Libya : The former rebel militias are as bad as Gadaffi's dictatorship at it's worst

The NATO governments who armed and provided air support to the armed rebellion against Gadaffi's dictatorship have quietly ignored the aftermath of Gadaffi's overthrow, perhaps because it involves militias running riot torturing, threatening and killing people (apparently with the approval of the National Transitional Council), looting; and even ethnically cleansing entire towns for the crime of being black.

Many people paint Libya as entirely worse or entirely better than it was under Gadaffi, but it isn't as clear cut as that. While the rebels were committing some atrocities themselves even before the military balance swung in their favour, Gadaffi's forces were killing people suspected of not supporting Gadaffi or supporting the rebels on a much larger scale and almost randomly, even when abandoning cities to the rebel advance (1) - (2).

For white or brown skinned Libyans not suspected of supporting Gadaffi, things are better for many of them. For Islamists, many of whom were jailed and tortured under Gadaffi, things are better too. For black Libyans and black immigrant workers from other countries - and anyone suspected of having supported Gadaffi (whether they actually did or not) things are much, much worse. Over all that seems like no real improvement.

Amnesty Internationalreports that 'Militias continue to arrest people and hold them in secret and unofficial detention facilities...it is estimated that 4,000 remain in centres outside the reach of the central authorities. Some have been held without charge for a year.

An Amnesty International fact-finding team found evidence of recent beatings and other abuse - in some cases amounting to torture - in 12 of the 15 detention centres where it was able to interview detainees in private during its most recent visit.

Common methods of torture reported to the organization include suspension in contorted positions and prolonged beatings with various objects including metal bars and chains, electric cables, wooden sticks, plastic hoses, water pipes, and rifle-butts; and electric shocks.

Amnesty International has detailed information on at least 20 cases of death in custody as a result of torture by militias since late August 2011.'

It adds that 'In May the transitional authorities adopted legislation which grants immunity from prosecution to thuwwar (revolutionaries) for military and civilian acts committed with the “purpose of rendering successful or protecting the 17 February Revolution.”

In a June meeting with Amnesty International, Libya’s General Prosecutor was unable to provide any details of thuwwar being brought to justice for torturing detainees or committing other human rights abuses. ' (3)

This sounds a lot like even the central government in Libya is giving former rebel militia-men a blank cheque to do anything to anyone to "protect the revolution", with a law which could as easily have been one of those allowing Gadaffi's forces to do anything to anyone to protect his 1969 revolution against the monarchy. Unless this changes then it's just going to be history repeating itself.

The French medical charity Medicines Sans Frontieres (doctors without borders) suspended some of its operations in Libya in January after multiple cases of rebel militia-men bringing in prisoners who they had tortured for treatment just to keep them alive to torture them some more (4).

James Hider of the Times newspaper reports that 'In Mshashia, once a town of 15,000 outside Zintan, not a single person can be seen. Entry roads are blocked with burnt-out lorries. Signs read: “Closed military zone. No entry.”

The emptying of Tawerga, just outside Misrata, is even more disturbing. A town of 30,000 people, many of them black, the mass expulsion was tinged with the racial overtones that marked much of the revolution, when Gaddafi was accused of using African mercenaries to do his killing. ...

...Ramzi al-Muntar, a jobless former rebel ....whose home was destroyed in the siege of Misrata...

“They are not allowed to come back. If they do, someone will kill them,” he said. “...Anyway, they are not really Libyans. They are descended from a slave ship that ran aground once off the coast.” (5).

Amnesty was already reporting in September last year that many black Tawerghan men had never been heard of again after being taken away at gunpoint by armed militia-men from the Misrata brigades (6).

Human Rights Watch has reported that the militias have also tortured Tawerghans to death and looted their homes and businesses, which has parallells with ethnic cleansing by militias in Bosnia , which was similarly motivated partly by getting loot in a country under sanctions and in which 'economic reforms' demanded by the US in return for providing new loans to Yugoslavia (having called in the old ones) had pushed up unemployment (7) - (9).

The militias aren't even content with having forced Tawerghans out of their homes, having continued to attack and kill Tawerghan men, women and children in refugee camps near Tripoli for instance (10).

Libyans who aren't black aren't safe either if they annoy or criticise the militias in any way.

Just complaining about Misrata militia-men firing their guns in the air was enough for them to beat one hotel owner unconscious and destroy his hotel with rocket propelled grenades, while another man who had some unknown argument with militia-men at a checkpoint was later found by his family dead in a morgue, supposedly of natural causes, though his body was covered in bruises and a second autopsy paid for by his family showed he had died of kidney failure and internal bleeding (11).

This sounds a lot like the days of Gadaffi's dictatorship when anyone who criticised Gadaffi or his regime could end up disappeared, only more chaotic, because rather than being at risk if you criticise one lot of rulers, Libyans are at risk if they criticise or argue with any of over 100 militias, if their skin is considered to dark, or if they are suspected (rightly or wrongly) of having supported Gadaffi.

The way the supposedly 'democratic' armed revolutionaries, who supposedly only wanted "freedom" are behaving - just like the forces of the dictatorship they overthrew - makes me regret having supported arming the rebels and half regret ever having backed a NATO intervention to protect Benghazi (though i never supported using it for a war of regime change due to the risks of civil war and revenge killings by victorious rebels). It also makes me even more opposed to supporting armed rebellion in Syria, as the resulting sectarian civil war is likely to make Libya look peaceful by comparison.

If freedom from dictatorship just means the freedom for different people to torture and murder and loot the possessions of others, then it is not worth the loss of life required to overthrow the dictatorship and we should wait for it to fall peacefully the way the Soviet bloc dictatorships did instead.

The election victory of a relatively secular coalition in Libya is less bad than if hardline Islamists had won, but it remains to be seen whether all the militias in control of different parts of the country will accept the authority of the central government or not.

With torture and murder by armed former rebel militias replacing that by Gadaffi's forces - and no trials involved, suspicion being enough, so far things are not that much better than under Gadaffi - the only change being who is doing the torture and killing and who the victims of it are, with the likelihood that just as under Gadaffi many of those suffering violence are not responsible for the crimes they are accused of. (I don't mean that this would excuse torture or execution or jail without trial even of those who are guilty - none of these things are justifiable).

Whether Libyans end up better or worse off overall depends on how the elected government behaves and whether it is willing and able to disarm and disband the militias. If it can't or won't, things are unlikely to improve.

Sources

PHOTO at top of blog from this Black Presence blog post

(1) = Amnesty International 13 Sep 2011 'Libya: The battle for Libya: Killings, disappearances and torture',http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/025/2011/en

(2) = Amnesty International 13 Sep 2011 'Libya: No place of safety: Civilians in Libya under attack', http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/027/2011/en

(3) = Amnesty International 04 Jul 2012 'Libya: Militia stranglehold corrosive for rule of law ', http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/libya-militia-stranglehold-corrosive-rule-law-2012-07-04

(4) = Medicines Sans Frontieres 26 Jan 2012 'Libya: detainees tortured and denied medical care',http://www.msf.org.uk/libyaprison360112_20120126.news

(5) = Times 12 July 2012 'Hate and fear: the legacy of Gaddafi', http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article3472720.ece

(6) = Amnesty International UK 07 Sep 2011 'Libya: Tawarghas being targeted in reprisal beatings and arrests',http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=19674

(7) = Human Rights Watch 30 Oct 2011 'Libya: Militias Terrorizing Residents of ‘Loyalist’ Town', http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/10/30/libya-militias-terrorizing-residents-loyalist-town

(8) = Mary Kaldor (1999) ‘New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era’, Polity Press, 1999

(9) = Woodward , Susan L.(1995) Balkan Tragedy - Chaos and dissolution after the Cold war The Brookings Institution , Washington D.C , 1995

(10) = New York Times 02 Mar 2012 'U.N. Faults NATO and Libyan Authorities in Report',http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/world/africa/united-nations-report-faults-nato-over-civilian-deaths-in-libya.html?_r=1 ; 'Certain revenge attacks have continued unabated, particularly the campaign by the militiamen of Misurata to wipe a neighboring town, Tawergha, off the map; the fighters accuse its residents of collaborating with a government siege.

