People

24 August 2011

ByAnatoly Medetsky

Iran’s ambassador to Moscow on Wednesday assailedGazpromNeft for a “delay” in developing the country’s oil reserves, as fewer energy investors remain committed to cooperating with Tehran.

Mahmoud Reza Saijadi also announced that Iran asked the United Nations’ International Court of Justice to rule on Russia’s refusal to supply S-300 missile systems to his country.

Saijadi’s broadside at Gazprom Neft, the oil arm of state-controlled Gazprom, comes as many foreign oil majors are pulling out of the country, citing reasons that include U.S sanctions and difficulty in dealing with the government.

Gazprom Neft has delayed the development of the Azar field for nearly two years since signing a tentative agreement with the National Iranian Oil Company in November 2009 to jointly tap its resources, he said.

“Big damage has been done by Russian oil companies to the Iranian people,” Saijadi said through a translator at a news conference. “I have already told the Russian side about the danger of this approach.”

A spokeswoman for Gazprom Neft said the company would have no comment. The company does not mention Iran as a country of presence in the map of its business on the corporate web site.

A Gazprom Neft executive last mentioned Iran in March. Alexander Kolomatsky, head of the company’s Iraq-based Badra project, said in an interview that data from Iran helped the company evaluate Badra’s potential.Gazprom Neftraised its estimate of Badra’s reserves more than twofold to 3 billion barrels thanks to its involvement in Iran, he said.

The company believes that Iran’s Azar field and Badra in neighboring Iraq are part of the same underground oil reserve.

Foreign oil companies have reduced their activity in Iran since January 2010, according to a U.S. congressional report released earlier this month. The report by the Government Accountability Office said 20 firms — out of 41 firms it had tracked as having presence in Iran — withdrew or were in the process of pulling out from commercial activity in the country.

Those companies includedLUKoil, which announced its retreat from Iran in March 2010 citing U.S. sanctions that seek to punish Iran for its nuclear program, which many nations suspect aims to create a nuclear bomb. U.S. lawmakers reinforced sanctions, which previously only barred investments of more than $20 million a year in Iranian exploration and production, by legislation that U.S. PresidentBarack Obamasigned last summer.

The new law complicates any investment in Iran by expanding sanctions to financial institutions, insurers and export credit agencies aiding the Iranian oil sector.

Some other companies that cooled to Iran also listed the difficulty of doing business with the country as a reason why they left, the congressional report said.

Saijadi on Wednesday unveiled a plan to rescue another deal that went sour: The sale of Russian S-300 missile systems, which PresidentDmitry Medvedevbanned in September 2010 in compliance with a UN resolution from June 2010.

Iran is suing Russia in the International Court of Justice, hoping that the court will rule that UN resolution does not cover S-300s, Saijadi said.

“We have filed our lawsuit in order for the court ruling to help Russia go through with the sale and in order for Russia to have a legal trump,” he said in comments translated into Russian, Interfax reported.

In response, a highly placed Russian source dealing with arms exports from the country said Russia will not agree to supply the weapons unless the UN lifts its sanctions, Interfax reported.

“As of now, the contract is not on ice as some people believe. It’s canceled,” the source said.

Moscow is ready to return to Tehran the advance payment of $166.8 million, the source said. The entire contract, signed in 2007, has been estimated to be worth $800 million.

