Lybian no-fly zone saga. What remains of Obamalism rule of transparency ?
With stupefaction, we are informed by Reuters of the secret aid order Obama signed weeks ago to allow support to Lybian Rebels. With stupefaction, we are seeing the hypocritical maneuver of America and its allies asking the coverage of a resolution over the pretext of "protecting civilians" whereas they were already planning a support for the rebels in order to achieve a regime change. The questions are multiple here. Was this an alliance conspiracy as Syrian President Assad El-Bachir put it yesterday addressing the nation ? Was the U.N. secretly informed ? Were Arab League leaders backing the no-fly zone knowing the hidden face of the pact ? What about the defector Lybian Foreign Minister, Moussa Koussa ? How much cash will he be receiving for its intelligence information over his country ? The answer of these questions are enough to investigate the pact secretly at war in Lybia without any U.N. resolution.
The first scene of this secret war in Lybia was played out by France, Britain and Lebanon launching the idea of establishing a no-fly zone over the whole territory of Libya. First reluctant, America joined the convoy down the road. Having launched the idea, French played its firsthand and pounded the first bombs with its mirages. The British followed the bombing sonata. At that time, America was talking about "helping the allies to achieve the U.N. resolution goal". They insisted they would step aside. But, the day later, they were already in command with tomahawk missiles pounding Libya tanks, artillery, missiles, armories, a Kadhafi coumpound, etc..
The end of the story is America leading the operation officially and underground. The end of the story is today’s news of the covert order signed by President Obama to support Lybian rebels secretly. The end is the illegal CIA presence inside Lybia acting like smugglers under the pretext of getting firsthand intelligence. All things contrasting with the resolution 1973. Those are 19th century’s yankee methods.
Ahead of the Tuesday London conference for Lybia, the Turkish Foreign Minister expressed concerns about the psychological aspects of the no-fly zone intervention the way it is playing out on the ground. He insisted "a war without clear political objectives and ignoring psychological aspects can’t succeed". The idea was echoed in an AlJazeera debate where the author of the "Yankee Empire" underlined the bad souvenirs of colonisation inside Lybian minds. France, Italia and Britain have colonised Lybia. Coming back today to lead another aggressive pact similar to the colonisation one is certainly unbearable for many. Lybians have not forgotten Italians "Jack l’eventreur" methods of 1911, opening the belly of Lybian women and killing them and their children all alike in a madness rage.
The author of the "Yankee Empire" added that Lybia will be the fourth Arab country under American war and bombs. Factually, so far, America has been at war not in two Arab countries but in three : Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan de facto. Lybia ranks four in the list. At a certain stand, enough is enough. Another point to range inside negative psychological factors.
As for "protecting civilians", the reason is non convincing. Had this worry really been the case, America would have helped Gaza in 2008 when Israel invaded them and did whatever they wanted, in total impunity. The U.N. issued a condemnation of the killings and amounted them to crimes against humanity. The international body ruled out the same for Gaza towards Israel. Eventually, the two statements neutralised each other and nullified the whole process. The double standard in dealing with Arab States matters on one hand, and, on the other, in the incapacity of the U.S. towards Israel are other reasons to question the no-fly zone in Lybia and all the operations going by under that coverage which appears abusive all the same as the untold war operations.
A NEW WORLD IS EMERGING
Here is the bottom line. The "Yankee Empire" author came forward with a strong geopolitical argument of changing conception in leading the world. America should stop thinking he is the only country responsible to resolve conflicts in the word. The world is getting multipolarised and the emergence of other centers of power is irreversible. America should have stood by and left regional powers handle the Lybian crisis. The Arab League and the African Union should have found a better solution that the one we are witnessing now and its whereabouts. He regretted this and, of course, it is not only about America, it is also up to the others States and regional powers to stop waiting the American decision to lead their regional matters. He said "shame on the Arab League" and "shame on the African Union".
African Union didn’t attend Tuesday London conference over Lybia. Divisions inside the AU make it impossible to find a common position to send a delegate to read it in London. South African, the first African Union economy and democracy voted in favor of the resolution. A pure disastrous vote ; indeed a shamefull one.
As for the Arab League, as a panel of dictators, no word can express the disaster of their no-fly zone backing. Moreover, States like Qatar and the Emirates are handling planes at the coalition, not because the coalition are in need to, but just to confirm their vote the best symbolic way. The worst part of colonialism is when the colonised people remains intellectually the same inferior person and adjusts his psychology to the intrusive colonialist line of conduct, years after colonisation has ended.
The no fly-zone and its whereabouts are 19th century’s practices in sharp contrast with today’s emerging new world. That’s why the 1973 resolution is on the wrong side of History. Unfortunately.