Such attacks have been documented before, but the report stressed that despite previous criticism, the militiamen were continuing to hunt down the residents of the neighboring town no matter where they had fled across Libya. As recently as Feb. 6, militiamen from Misurata attacked a camp in Tripoli where residents of Tawergha had fled, killing an elderly man, a woman and three children, the report said. '

(11) = Independent on Sunday 08 July 2012 'Patrick Cockburn: Libyans have voted, but will the new rulers be able to curb violent militias?', http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/patrick-cockburn-libyans-have-voted-but-will-the-new-rulers-be-able-to-curb-violent-militias-7922358.html

Power sharing in Syria could avoid Libyan revenge and civil war – but it and ending Assad’s crimes require a deal with Russia

Assad's government and military in Syria are definitely guilty of torturing and killing civilians, including children, as well as targeting the wounded and doctors. That’s sickening and it needs to be stopped (1) – (4). Accounts by Syrian opposition activists of the killing of whole families are painful to read (5).

That has to be stopped – the question is how to stop it without creating a longer civil war or mass revenge killings and torture of the kind going on in Libya.

We should be wary of believing every claim made by the Syrian opposition. Some of the claims made by the Libyan opposition of Gaddafi ordering his troops to rape women and anti-aircraft guns being used on demonstrators turned out to be false (6).

A look at the results of a rebel victory in Libya or the situation in “liberated” Iraq should throw some serious doubt on the idea that the overthrow of Assad through Arab League and Western government arming and training of the rebels would guarantee an end to torture and murder. It might, as in Libya, lead to fighting among different rebel factions and the torture and murder by them of people even suspected (often wrongly) of having supported the dictatorship. NATO and Arab governments will only care about removing Assad as an ally of Iran, just as they lost all interest in torture and killings in Libya once Gaddafi was overthrown and his enemies were responsible for the crimes. As in Libya though, they are the only source of military support that the opposition have to turn to. However the Russian military presence in Syria (their fleet is allowed to use Syrian ports) would make any direct NATO involvement risk World War Three, which is probably why the US and it’s allies have ruled out direct military involvement – if they intervene it is likely to be covertly by arming and training the rebels with Special Forces, as in Libya. In Syria even that could risk war with Russia though.

A power sharing agreement of the kind suggested in the UN Resolution that the Chinese and Russian governments vetoed may be less bad than a Libyan or Lebanese style civil war – but that would first require an end to the government forces’ attacks on civilians – and then there would be the problem there is how to achieve a balance of power which results in compromise and a transition to democracy rather than a long civil war which neither side can win.

Many minorities in Syria including Kurds and Christians also fear being targeted by Sunni Muslim fundamentalists among the opposition if Assad is overthrown by force, just as black Libyans and African immigrant workers have been lynched and tortured in Libya and Assyrian Christians and other minorities have been killed and ethnically cleansed in Iraq. The Assad family are from the Alawite minority sect of the Shia Muslim religion.

Achieving peace is a lot harder than just overthrowing Assad, which would achieve the aims of the US government and it’s allies without ending the fighting or the torture and killing, just as with overthrowing Gaddafi in Libya. As in Libya it might reduce the scale of the torture and killing, but at the risk of civil war continuing indefinitely.

Getting that agreement will be hard as the sides now have plenty of reasons to hate and distrust one another ; and getting each to make real concessions requires convincing them that they have enough power to force the other to make real concessions to them, but not enough that they can be sure the other won’t defeat them in a fight to the end.

In Libya there are over 8,500 people held without trial by the rebel factions including women and children, many of them tortured using the same methods Gaddafi's forces used, some to death. It's so bad that Medicines Sans Frontieres have pulled out as they were being given hundreds of prisoners to keep them alive in between torture sessions so they could be tortured again. (7) – (10).

The rebel militias have been fighting one another in Tripoli ever since Gaddafi's death right up to present (in one case over control of the airport as NATO flew in planeloads of released Libyan funds in bales of cash - much of which will likely end up disappearing 'unaccounted for' just as with the billions of dollars of Iraqi Oil for Food funds that went missing under Bremer in Iraq ) and creating revolts against their rule by arresting and large numbers of people on suspicion of being Gaddafi supporters, with no trials and torturing or killing many of them (i.e behaving exactly like Gaddafi's forces did towards anyone they suspected of not supporting Gaddafi) (11) – (15).

In Iraq the torture and death squad methods used by Saddam continue to be used by the US trained police commandos and counter-terrorist units - who also kidnap and torture people just in order to extort money from their families (16) – (21).

The Arab League, which backed the UN motions on Libya and Syria is mostly made up of dictatorships that torture and kill their own civilians themselves (the Saudi monarchy, Bahraini monarchy both last year and last month, the Yemeni dictatorship, the Egyptian military) and which the NATO governments continue to back despite this. The Saudis, who have backed the brutal repression in Bahrain which has included shooting unarmed protesters, torturing protesters to death and targeting ambulances, ambulance crews and hospital staff, are the main supporters of the Syrian rebels as part of a US and NATO alliance with Sunni dictatorships against Iran and Shia Muslims. The Saudi and Qatari monarchies, along with the Egyptian military, also provided arms, funding and Special Forces to aid the rebels in Libya. None of them are democracies so promoting democracy is not likely to be their main motive (22) – (30).

The motives for intervention among the Arab League and western governments are as much about their own power in the Middle East, rather than democracy or human rights, as the Russian and Chinese governments’ are. Syria provides Russia with a naval base in the Mediterranean, while Bahrain provides the US with a naval base in the Persian Gulf, the main export route for Middle Eastern oil to the net oil importing NATO governments. That’s why Russia had blocked intervention to stop the massacres in Syria and has even sent arms shipments to Syrian forces as they commit these crimes; and why the US and it’s allies did nothing about the massacres in Bahrain (except for the Saudis, who sent troops to ensure it would continue and prevent any concessions to the protesters from the king of Bahrain) (31).

Amnesty International have now found that the Obama administration have begun arms sales to Bahrain again while killings of protesters and their deaths by torture after arrest continue (32) – (34).

Having seen what happened in Libya, i am sickened by what Assad's forces are doing, but a complete rebel victory might lead to similar brutality against anyone known or suspected to have supported Assad. The Libyan rebels may not be killing as many civilians as Gaddafi’s forces were, but they’re still torturing and murdering plenty of people on suspicion of being Gaddafi supporters.

What's needed is a balance of power between the two sides so neither feels it can torture and murder the supporters of the other.

The UN Resolution that the Arab League backed was a good peace plan for power sharing and reconciliation before elections and is still the best plan despite the Russian and Chinese vetoes.

Unless the US and it’s allies want to risk ending up at war with Russia any peace deal will require a deal between the US and it’s allies and the Russians and theirs.

After Iraq and Libya it's not hard to see why Russia and China, apart from their own self-interest, didn't trust NATO governments to not go much further than the Resolution allowed them to, but that doesn't make the main parts of the plan in the Resolution they vetoed any less valid.

The problem is that the Syrian government has to fear foreign sanctions and/or support for the rebels enough to make a real deal with the rebels, but the rebels have to fear losing enough to be willing to compromise with a government that they have very good reasons to hate; and both have to believe they’re strong enough that the other side will be forced to make genuine compromises, but not so strong that they could defeat it completely. That will be a very difficult balance to achieve. The sad truth is that whatever governments outside Syria do now, there is a high risk of a long civil war. Ending the current civil war without either creating a longer one or letting whoever wins take brutal revenge on anyone suspected of having supported the losing side should be the aim now.