Behold India’s unfolding democratic revolution

Sudip Mazumdar
A unique revolution is unfolding across India. No matter what is the immediate outcome of this popular upsurge, triggered by the inspiring determination of a 74-year-old man’s refusal to eat food till the first step towards containing the hydra-headed monster of state-encouraged corruption is taken, Anna Hazare’s fast has already become an event of great historic proportions. Take a few recent developments in the so-called developed democracies of the West. In the United Kingdom marauding mobs robbed innocent people, burned down neighbourhood shops and houses and attacked police with guns and petrol bombs. In otherwise placid Norway, extreme hate-filled anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant mindset led to the mass carnage of innocent students and bombing of buildings in Oslo. In the preacher of democracy, the United States, a prolonged recession, mounting unemployment and venal partisan politics have led to hardening of anti-immigrant prejudices, instead of a pan-American protest movement. A similar narrow-minded response is on display across crisis-ridden Europe. Now contrast that with India’s sweeping mass movement. It is peaceful, non-violent and all-inclusive, propagating a ‘middle path’ shunning the extremism of Maoists on the one hand and rightwing bigotry on the other. We must remember that ordinary Indians have been brutalised for far too long by tyrannical state functionaries ranging from a ruthless policeman to a shameless minister looting public money to a pitiless judge allowing the innocent to rot in prison. And yet, Indians have not swung either to the extreme left or to the extreme right. They have steadfastly remained on the middle path. In a dazzling display of noble human emotions, Indians are helping each other in this mass uprising in a spirit of service and fellow feeling. Look at that family of 40 from Ludhiana distributing food and water at Ramlila grounds and the traders from Shahdara who are running community kitchens to feed people and the grandmother from Kurukshetra who cooks food and brings it to Delhi and shares it with anyone sitting next to her at Ramlila grounds. Such stories abound across the country. There is, as if, a race to do as much as one can to help the fellow human being braving the punishing heat and a callous government apparatus. There was a blind teacher from Delhi University who came with his blind wife so that they could let their one-year-old son see and hear Anna Hazare. There was an 80-year-old ailing professor from Patna who was brought in a wheelchair by his daughter-in-law so that he could be part of this social churning before he dies. Groups of poor homemakers from the suburb of Palwal came every day after finishing their household chores along with babies in their arms. Taxi-drivers skipped their work one evening and brought their taxis in a procession and many gave free rides to fellow protesters. Diasporic Indians also took to streets from Toronto to London and New York to feel emotionally connected with the movement back home. No other popular movement since independence has been able to generate such nationwide enthusiasm in such a grand scale that is totally peaceful and non-violent. Even the ‘total revolution’ call by Jayaprakash Narayan in the seventies evoked a response mainly among the youth and stayed confined to northern and western India and sometimes degenerated into violent outbursts. Cynics and sceptics, unwittingly propping up the indefensible case of an insensitive and insular ruling establishment, have variously tried to run down the uprising by picking up a stray slogan here or an out-of-context comment there or by plainly circulating lies and misinformation. That is why they are as disconnected from the ground reality and popular aspirations as the government and its corrupt minions are. We must celebrate the swelling popular participation in the uprising that has forced the elected representatives to be accountable in an unprecedented way. If the legislators were truly representing the people, they would be milling among the peaceful crowds, and not hide in fear in their well-guarded, fenced and usurped prime real estate. This churning will go toward strengthening democracy and making it more meaningful and relevant. Democracy does not mean voting once in five years and allowing the elected politician to lord over people and to loot public money and resources, secured in comfortable enclaves and protected by phony legalese. It is the criminal masquerading as politician who has degraded parliament and its procedures, not the long suffering Indian people who are out on the street today demanding accountability and transparency – two hallmarks of real democracy. And the citadel of corruption is shaking. It is time to be proud of India’s vibrant and exemplary democratic revolution. (24.8.2011 -Sudip Mazumdar is long-time foreign correspondent based in New Delhi and a keen political observer. The views expressed are personal. He can be contacted at sudipm@gmail.com)

‘Stealth’ warships to test China’s nerve

Sea Shadow
Sea Shadow is an experimental stealth warship concept of the US Navy, Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and Lockheed Martin.

• Michael Sheridan
• From:The Australian
  

THE US is deploying a new generation of high-speed stealth warships to the disputed waters of the South China Sea, in a move that is bound to raise tensions with Beijing.

The vessels, which cost $US440 million ($422m) each, will be deployed in the shipping lanes between Hong Kong and Singapore, where four nations are at odds with China over who owns vast areas of ocean rich in oil and gas.

The ships are designed to fight in shallow waters. They carry three helicopters and special forces units with armoured vehicles that can roll off a ramp into action, while fast gunboats can be launched from the stern.

The latest version, built by General Dynamics, is an aluminium-hulled trimaran, the USS Independence. Launched last year, it is protected by Mk 110 57mm guns made by BAE Systems, plus missiles for air, land and underwater targets.

The warships’ sleek silhouettes reflect their stealth technology, while the stable trimaran design suits the South China Sea, which is swept by typhoons every summer.

Experts say the ships are superior to any known Chinese vessel in their ability to combine anti-submarine, minesweeping, surveillance, reconnaissance and troop deployment missions.

However, they are expensive and controversial.

US legislators have complained about their cost, and some military analysts claim they could be vulnerable to Chinese anti-ship missiles. Nonetheless, they are seen as a potent symbol of US might.

The Sunday Times

Sounding the Alarm About Dirty Bomb Material Falling Into Libyan “Al Qaida” Hands

[I watched the headline change from "IAEA Official" to the current title.]

