London has in effect de-recognised the Gaddafi regime. But if things don't go to plan it will leave Hague badly exposed
Comments (61)
Simon Tisdall
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 27 July 2011 13.59 BST
Article history
William Hague is escorted by security personnel during a visit to Benghazi in June. Photograph: Mohammed Salem/REUTERS
William Hague's announcement today that Britain is expelling the remaining eight Libyan diplomats accredited to London represents a further intensification of the military, economic and diplomatic pressure on the beleaguered regime of Muammar Gaddafi.
The foreign secretary's decision is a significant boost for the rebels' Benghazi-based national transitional council, which is viewed by Britain, as of today, as the "sole governmental authority" in Libya. By taking this action, Britain has come into line with the US, France, Italy and other Nato allies, which had already declared the NTC to be the de facto government of Libya.
As a matter of longstanding policy, Britain recognises states, not governments. But in effect London has now "de-recognised" the Gaddafi regime and its representatives in the UK. In doing so, it has further delegitimised the remaining authority of Gaddafi and those around him and has invited the NTC to send a representative – in essence an ambassador – to London.
Speaking at the Foreign Office, Hague did not give a specific reason for taking this action at this time, but set it in the context of the decision of the recent Libya contact group meeting in Istanbul to maximise pressure on the Gaddafi regime. He claimed the move had support from Arab League and African Union countries – many of which, however, continue to deal with Gaddafi's government.
Nor did he shed any light on how he believed the decision may affect the desultory negotiating process with Tripoli that the UN and the Russians are trying, so far without much success, to advance. Hague changed his position on Gaddafi's future earlier this week, saying he could in theory remain in the country (and not go into exile) as long as he surrendered power. That was seen in some quarters as a softening of Britain's position.
Now Hague has gone back on the offensive, stripping Gaddafi of international legitimacy and making clear that any peace settlement in Libya must be struck, first and foremost, under the auspices and with the full agreement of the NTC, as the only credible representative of the Libyan people. Hague was saying to the military and political figures around Gaddafi: the game is up, you have no future. It's time to accept that, cut your losses, and make a deal.
The foreign secretary underscored that message by repeating that the military campaign would go on "as long as it takes", and by drawing attention to Britain's recent decision to deploy an additional four Tornado fighter-bombers. He said Britain would work to unfreeze regime assets, including £91m in oil company assets, and make them available to the NTC.
Evidently with an eye on relations with an oil-rich post-Gaddafi Libya, Hague emphasised that Britain was a "true friend" of the Libyan people and listed all it was doing to help: humanitarian assistance, military and diplomatic advice and material support, and help with policing and security. The British mission in Benghazi was now its biggest in north Africa after Cairo, he said.
Hague's bullishness extended to sharp criticism of the Scottish government's "mistaken" decision two years ago to release the Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. Megrahi was recently seen on Libyan state television in what was interpreted as a deliberate act of defiance by Gaddafi, aimed at London. Hague described the Scottish doctors' opinion that Megrahi was close to death from prostate cancer as "worthless".
Hague's performance today appeared designed to dispel doubts about the wisdom and effectiveness of the government's strategy and convince his listeners that success was only a matter of time. He emphasised that he had the full support of the prime minister, David Cameron, in ordering the expulsions and pursuing the campaign. He also stressed Britain's leading role in organising the international response to the uprising that began in March.
All this leaves him very exposed if things don't go according to plan, or drag on indefinitely at ever greater cost. Hague admitted indirectly that Britain and its allies have no actual control over what happens next in Libya. That is ultimately up to the Libyan people, and their collective wishes are difficult to gauge.
It may be true that they yearn impatiently for Westminster-style democracy and the warm, unselfish embrace of the west. Or it may be that a compromise internal political settlement that is altogether less clear-cut, and less wholly favourable to western interests, will emerge despite all Britain's not so subtle cajoling.
There is another basic policy problem. Hague cannot escape the ongoing consequences of the personalisation of the Libyan campaign around the unlovely figure of Gaddafi. Early on it became clear that Gaddafi was the primary target and democratisation a secondary aim. The uprising gave Britain, the US and their partners a chance to get even with this much reviled bogeyman after many years of humiliation and repeated outrages. The success of the Libyan policy will consequently be measured, primarily, by what happens to Gaddafi. If he survives, crowing, to fight another day, Hague and others may not.