That first requires an end to the massacre in Homs though – which requires Assad’s regime to fear intervention by outside powers - and it’s hard to see how that can be done at all, since direct military intervention on the side of the rebels could lead to all out war with Russia. The Assad-Russian side may have a point that attacks by rebels would also have to end for any ceasefire and power sharing deal to happen, but no-one can believe their claims that all violence is the result of attacks by armed enemies of Assad’s government any more.

(1) = Amnesty International UK  24 Oct 2011 ‘Syria: Hospital patients subjected to torture and ill-treatment - New report’, http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=19770

(2) = Amnesty International 01 Feb 2012 ‘Security Council: Russia must not block efforts to end atrocities in Syria ’, http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/security-council-russia-must-not-block-efforts-end-atrocities-syria-2012-02-01

(3) = Human Rights Watch 03 Feb 2012 ‘Syria: Stop Torture of Children’, http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/02/03/syria-stop-torture-children

(4) = Medicines Sans Frontieres 08 Feb 2012 ‘Syria: medicine used as a weapon of persecution’, http://www.msf.org.uk/Syria_repression_20120208.news

(5) = guardian.co.uk 07 Feb 2012 ‘Syrian siege of Homs is genocidal, say trapped residents’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/07/syrian-homs-siege-genocidal-say-residents

(6) =  Independent 24 Jun 2011 ‘Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/amnesty-questions-claim-that-gaddafi-ordered-rape-as-weapon-of-war-2302037.html

(7) = Guardian 24 Nov 2011 ‘Libyan rebels detaining thousands illegally, Ban Ki-moon reports’ , http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/24/libya-illegal-detentions-un-report , ‘Libya's former rebels have illegally detained thousands of people, including women and children, according to the United Nations secretary general….Many of the 7,000 prisoners have been tortured, with some black Africans mistreated because of their skin colour, women being held under male supervision and children locked up alongside adults, the report by Ban Ki-moon found.’

(8) = BBC News 26 Jan 2012 ‘Libyan detainees die after torture, says Amnesty International’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16741937 , ‘More than 8,500 detainees, most of them accused of being loyal to former Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi, are being held by militia groups in about 60 centres, according to UN human rights chief Navi Pillay.’

(9) = Independent 27 Jan 2012 ‘Free' Libya shamed by new torture claims’,http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/free-libya-shamed-by-new-torture-claims-6295394.html

(10) = Amnesty International 26 Jan 2012 ‘Libya: Deaths of detainees amid widespread torture’, http://www.amnesty.org/zh-hant/node/29388

(11) = Reuters 01 Feb 2012 ‘Rival Libyan militias fight gunbattle in capital’,http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/01/us-libya-tripoli-battle-idUSTRE81029420120201 ; ‘Rival militias fought a two-hour gunbattle over a luxury beach house being used as a barracks in the Libyan capital Wednesday…Militias have carved up Tripoli and the rest of Libya into competing fiefdoms, each holding out for the share of power they say they are owed.’

(12) = guardian.co.uk 17 Dec 2011 ‘Libyan scramble for £100bn in assets fractures the peace at Tripoli airport’,  http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/17/libya-tripoli-airport-assets-un

(13) = CNN 31 Aug 2005 ‘Audit: U.S. lost track of $9 billion in Iraq funds’, http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/30/iraq.audit/

(14) = Reuters 24 Jan 2012 ‘Anger, chaos but no revolt after Libya violence’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/24/libya-idUSL5E8CO2HB20120124 , ‘elders in the desert city…dismissed accusations they wanted to restore the late dictator's family to power or had any ambitions beyond their local area…."When men from Tripoli come into your house and harass women, what are we to do?" said Fati Hassan, a 28-year-old Bani Walid resident who described the men of May 28th as a mixture of local men and outsiders, former anti-Gaddafi rebels who had turned into oppressors when given control over the town….."They were arresting people from the first day after liberation. People are still missing. I am a revolutionary and I have friends in The May 28th Brigade," said Hassan, who said he urged them to ease off. "The war is over now."….."On Friday, the May 28th Brigade arrested a man from Bani Walid. After Bani Walid residents lodged a protest, he was finally released. But he had been tortured…."This caused an argument that escalated to arms.’

(15) = BBC News 24 Jan 2012 ‘Libya: Competing claims over Bani Walid fighting ’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16702044 , A source within the Libyan government, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the BBC the fighting broke out after a group of former rebel fighters, the 28 May Brigade, arrested one person.

The fighting was "more a clash between local people regarding a difference of who this [arrested] person was," the source said. "But of course now other people seem to be involved as well. The situation is not very clear who is who. It's still confused."

(16) = NYT magazine 01 May 2005 ‘the way of the commandos’, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/magazine/01ARMY.html

(17) = The Nation 22 Jun 2009 ‘Iraq's New Death Squad’, http://www.thenation.com/article/iraqs-new-death-squad

(18) = BBC News 27 Jan 2005 'Salvador Option' mooted for Iraq’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4209595.stm

(19) = Times 08 Aug 2005 ‘West turns blind eye as police put Saddam's torturers back to work’, http://www.infowars.com/articles/iraq/west_turns_blind_eye_saddams_torturers_at_work.htm

(20) = Amnesty International Annual Report 2011 – Iran,http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iran/report-2011#section-64-6

(21) = Guardian 16 Jan 2012 ‘Corruption in Iraq: 'Your son is being tortured. He will die if you don't pay'’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan

(22) = BBC News 13 Jan 2012 ‘ Shia protester 'shot dead' in Saudi Arabia’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16543013 ‘At least one person has been killed and three others injured in clashes between security forces and Shia protesters in eastern Saudi Arabia, activists say.Issam Mohammed, 22, reportedly died when troops fired live ammunition after demonstrators threw stones at them in al-Awamiya, a town in the Qatif region.’

(23) = Amnesty International Annual Report 2011 – Saudi Arabia, http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/saudi-arabia/report-2011#section-121-5 and http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/saudi-arabia/report-2011#section-121-11

(24) = CNN 27 Jan 2012 ‘4 killed in protests in Bahrain, opposition group says’, http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-27/middleeast/world_meast_bahrain-unrest_1_bahrain-center-bahraini-police-wefaq?_s=PM:MIDDLEEAST

(25) = See sources listed and linked to in this post and this one on Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi and Yemen

(26) = CNN 04 Feb 2012 ‘Death toll climbs after Egypt soccer protests’, http://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/04/world/africa/egypt-soccer-deaths/index.html

(27) = Independent 07 Mar 2011 ‘America's secret plan to arm Libya's rebels  - Obama asks Saudis to airlift weapons into Benghazi ’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/americas-secret-plan-to-arm-libyas-rebels-2234227.html

(28) = Al Jazeera 03 Apr 2011 ‘Libyan rebels 'receive foreign training'’,http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/04/201142172443133798.html ; US and Egyptian special forces have reportedly been providing covert training to rebel fighters in the battle for Libya, Al Jazeera has been told….An unnamed rebel source related how he had undergone training in military techniques at a "secret facility" in eastern Libya.