Nuclear experts warn of Libya “dirty bomb” material

By Fredrik Dahl

VIENNA | Wed Aug 24, 2011 8:59am EDT

(Reuters) – A research center near Tripoli has stocksof nuclear material that could be used to make a “dirty bomb,” a former senior U.N. inspector said on Wednesday, warning of possible looting during turmoil in Libya.

Seeking to mend ties with the West, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi agreed in 2003 to abandon efforts to acquire nuclear, chemical and biological weapons — a move that brought him in from the cold and helped end decades of Libyan isolation.

A six-month popular insurgency has now forced Gaddafi to abandon his stronghold in the Libyan capital but continued gunfire suggests the rebels have not completely triumphed yet.

Olli Heinonen, head of U.N. nuclear safeguards inspections worldwide until last year, pointed to substantial looting that took place at Iraq’s Tuwaitha atomic research facility near Baghdad after Saddam Hussein was toppled in 2003.

In Iraq, “most likely due to pure luck, the story did not end in a radiological disaster,” Heinonen said.

In Libya, “nuclear security concerns still linger,” the former deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in an online commentary.

Libya’s uranium enrichment program was dismantled after Gaddafi renounced weapons of mass destruction eight years ago. Sensitive material and documentation including nuclear weapons design information were confiscated.

But the country’s Tajoura research center continues to stock large quantities of radioisotopes, radioactive waste and low-enriched uranium fuel after three decades of nuclear research and radioisotope production, Heinonen said.

Refined uranium can have civilian as well as military purposes, if enriched much further.

“DANGEROUS” MATERIAL

“While we can be thankful that the highly enriched uranium stocks are no longer in Libya, the remaining material in Tajoura could, if it ended up in the wrong hands, be used as ingredients for dirty bombs,” Heinonen, now at Harvard University, said.

“The situation at Tajoura today is unclear. We know that during times of regime collapse, lawlessness and looting reign.”

A so-called dirty bomb can combine conventional explosives such as dynamite with radioactive material.

Experts describe the threat of a crude fissile nuclear bomb, which is technically difficult to manufacture and requires hard-to-obtain bomb-grade uranium or plutonium, as a “low probability, high consequence act” — unlikely but with the potential to cause large-scale harm to life and property.

But a “dirty bomb,” where conventional explosives are used to disperse radiation from a radioactive source, is a “high probability, low consequence act” with more potential to terrorize than cause large loss of life.

“There are a number of nuclear and radiological materials at Tajoura that could be used by terrorists to create a dirty bomb,” said Mark Fitzpatrick, a director at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies think-tank.

There was no immediate comment from the IAEA on the Tajoura facility. A document posted on the IAEA’s website said it was a 10 megawatt reactor located 34 km (20 miles) east of the Libyan capital.

The Vienna-based U.N. agency has been involved in technical aid projects in Libya, including at Tajoura.

Heinonen said Libya’s rebel Transitional National Council would need to be aware of the material at Tajoura. Once a transition takes place it should “take the necessary steps to secure these potentially dangerous radioactive sources.”

Fitzpatrick said the looting that occurred at Iraq’s Tuwaitha center “should stand as a lesson for the need for nuclear security precautions in the situation today in Libya.”

(Editing by Mark Heinrich)

Foreign reporters trapped in Tripoli’s Rixos Hotel

Foreign reporters trapped in Tripoli hotel – media

Foreign reporters trapped in Tripoli hotel

© AFP/ IMED LAMLOUM

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi loyalists are keeping 35 foreign journalists inside a hotel in downtown Tripoli, Al Arabiya television said on Wednesday.

The reporters have not been allowed to leave the Rixos Hotel since late Tuesday as the fighting for control of the capital between Gaddafi soldiers and rebels intensified.

According to Al Arabiya, the journalists have been largely deprived of water and electricity, and food is in short supply. They have to wear bullet-proof vests and helmets, as gunfire periodically erupts in the neighborhood.

Rebels claimed on Wednesday they were trying to release the reporters, who had been issued passes by the International Organization for Migration for a possible departure from the Libyan capital by sea.

However, a direct assault on the hotel guarded by a handful of soldiers wearing civilian clothes and armed with Kalashnikov assault rifles and grenade launchers could put the lives of the reporters in serious danger.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Tuesday called on Libya’s National Transitional Council and opposition forces to ensure the protection of all foreign nationals during the final days of the Gaddafi regime and transition period.

Rebels seized control of much of Tripoli this week, but Colonel Gaddafi’s whereabouts remain unknown. According to a pro-Gaddafi television channel, the 69-year-old promised “martyrdom or victory” in his fight against the rebels and NATO forces.