***
Comments in chronological order (Total 61 comments)
Kerrygold
27 July 2011 2:11PM
London has in effect de-recognised the Gaddafi regime. But if things don't go to plan it will leave Hague badly exposed
Rather strange way to describe a man who has been caught with his trousers down, politically and ...
Mercurey
27 July 2011 2:15PM
Turning in to a farce. Evert since he told us Ghadaffi was already on his way on a plane out, and then it will be over by Christmas, FO seems to be running along the wishing for the best lines of the Treasury.
Government of amateurs.
Where are all the grown ups on politics? Bunch if inexperienced kids in charge where ever one looks.
MERidley
27 July 2011 2:19PM
Why are we taking the lead on this War, it is another adventure we can't afford - the money should be spent on investment in modernising the UK economy.
RobotShone
27 July 2011 2:23PM
Hague's performance today appeared designed to dispel doubts about the wisdom and effectiveness of the government's strategy ... He also stressed Britain's leading role in organising the international response to the uprising that began in March.
Just to clarify:
He also stressed his complicity in an act of international aggression.
bailliegillies
27 July 2011 2:30PM
Can this Foreign Secretary become even more ludicrous? He would do well to learn when to speak and when to keep quiet and now would be a very good time to keep quiet.
The worse aspect is he's starting to make Boy Miliband look statesman like in comparison and I thought that an impossibility given his track record!
Cauldron
27 July 2011 2:36PM
By taking this action, Britain has come into line with the US, France, Italy and other Nato allies, which had already declared the NTC to be the de facto government of Libya.
How much of a 'gamble' can it really be if all these other countries have already done the same thing?
Keo2008
27 July 2011 2:37PM
Now let's not be unkind to Mr. Hague.
I well remember the hours of innocent pleasure he gave us when he wore that baseball cap.
JamesDavid
27 July 2011 2:38PM
Hague admitted indirectly that Britain and its allies have no actual control over what happens next in Libya. That is ultimately up to the Libyan people, and their collective wishes are difficult to gauge.
What a farce. The whole thing was and remains none of our business. We're entangled in yet another crisis in the Muslim world (as if two weren't enough) thanks to yet more schoolboy politicians wanting to look heroic on the world stage. Bloody stupid - the lot of them.
DrainingFaces
27 July 2011 2:47PM
William Hague is a self-important imbecile.
He's a puppet - but the puppeteers probably don't even need to pull his strings.
What NATO is doing in Libya is shameful.
CrisSantos
27 July 2011 2:52PM
"If things don't go to plan"
LOL. What plan? In the last 5 months when did things go to plan, Mr Tisdall?
This is just William Hague throwing whatever he has up in the air, hoping SOMETHING goes right for him.
Things are so badly off-the-plan that I hear Liam Fox is preparing a "not my fault" file.
KatieL
27 July 2011 3:12PM
Militarily, I can't see the rebels winning.
I don't know what Hague can know that makes him so sure they will.
The rebels won't win because this isn't a universally unpopular leader about to be swept from power by either his own people or by an invading army. And the rebels are at best a bunch of enthusiastic but disorganised rabble who happen to own AKs.
Even if it WERE possible, do we really want to see the shitstorm that will go down if the rebels try to take and hold Tripoli by force? I mean given how well the Americans with all the money, time, people and resources they had to hand did in Iraq?
Not happening.
I can't see the rebels giving in either since it pretty much means death at this point. So this is either going to involve a partition or a long term stalemate. And if we're going to contribute meaningfully to either, we need to be on speaking terms with the Tripoli government as well.
So either Hague has more information than we do or he's waving indignation in the hope that it's mistaken for a weapon.
republicantraveller
27 July 2011 3:27PM
Anyone thought that Hague might have sent in the SAS to deal with Gadaffi?
FalseBottomBureau
27 July 2011 3:36PM
OMG. Are you trying to tell me that British foreign policy is driven by opportunism and expediencey.?
And there I was, thinking we were standing up for democracy and human rights.
You mean the stuff about Gaddafi being a terrible dictator who we needed to get rid of by hook or by crook was just a cover for an oil grab?
Is nothing sacred?
hoddle1
27 July 2011 3:37PM
I wish someone would "de-recognise" this unmandated Tory government.
moretheylie
27 July 2011 3:37PM
Anyone thought that Hague might have sent in the SAS to deal with Gadaffi?
i think that was what he meant when he said 'as long as it takes'. its known that special forces were in libya prior to the 'uprising' in the east.
as craig murray writes in his blog, the only option left to claim victory is to assassinate gaddafi.
the independent reports today that Gaddafi now controls 20% more territory than he did before we started the bombing - despite hagues claims to the contrary.