(29) = Guardian.co.uk 23 Aug 2011 ‘Libya: battle for Tripoli – live blog – 5.50pm’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2011/aug/23/libya-battle-for-tripoli-live-blog#block-11 ; ‘Defence expert Robert Fox is telling the BBC special forces from Qatar and the UAE, with US, British and French training, are responsible for the successful attack on Tripoli. "It has been a genuine Arab coalition ... I think it was the Qataris that led them through the breach." He said William Hague was "dissembling" in his comments just now.’ ;

(30) = Go to the post on this link and see sources 7 to 14 on it

(31) = Amnesty International 01 Feb 2012 ‘Security Council: Russia must not block efforts to end atrocities in Syria ’, http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/security-council-russia-must-not-block-efforts-end-atrocities-syria-2012-02-01

(32) = Amnesty USA blog 30 Jan 2012 ‘U.S. Arms Sales to Bahrain: 4 Questions for the Obama Administration’, http://blog.amnestyusa.org/middle-east/u-s-arms-sales-to-bahrain-4-questions-for-the-obama-administration/

(33) = Amnesty International 26 Jan 2012 ‘Bahrain’s use of tear gas against protesters increasingly deadly’, http://www.amnesty.org/zh-hant/node/29403 ; ‘A Bahraini human rights group has reported at least 13 deaths resulting from the security forces’ use of tear gas against peaceful protesters as well as inside people’s homes since February 2011, with a rise in such deaths in recent months.

“The rise in fatalities and eyewitness accounts suggest that tear gas is being used inappropriately by Bahraini security forces, including in people’s homes and other confined spaces,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director.’

(34) = CNN 27 Jan 2012 ‘4 killed in protests in Bahrain, opposition group says’, http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-27/middleeast/world_meast_bahrain-unrest_1_bahrain-center-bahraini-police-wefaq?_s=PM:MIDDLEEAST

Saif Al Gaddafi & Megrahi Vs Moussa Koussa - Patsies vs Real Criminal aided and abetted by the US government?

(the latter a proven torturer and Gaddafi’s intelligence chief at the time of the Lockerbie bombing but “free to travel to and from the UK as he wishes”)

The propagandists tell us that Saif Al Gaddafi is a war criminal who must be brought to justice for the torture and killing of civilians. Yet Gaddafi’s torturer in chief Moussa Koussa, who has been identified by survivors as having personally tortured them himself, faces no ICC charges after he defected from the Gaddafi regime once he realised the writing was on the wall for it. British government spokespeople told the BBC that Koussa is “a free individual, who can travel to and from the UK as he wishes” and allowed him to go into exile in Qatar, another US allied dictatorship which refuses to extradite him (1) – (3).

Koussa had a parallel in Omar Suleiman, Mubarak’s Vice President and torturer in chief, who was the favoured candidate of the US government and it’s allies to take over from Mubarak. He, like Koussa, was one of the people that the CIA and MI6 contract out to for torture of prisoners kidnapped illegally under “extra-ordinary rendition” procedures (really just a vaguely legalistic sounding term to cover up illegal kidnapping and torture).

Muammar Gaddafi was certainly guilty of ordering massacres of civilians and torture, but the brutal, sickening, way he was killed did not suggest those who replace him will be any better. The Libyan rebels respond that ‘Gaddafi was a monster’.

Well, if you’re looking for a definition of a monster, a sadist who stabs an unarmed prisoner in the anus with a knife or metal rod to torture them before killing them, as one of the men who captured Gaddafi did, is a pretty good definition. One monster behaving like a monster to another is not justice, it’s just another atrocity (4).

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch confirm that the rebels have already been involved in torturing and killing prisoners and suspected Gaddafi supporters, though so far not nearly as many as were killed or tortured by Gaddafi’s forces. The way Gaddafi was treated does not suggest this will become a smaller problem (5).

If Saif Al Gaddafi is tortured and is not given a fair trial it will be another sign to the world that the Libyan rebels are at least as bad as Gaddafi’s killers were – and if at the same time Koussa, who co-operated with the US and its allies in torturing people based on mere suspicion is allowed to go free, the US government and it’s allies will look like total hypocrites with no moral standing, desperate to have people like Saif, who might reveal it’s involvement in these crimes, silenced, not for his crimes, but to cover up theirs and Koussa’s.

There are plenty of people who knew Saif who say he was attempting to make reforms which his father and hardliners in the regime refused to implement (6).

Then he was forced to make a choice between turning on his own father and helping people who were trying to kill him, or else backing a dictatorship that was killing it’s own people. Can anyone pretend that that would be an easy choice to make if they were put in the same position?

If there is evidence that Saif was involved in ordering torture and murders of civilians then by all means give him a fair trial with witnesses for the defence and prosecution and if he’s found guilty, jail him for it.

Incidentally Koussa, who claims Gaddafi ordered Lockerbie, was Gaddafi’s head of intelligence at the time of Lockerbie – so if the US and British governments believe him, why are they letting him go free, since he would be guilty of that atrocity? Too many people are tripping over their own lies here.

There are many reasons to doubt that another US and British scapegoat – Abdul Baset Al Megrahi – was ever involved in the Lockerbie bombing. His trial was a sham with bribed witnesses, no jury and evidence tampered with according to Scots Law Professor Robert Black, UN Observer Dr. Hans Koechler and Dr. Jim Swire, whose daughter died in the bombing.

Is Saif a real war criminal or just another patsy set up by the US and it’s allies?  Unless he gets a fair trial, I’d have to suspect it could be the latter.

(1) = BBC News 26 Oct 2011 ‘Gaddafi spy chief Koussa 'tortured' Libya prisoners’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15415793

(2) = BBC News 13 Apr 2011 ‘Moussa Koussa, ex-Gaddafi aide, leaves for Doha talks’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13049308 ‘The most high-profile minister to flee Libya, Moussa Koussa, has left the UK for Qatar, the Foreign Office has said. The former foreign minister had been staying at an undisclosed location in the UK after travelling from Tunisia.

An FCO spokesman said it was understood he would meet the Qatari government and a range of other Libyan representatives in the capital city Doha. A spokesman said Moussa Koussa was "a free individual, who can travel to and from the UK as he wishes".’

(3) = BBC News 23 Oct 2011 ‘Libyan spy chief tracked to Qatar’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15417947

(4) = ‘Libyan rebels 'guilty of torture' says Amnesty’ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/libyan-rebels-guilty-of-torture-says-amnesty-2353988.html , ‘Rebels fighting to topple Muammar Gaddafi carried out unlawful killings and torture, human rights group Amnesty International has said….A report based on three months of investigation in Libya, said the crimes of Gaddafi loyalists were far worse than those of the former rebels, who now hold power in Tripoli:….But it said the crimes of the rebels were not insignificant…."Members and supporters of the opposition, loosely structured under the leadership of the National Transitional Council (NTC) ... have also committed human rights abuses, in some cases amounting to war crimes, albeit on a smaller scale," the Amnesty report said.’

(5) = Channel 4 News 25 Oct 2011 ‘Gaddafi buried at dawn in ‘secret’ location’, http://www.channel4.com/news/gaddafi-buried-at-dawn-in-secret-location (scroll down to video and then see under sub-heading ‘Concerns over human rights abuses)

(6) = Time 19 Nov 2011 ‘The Capture of Gaddafi's Son: The Reformer Who Refused to Reform’, http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2099890,00.html?xid=gonewsedit , ‘Sawani, who has a political-science doctorate from the University of Canterbury, had been hired by Saif in 2007 to oversee sweeping political reforms in Libya — changes that Saif has long claimed were blocked by his father's hard-liners. In interviews in February 2010 and in March this year, Saif told me that his strong efforts to bring democracy to Libya had been stymied by the Gaddafi regime.’

Libya – Even rebels fear civil war between them or chaos - add the risk of an Iraq style insurgency or a Somalia like civil war

Some of the coverage of the war in Libya makes it sound as though a rapid collapse of Gaddafi’s forces followed by a rapid transition to a democracy is a foregone conclusion. Unfortunately this is being very optimistic.

Rebel claims that Gaddafi’s forces would all surrender as soon as they took Tripoli as they were “cowards” or only fighting for Gaddafi out of fear have been proven wrong proven wrong by so far three days of resistance by Gaddafi loyalists in Tripoli. Many are fighting on because they fear what the rebels may do to them – and even some rebels fear there may be bloody chaos or civil war between rebel factions if Gaddafi is defeated.

The Independent reported that:

‘Adem Husseini, 40, also from Manchester, foresaw a period of turbulence after Colonel Gaddafi and his regime are driven from power. "I am going to go back to the UK after the job is done, but I am not going to bring my family for the next three years. There are too many men with guns – a lot of them very young. I am talking about heavy weapons. Some people even have their own private tanks. We are fighting for freedom. History will record we were on the right side. But we are going to go through a very risky time.’ (1)

In April Hillary Clinton and Libyan defector Moussa Koussa warned of the risks of Libya descending into a long civil war and turning into another Somalia and becoming a haven for Al Qa’ida as a result of the chaos (2)

The rebels are split on regional, religious (moderate vs hardline fundamentalist Muslims) and tribal lines ;and there are rivalries among different military commanders and politicians for leadership, plus divisions between those who have opposed Gaddafi for decades and those (like TNC head Jalil) who recently defected.

Patrick Cockburn writes that ‘The rebel fighters in Misrata, who fought so long to defend their city, say privately that they have no intention of obeying orders from the TNC.’ (the rebel Transitional National Council).(3)

Guardian reporter Chris Stephen in Misrata reports ‘with the still unexplained murder of army commander Abdul Fatah Younis seeing units loyal to him coming back to the front and threatening violence against NTC officials they blame for the killing. Their anger was assuaged only with the appointment of a new army commander, Suleiman Obedi, who is from the same Obedi tribe as Younis. Another split has been between Misrata and Benghazi. After the assassination, Misrata rebel army spokesman Ibrahim Betalmal underlined to the Guardian that Misratan units did not accept orders from NTC military command, while continuing to remain on paper loyal to the NTC.’ (4)

(Even the imminent defeat of Gaddafi’s forces in Tripoli is uncertain, with rebel reports (also “confirmed” by the ICC) that Saif Gaddafi had been captured turning out to have been untrue or premature and fighting having continued even after rebels got to the centre of the city. (5) – (7)

Saif claimed the rebels had been defeated in ‘a trap’, which has happened several times when rebel forces took the centre of towns before being attacked from all sides by Gaddafi’s forces – though these claims could be propaganda too.)

The many different, unlikely and inconsistent stories told by the rebels about the killing of General Younis (a defector from Gaddafi to the rebels) and the subsequent dismissal of the entire Transitional National Council by it’s head Mustafa Abdul Jalil also shows serious divisions among the rebels. Some rebel stories said Younis was killed by Gaddafi’s forces (who strangely killed him and his bodyguard without killing any of the rebel troops ‘escorting’ or arresting Younes and his men to take them before the rebel council to answer charges of disloyalty). Other accounts by different TNC spokespeople said an Islamist rebel faction (8) – (13)

Photo: General Younes

Fighting between rival Islamist factions among the rebels has already  happened long before they even reached Tripoli (14).

This and the attempted kidnapping of an Australian freelance journalist in rebel held Benghazi by two armed men in military fatigues suggests the TNC either isn’t in control of all the rebels, or else is behavihttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifng similarly to Gaddafi’s forces (15). It’s especially suspicious as Shelton was reporting on Younis’ death (16).

Personal rivalries are also a problem. In earlier stages of the war rebel officers sometimes refused even to talk to one another to co-ordinate offensives on towns held by Gaddafi (17).

Islamic factions are a big part of rebel military forces.

A French newspaper reported in April that one rebel Islamist faction is led by Hakim Al Sadi, who was previously with the Taliban in Afghanistan and says his aim is to “kill Gaddafi and establish an Islamic state in Libya.” (18)

The same report says that ‘Iman Bugaighis, the spokesman for the National Transition Council’ admitted that “We have twenty-five fighters on the front that were linked to al-Qaida… But they have done their prison, and they now only fight for the liberation of Libya.”(19)

So while Gaddafi’s claims that all the rebels are Al Qa’ida are not true, he seems to be right that some of them are.

So there is a serious risk of a Somalia or Afghanistan style civil war with the winners of each round splitting and fighting among one another – and of Libya splitting up like Somalia into two or three separate countries in practice (Somalia currently has Puntland and Somaliland as effectively separate states). The most likely split would be between the three main Italian colonies that made up Libya at independence, which correspond to the three main rebel factions – Cyrenaica in the East (the Benghazi rebels), Tripolitania in the North-west centred on Tripoli (the rebels who defected from Gaddafi) and Fezzan in the South-West(the western Berber and mountain Arab rebels) (20) -(21).

Many people have pointed out that Libya does not have the religious, ethnic or cultural diversity of Iraq - but Somalia is overwhelmingly made up of Sunni Muslims from the same nomadic herding culture, but has been in a decades long civil war between different clans and leaders and more recently between those Islamists willing to co-operate with the US against Al Qa'ida and those who refuse to. So civil war in Libya is still a serious risk.

NATO's involvement could make this more or less likely. If it aims to keep the rebels unified it could reduce the risk, but in Iraq the US and Coalition forces tended to play on divisions among Iraqis and try to get them fighting and distrusting each other in order to secure the oil laws and contracts wanted by US and other coalition oil companies (see Greg Muttitt's book 'Fuel on the Fire' on this). There is a serious risk of NATO governments doing the same in Libya.

There is also the risk of an in Iraq style insurgency either by armed Islamic fundamentalist groups at odds with the other rebels, Gaddafi supporters, or Libyans who don’t support Gaddafi but distrust the rebels due to their close links with foreign governments with ulterior motives (primarily oil contracts and prices more favourable to their firms; increased oil production and exports to benefit NATO countries’ oil importing economies; and control of air bases and ports – the US and Britain having had control of the Wheelus Field air base near Tripoli under Gaddafi’s predecessor King Idris) (22). The insurgency in Iraq lasted long after Saddam’s overthrow and his capture, with more insurgents having been opponents of Saddam than supporters.

NATO seem to have managed to organise and co-ordinate the rebel forces far more effectively than in the earlier stages of the war – probably because many NATO special forces, CIA men and French Foreign Legion troops are on the ground advising rebel units – as are NATO ‘private security contractors’ – their usual euphemism for mercenaries – who include former SAS men. Many reports from journalists on the ground in Libya talk of western men who were not keen to be filmed or interviewed – and the Obama administration told congress that CIA operations in Libya could not be overseen by them as they were not military forces (23) – (29) .

The "advisers" may actually be fighting - as tens of thousands of American 'military advisers' did in Nicaragua in the 80s on the side of the Contras who backed Somoza, the former dictator. Defence expert Robert Fox has suggested that UAE and Qatari Special forces trained by NATO special forces may have been leading the attack on Tripoli.

Whether NATO will be able to prevent rebel factions turning on one another if Gaddafi’s forces are entirely defeated is another matter.

It's possible that by making funding and trade deals conditional on rebels staying part of a single TNC NATO governments or the UN might be able to reduce the risk of civil war, but it's not guaranteed to work, especially as other countries such as Russia and China may be backing their own preferred candidates or groups to try to ensure they get oil contracts in Libya too. The civil wars in Afghanistan and Somalia have lasted as long as they have partly due to many different neighbouring governments and world powers backing different factions there.

So it’s far too early to be hanging up the Mission Accomplished banner in Libya – and there’s no guarantee that it will lead to democracy, peace and human rights even if NATO achieves it’s aims.

(1) = Independent 20 Aug 2011 ‘Next stop Tripoli – Libya's rebels sense victory is within reach’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/next-stop-tripoli-ndash-libyas-rebels-sense-victory-is-within-reach-2340837.html

(2) = Bloomberg 13 Apr 2011 ‘Clinton’s ‘Failed State’ Warning Hangs Over Libya as NATO Officials Meet’, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-12/clinton-s-failed-state-warning-hangs-over-libya-as-nato-can-t-stem-chaos.html

(3) =  Independent 22 Aug 2011 ‘Despite the euphoria, the rebels are divided’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/despite-the-euphoria-the-rebels-are-divided-2341792.html

(4) = guardian.co.uk 22 Aug 2011 ‘Libya: rebel forces reach heart of Tripoli - live updates’,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2011/aug/22/libya-middle-east-unrest-live#block-45

(5) = guardian.co.uk 22 Aug 2011 ‘Libya: rebel forces reach heart of Tripoli - live updates’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2011/aug/22/libya-middle-east-unrest-live#block-66

(6) = Hague Justice Portal 22 Aug 2011 ‘ICC confirms that Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi has been arrested in Libya’, http://www.haguejusticeportal.net/eCache/DEF/12/892.TGFuZz1FTg.html

(7) = Guardian.co.uk 22 Aug 2011 ‘Libya: rebel forces reach heart of Tripoli - live updates’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2011/aug/22/libya-middle-east-unrest-live

(8) = Guardian 29 Jul 2011 ‘Abdul Fatah Younis ambush killing blamed on pro-Gaddafi forces’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/29/abdul-fatah-younis-killed-libya

(9) = Guardian.co.uk 29 Jul 2011 ‘Libyan rebels fear rift after death of Abdel Fatah Younis’,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/29/libyan-rebels-rift-death-younis ; Before the announcement of his death, armed men declaring their support for Younis appeared on the streets of Benghazi claiming they would use force to free him from NTC custody….Minutes after Jalil's statement at a chaotic late-night press conference at a hotel in Benghazi, gunfire broke out in the street outside. Members of Younis's tribe, the Obeidi, one of the largest in the east, fired machine guns and smashed windows, forcing security guards and hotel guests to duck for cover.

(10) = Guardian.co.uk 30 Jul 2011 ‘Libyan rebel soldiers killed Younis’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/30/libyan-rebel-soldiers-killed-younis ; General Abdel Fattah Younis shot dead by Islamist-linked militia within the anti-Gaddafi forces, says senior opposition minister……. Younis was killed in mysterious circumstances on Thursday. Initially, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, president of the National Transitional Council, the rebel's government, claimed the murder had been carried out by Gaddafi-linked forces…..That was starkly contradicted by oil minister Ali Tarhouni who confirmed Younis had been killed by members of the Obaida Ibn Jarrah Brigade, a group linked to the rebels……Tarhouni told reporters Younis was being brought back to Benghazi when he was shot. A militia leader who had gone to fetch him from the front line had been arrested and confessed that his subordinates had carried out the killing.

(11) = Independent 30 Jul 2011 ‘Rebel feud puts UK's Libya policy in jeopardy’,http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/rebel-feud-puts-uks-libya-policy-in-jeopardy-2328626.html ;

Increasing evidence has begun to emerge that the savage killings of General Abdel Fatah Younes and two other senior officers – who were shot and whose bodies were burnt – may have been carried out by their own side….Gen Younes, who had himself served as interior minister in the regime, had been accused of holding secret talks with Tripoli officials and leaking military secrets. The news of his arrest led to men from the Obeidi tribe gathering outside the Tibesti Hotel on Thursday evening, where the rebels were due to hold a press conference, threatening to take action to free the commander unless he was released….. Mr Jalil held that Gen Younes had merely been "summoned" for questioning and been released on his own recognisance before being killed in an attack by an "armed gang". Rebel security forces, he maintained, were still trying to find the bodies, but the TNC leader refused to answer questions on how, in that case, he could know that the men were already dead…..  Meanwhile Mr Jalil's version of events was contradicted by the TNC's military spokesman, Mohammed al-Rijali, who stated that Gen Younes had been detained at the oil port of Brega and brought to Benghazi for interrogation prior to his death. A third rebel official, a senior security officer, Fadlallah Haroun, maintained that three corpses had already been found before Mr Jalil had made his announcement. He could not explain why the TNC leader had failed to mention this at the press conference.

(12) = NPR 03 Aug 2011 ‘Rebel Leader’s Death Puts Eastern Libya On Edge’,

http://feb17.info/news/rebel-leaders-death-puts-eastern-libya-on-edge/ ; At the tribal gathering, Younis’ sons — who didn’t want their names used — say that if the rebel leadership couldn’t bring their father’s killers to justice then they hoped the tribe would….“The way he was killed looks like a betrayal,” says one son, adding that no one is above suspicion….Another son says he believes the rebel council was involved.

(13) = guardian.co.uk 09 Aug 2011 ‘Libyan rebel leader sacks entire cabinet’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/09/libyan-rebel-leader-sacks-cabinet

(14) = guardian.co.uk 31 Jul 2011 ‘Younis assassination magnifies divisions among Libyan rebels’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/31/libya-younis-rebels-ramadan-analysis ; ‘News of fighting involving rival Islamist factions came as yet another worrying sign of internal division at a time when western political and military support for the rebels has reached the point of no return.’

(15) = Committee to Protect Journalists 22 Aug 2011 ‘Australian journalist attacked by assailants in Benghazi’, http://cpj.org/2011/08/australian-journalist-attacked-by-assailants-in-be.php

(16) = The National 31 Jul 2011 ‘The death of General Younis makes us stronger, Libya rebels say’, http://www.thenational.ae/news/worldwide/middle-east/the-death-of-general-younis-makes-us-stronger-libya-rebels-say

(17) = Independent 24 Mar 2011 ‘ Kim Sengupta: The resistance has foundered on its own indiscipline and farcical ineptitude’, http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/kim-sengupta-the-resistance-has-foundered-on-its-own-indiscipline-and-farcical-ineptitude-2251298.html ;The rebels' operations are further undermined by an absence of command and control. On Monday two men standing within a hundred yards of each other, "Captain" Jalal Idrisi and "Major" Adil Hassi, claimed to be in charge of the fighters who were meant to be attacking Ajdabiya. A brief advance soon turned into a chaotic retreat. Major Hassi then claimed that the misjudgement in going forward had been Captain Idris's idea. But why didn't they liaise? "We haven't got communications equipment" he responded. But the Captain is standing just over there, journalists pointed out. "I don't talk to him," said Major Hassi.

(18) = Le Journal de dimanche 02 April 2011 ‘En Libye, les djihadistes montent au front’,

http://www.lejdd.fr/International/Afrique/Actualite/Al-Qaida-s-implique-en-Libye-293649/?from=headlines ; English translation at http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lejdd.fr%2FInternational%2FAfrique%2FActualite%2FAl-Qaida-s-implique-en-Libye-293649%2F%3Ffrom%3Dheadlines

(19) = See (18) above

(20) = Bloomberg 13 Apr 2011 ‘Clinton’s ‘Failed State’ Warning Hangs Over Libya as NATO Officials Meet’, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-12/clinton-s-failed-state-warning-hangs-over-libya-as-nato-can-t-stem-chaos.html; '“It looks like a very untenable situation,” Geoff Porter, an analyst at North African Risk Consulting, said in an interview from New York. “Where we are heading is a de facto partition, between Tripolitania and Cyrenaica,” the historic names for western and eastern Libya.'

(21) = Ronald Bruce St. John (2008) ‘Libya From Colony to Independence’,  Oneworld Paperback/Oxford, Chapters 3 -4 (on the colonial divisions of Libya under Italy and later France and Britain - Tripolitania, Cyrenaica and Fezzan)

(22) = Ronald Bruce St. John (2008) ‘Libya From Colony to Independence’,  Oneworld Paperback/Oxford, pages 97-8, 105-106, 116, 141-142(on Wheelus Field air base and the US under Idris, plus Gaddafi telling US forces to leave)

(23) = BBC News 06 Mar 2011 ‘Libya unrest: SAS members 'captured near Benghazi'’,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12658054

(24) = NYT 30 Mar 2011 ‘C.I.A. Agents in Libya Aid Airstrikes and Meet Rebels’,http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/world/africa/31intel.html

(25) = Guardian 31 Mar 2011 ‘Libya: SAS veterans helping Nato identify Gaddafi targets in Misrata’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/31/libya-sas-veterans-misrata-rebels ; Former SAS soldiers and other western employees of private security companies are helping Nato identify targets in the Libyan port city of Misrata, the scene of heavy fighting between Muammar Gaddafi's forces and rebels, well-placed sources have told the Guardian.

(26) = Al Jazeera 03 Apr 2011 ‘Libyan rebels 'receive foreign training'’,http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/04/201142172443133798.html ; US and Egyptian special forces have reportedly been providing covert training to rebel fighters in the battle for Libya, Al Jazeera has been told….An unnamed rebel source related how he had undergone training in military techniques at a "secret facility" in eastern Libya.

(27) = Bloomberg Businessweek 03 Apr 2011 ‘NATO Escalates Libya Campaign After Rebels Criticize Mission’,http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-04-06/nato-escalates-libya-campaign-after-rebels-criticize-mission.html

(28) = Washington Post 22 Aug 2011 ‘Allies guided rebel ‘pincer’ assault on Tripoli’http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/allies-guided-rebel-pincer-assault-on-tripoli/2011/08/22/gIQAeAMaWJ_story.html; British, French and Qatari Special Forces have been operating on the ground in Libya for some time and helped the rebels develop and coordinate the pincer strategy, officials said. At the same time, CIA operatives inside the country — along with intercepted communications between Libyan government officials — provided a deeper understanding of how badly Gaddafi’s command structure had crumbled, according to U.S. officials.

(29) = Independent 23 Aug 2011 ‘Rebels claim the victory – but did the Brits win it?’,http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/rebels-claim-the-victory-ndash-but-did-the-brits-win-it-2342152.html

Why Gaddafi running out of fuel or money or being killed would not guarantee an end to the war in Libya

There have been reports that Gaddafi’s forces may be close to running out of fuel altogether, mostly assuming that this will force his side to surrender. This assumption is based on the North African campaigns in World War Two, in which Rommel was eventually forced to surrender due to lack of fuel for his tanks (1).

However, while that’s possible, there is no guarantee of Gaddafi’s forces surrendering if this happens. They might, but it’s as or more likely that without a negotiated peace they would switch to using guerrilla, insurgent, terrorist or resistance tactics (choose whichever term you prefer), as happened in Iraq after the defeat of it’s military. The fact there are no large numbers of foreign troops occupying Libya (only a few special forces trainers and spotters for airstrikes)  might make this less likely or a smaller insurgency than in Iraq, but it’s still a possibility that has to be taken into account.

Gaddafi’s forces seem to only control one functioning refinery – at Zawiyah – and the oil pipeline to it has been cut by the rebels (2). This should certainly mean that sooner or later his forces will run out of fuel for their tanks, truck mounted Grad rocket launchers, mobile artillery and pick up trucks. How soon (or not soon) is still anyone’s guess, as no-one knows how much oil Gaddafi has stored in reserve in barrels in Tripoli that could be sent to the refinery. (This also raises the question of why NATO hasn’t bombed the refinery and why it tried to persuade the rebels not to cut the pipeline – issues I’ll cover in a separate post).

The claims by Libyan defectors that Gaddafi was running out of fuel and money were made before the 13^th of June though (and seem to mostly have been made by one defector – the former head of Libya’s central bank). He claimed that this would happen within days or a couple of weeks (3). So either it’s going to happen very soon, or else these claims are just based on guesses, wishful thinking, or are propaganda designed to encourage any of Gaddafi’s people hearing it to defect.

Fuel prices have certainly gone up massively in the parts of Libya controlled by Gaddafi’s forces (starting even in May), but it’s possible this is partly due to Gaddafi prioritising supplies to his armed forces (4) – (5).

Similarly reports that Gaddafi is running out of money are no guarantee of his regime falling, nor would an airstrike killing him (a strategy which has failed for over 100 days now and has never worked anywhere else). The assumption that Gaddafi running out of money will lead to the surrender of his forces assumes their primary motivation is money. That may well not be the case.

Assuming killing Muammar Gaddafi alone will end the civil war may be an assumption that turns out to be true, but could equally be as false as the assumption in Iraq that all the insurgents were Sunni and Ba’athist ‘dead enders’ who supported Saddam and that they would surrender when he was gone. In fact most of the insurgents weren’t hardline Ba’athists at all and many of them were Shia.

Bombing carried out by the US air force and the British RAF from 1991 to 2002, combined with sanctions, repeatedly failed to either kill Saddam or generate a military coup against him, so hopes of Gaddafi’s own forces, generals or ministers overthrowing him may be wishful thinking too.

US and NATO military planners are generally meant to plan for the “worst case scenario”, but instead most of their plans (and those of the governments giving them orders) are hugely optimistic and ignore the possible pitfalls and false assumptions involved. As a result most of them either fail, or only succeed at great cost in lives.

Saif Al Gaddafi has repeated that his father will accept elections overseen by international observers in return for a ceasefire (6) – (7). He may or may not be telling the truth, but given all the potential ways this war could drag on with heavy civilian casualties without a peace settlement, taking up the offer might be a sensible course for the rebels and NATO.

Even if it doesn’t work they at least get more Libyans and more people and governments around the world on their side by showing they were willing to try for a peaceful solution. Currently their refusal to accept any offer of negotiations that doesn’t include Gaddafi and his sons giving up power entirely before negotiations even begin is making a long civil war more likely. They have plenty of justifiable reasons to be angry at the Gaddafis’ dictatorship and to want rid of them, but the reality is that at least giving negotiations a try would be the best option.

(1) = The Economist 16 Jun 2011 ‘The colonel is running on empty’,http://www.economist.com/node/18837167?story_id=18837167

(2) = Channel 4 News 29 Jun 2011 ‘Tripoli Pipeline Attack ‘endgame’ for Gaddafi’, http://www.channel4.com/news/tripoli-pipeline-attack-signals-endgame-for-gaddafi

(3) = Bloomberg Business Week 5 Jul 2011 ‘Qaddafi Running Out of Money, Fuel, Ex-Central Bank Head Says’, http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-06-13/qaddafi-running-out-of-money-fuel-ex-central-bank-head-says.html

(4) = See (1) above

(5) = Guardian.co.uk 05 May 2011 ‘Libya faces fuel crisis as oil supplies dwindle’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/05/libya-fuel-crisis-oil-supplies

(6) = Guardian 4 Jul 2011 ‘Gaddafi's son says western powers attacking Libya are 'legitimate targets'’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/04/gaddafi-son-western-powers-legitimate-targets

(7) = Independent 16 Jun 2011 ‘Gaddafi would agree to supervised election, says son’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/gaddafi-would-agree-to-supervised-election-says-son-2298234.html

Amnesty finds Libyan rebels lied about Gaddafi rape orders, mercenaries and anti-aircraft guns - and says some protesters might have been armed

In case anyone else hasn’t seen it yet there’s an article in the Independent newspaper quoting Amnesty International investigators saying they’ve found no evidence to support the Libyan rebels’ claims that Gaddafi ordered his troops to rape women and that much of the rebels’ supposed evidence for it was manufactured, along with some of their other claims.

Rebel claims that Gaddafi was using black African mercenaries have also been found false by Amnesty, with those ‘mercenaries’ shown to journalists by the rebels being migrant workers. Some black migrant workers in Benghazi were murdered as a result of the rumours.

Amnesty’s investigation also found it’s possible some of the protesters killed by Gaddafi’s forces in Benghazi and Baidi at the start of the uprising may have been armed (though they’re not certain of this) and that there was no evidence of anti-aircraft weapons being used against the protesters, only kalashnikovs (that last one isn’t a big difference but is more evidence that the rebels’ claims include at least as much propaganda as Gaddafi’s claims do)

This confirms my earlier suspicions that both sides were putting out a lot of false propaganda and that we should take claims about what was going on in Libya with a pinch of salt.

It also makes me even more certain that US Defence Secretary Robert Gates’ claim that Gaddafi’s people are killing people and then moving the bodies about from one place to another to pretend they were all killed in NATO air strikes is recycled propaganda similar to that he used (and later admitted was false) in relation to the Taliban and US air strikes in Afghanistan.

I don’t doubt Gaddafi is involved in some propaganda too. It seems highly unlikely that all the rebels are Al Qa’ida, as he claims they are ; and one member of a hospital’s staff gave journalists a note saying that a baby who Gaddafi’s spokesmen said had been injured by a NATO air strike was actually hurt in a car crash.

NATO has admitted it was responsible for other air strikes attempting to assassinate Gaddafi and members of his government and military by airstrike – and in those cases children were, very predictably, killed.

We should beware of claims about the war in Libya made by Gaddafi’s people, the rebels and NATO government and military spokespeople unless corroborated by journalists (doing more than just repeating them) or human rights groups. None of them are all that reliable – and even Amnesty has sometimes been fooled for a few months till it got to investigate further on the ground, though not often.

Of course this doesn't mean Gaddafi and his forces haven't committed any war crimes against civilians. For instance Amnesty has reported Grad rocket attacks by his forces on Misratah from April through to this month by his forces, which is indiscriminate fire which they know will kill civilians whether they're aiming to hit rebels or not - and Amnesty also reported evidence of sniper fire on civilians in Misrata in April (3) – (4).

(1) = Independent 24 Jun 2011 ‘Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/amnesty-questions-claim-that-gaddafi-ordered-rape-as-weapon-of-war-2302037.html

(2) = Channel 4 News (UK) 09 Jun 2011 ‘Gaddafi ordered rape attacks as weapon of war- ICC’, http://www.channel4.com/news/gaddafi-ordered-rape-attacks-as-tactic-of-war-icc

(3) Amnesty International 05 May 2011 ‘Libya: Attacks against Misratah residents point to war crimes’,http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/libya-attacks-against-misratah-residents-point-war-crimes-2011-05-05

(4) = Amnesty International 23 Jun 2011 ‘Libya: Renewed rocket attacks target civilians in Misratah’,http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/libya-renewed-rocket-attacks-target-civilians-misratah-2011-06-23

More on the oil motive for NATO's intervention in Libya

The difference between the Gaddafi government’s oil policies and those that oil importing governments (such as NATO countries) and companies based in them would prefer are one of the main motives for NATO’s military intervention in Libya – and certainly more of a real motive than protection of civilians.

(A previous post covered some of this and the parallels between US intervention in Libya and in Iran and Venezuela – all primarily due to disputes over oil profits and control of production levels.)

Libya experts like Geoff Simons and Ronald Bruce St. John have described the Gaddafi government’s oil policy as one of playing foreign oil companies off against one another to ensure the best returns for Libya, in deals that get the country the investment and expertise it requires for oil exploration and production. From the beginning Gaddafi’s government used the threat of possible nationalisation in negotiations – a threat that has remained credible as they have sometimes carried it out (e.g in September 1973). (1) – (2).

St. John wrote that ‘In retrospect it seems obvious that the RCC [Revolutionary Command Council including Gaddafi] was determined from the start to reduce oil production to conserve supplies, increase oil revenues by maximising the price, develop upstream and downstream capabilities, and use oil revenues to diversify the economy’ (3).

(‘Upstream’ refers to exploration to find oil and production (i.e extraction) , ‘downstream’ usually means storage, refining e.g oil into petrol, distribution and sale.)

While the details of Gaddafi’s policy have varied, the key aims have remained the same. These aims have often conflicted with the aims of oil importing countries (including all NATO countries) and the oil companies based in them. In his book ‘Fuel on the Fire’ Greg Muttit quotes a report by the US Center for Strategic and International Studies, written by former members of the CIA, US government and American oil companies in 2000. They concluded that, with the increase in demand from developing economies like China, India and Brazil, the ideal scenario from the point of view of oil importers and oil companies based in them would be a 50% increase in production by 2020 to allow oil companies to profit fully from the growing demand and to maintain oil prices at a level low enough to allow continued economic growth in oil importing countries (4).

It’s also likely that Libya developing it’s own refineries (and it’s acquisition of the European oil refining firm Tamoil in 1986 (5)) cut into profits the oil companies could make from refining oil and selling the more valuable final products such as petrol back to Libya, as they do in some oil rich countries (e.g Nigeria ) (6).

The three countries who the CSIS report said would have to maximise production to achieve the 50% increase were Iraq, Iran and Libya – whose production levels were all limited by US government and/or UN sanctions (7). Lifting these sanctions without getting governments who had defied the US either replaced or made to make big concessions would result in huge loss of face and influence for the US government. So the US and it’s allies invaded Iraq and got contracts with their oil companies negotiated while the occupation and insurgency continued, forcing the Iraqi government to negotiate from a position of weakness. They’ve imposed sanctions on Iran and continue to threaten possible military action against it; and they’ve imposed Iraq style sanctions on and carried out air strikes in Libya.

The overthrow of Saddam Hussein failed to promote democracy in the Arab world, but it certainly promoted the interests of US and British oil companies. They got contracts on very favourable terms with the government of Iraq, while hundreds of thousands of their troops and mercenaries were still there (8) – (9). A week after Saddam Hussein was captured by US forces Gaddafi agreed to inspections of it’s nuclear facilities which would be accompanied by the return of US oil companies to Libya, later followed by BP (10) – (12).

While Gaddafi had allowed western oil companies contracts in Libya before the current fighting he was also haggling for a higher share of oil profits from them and hinting at the possibility of nationalisation if they refused. American oil companies became worried he might kick them out (13) – (14).

Oil profits, prices and supplies are one of the real motives for NATO’s intervention in Libya.

(1) = Ronald Bruce St. John (2008) ‘Libya From Colony to Independence’,  Oneworld Paperback/Oxford, especially Chapter 8, p145 -148; Chapter 7, p174 – 177;Chapter 9, p250-254, p 260

(2) = Geoff Simons (1996) ‘Libya the struggle for survival’ 2^nd edition, MacMillan, London, 1996, paperback

(3) = St. John (see 1 above), Chapter 6, page 145

(4) = Center for Strategic International Studies  (2000) ‘The geopolitics of energy into the 21st century’ cited by Gregg Muttitt (2011) ‘Fuel on the fire’, The Bodley Head, London, 2011; chapter 3, pages 35 and 370

(5) = St. John (see 1 above), Chapter7, page 176

(6) = BBC News 6 Jul 2010 ‘China to build $8bn oil refinery in Nigeria’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10527308

(7) = See (4) above

(8) = Gregg Muttitt (2011) ‘Fuel on the fire’, The Bodley Head, London, 2011

(9) = AP 1 Jul 2009 ‘Iraqi government approves BP oil field offer’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/iraqi-government-approves-bp-oil-field-offer-1727287.html

(10) = Jordan Times 23 Dec 2003 ‘Libya could provide intelligence bonanza’,http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/December/23n/Libya%20could%20provide%20intelligence%20bonanza.htm

(11) = See sources (55) to (59) on this link

(12) = CNN Fortune 28 Jun 2004 ‘Libya's Black Gold Rush With sanctions lifted, Big Oil is lining up to do business with Qaddafi’, http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2004/06/28/374397/index.htm

(13) = CNBC 03 Mar 2009 ‘Libya Wants Greater Share of Its Oil Revenue’, http://www.cnbc.com/id/29494495

(14) = Forbes Magazine 01 Jan 2009 ‘Is Libya Going To Boot U.S. Oil Companies?’,http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/22/libya-gaddafi-oil-biz-energy-cx_ch_0122libya.html