LittleRichardjohn
27 July 2011 3:39PM
Cauldron
27 July 2011 2:36PM
How much of a 'gamble' can it really be if all these other countries have already done the same thing?
Exactly. There's no case to answer. For once Britain is acting in the interest of freedom and good business sense.
To deny support to the rebels simply because that would be good for British business is to be willing to sacrifice Libyan lives to satisfy middle-class nitpicking pacifist scruples.
doughcnut
27 July 2011 3:41PM
He said Britain would work to unfreeze regime assets, including £91m in oil company assets, and make them available to the NTC.
I wonder what that money will be spent on..... not weapons surely?
well, not entirely on weapons
allantracy
27 July 2011 4:18PM
Why are we taking the lead on this War, it is another adventure we can't afford - the money should be spent on investment in modernising the UK economy.
Payback time for Lockerbie or perhaps you would rather have those good citizens wave a white flag for a having a 747 drop on their head.
Iloveoreo
27 July 2011 4:24PM
There is nothing to expose Britain about,other countries did it.Instead of bashing the UK,why not talk about the about face from Russia or China,about how they have started talking to the opposition leadership,and how Russia has said many times that Gaddafi has no future in Libya's politics?
How about exposing that,instead of what William Hague did or did not do.Britain has done NOTHING unusual from the other nations.
Infact we can talk about how Germany,which was against this,has donated millions to the opposition leadership.
There is nothing to leave Britain or it's foreign minister "exposed".
What we should be discussing is what happens if NATO leaves Libya with Gaddafi clinging to power?
What will happen inside the country?
One thing is for sre,the country won't go back to normal and those who rose up against him will never allow him to rule them again,and will fight him and his terrorist mercenaries tooth and nail.
Let us see more migrants fleeing the conflict,going to Europe.Those who say Gaddafi will never become our problem,are dreaming.
The same was said for Milosevic and the likes.
Iloveoreo
27 July 2011 4:32PM
Simon should get real,infact this was long way coming.The fact that UK did not do this long ago,even the U.S did it already,is the main issue.This was a logical first step.There is nothing that will leave the UK "exposed".
Recommend? (3)
Report abuse
Link NoWarPlease
27 July 2011 4:56PM
Gamble?
This is a meticulously orchestrated western plan for regime change in Libya that simply can't (shouldn't) go wrong.
The rebels are fully assisted by NATO.
By top western bankers, so they could quickly set up a new "central Bank of Libya".
BIG Oil, helped them so they could quickly set up a new National Oil Company.
A plan that just can't go wrong. (or?)
grabsplatter
27 July 2011 5:08PM
By taking this action, Britain has come into line with the US, France, Italy and other Nato allies, which had already declared the NTC to be the de facto government of Libya
How does this make him totally exposed, out on a limb, or whatever else Simon Tisdall would like to describe him as?
Do the editors think that CiF articles are always best when they prove themselves to be drivel?
OxIan
27 July 2011 5:10PM
LittleRichardjohn
27 July 2011 3:39PM
Cauldron
27 July 2011 2:36PM
How much of a 'gamble' can it really be if all these other countries have already done the same thing?
Exactly. There's no case to answer. For once Britain is acting in the interest of freedom and good business sense.
To deny support to the rebels simply because that would be good for British business is to be willing to sacrifice Libyan lives to satisfy middle-class nitpicking pacifist scruples.
But you're overlooking the fact that for many writers it's not what's done, but who does it.
As this is being done by the Coalition government it is, de facto, wrong.
Continent
27 July 2011 5:12PM
The foreign secretary's decision is a significant boost for the rebels' Benghazi-based national transitional council, which is viewed by Britain, as of today, as the "sole governmental authority" in Libya.
At least, the Transitional National Council has now the official recognition in No. 10, because it doesn't seem to be welcome by the rebels at home.
Part 1: Tribal Rivalries Complicate Libyan War Part 2: Gadhafi Played Off Tribes Against Each Other Last week, Omar Hariri, the military coordinator of the Transitional National Council, came to visit Zintan to talk about strategy. But many rebels from the town refuse to take direct orders from such officials. Instead, their allegiance lies with their local command center.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,776695,00.html
Continent
27 July 2011 5:12PM
The foreign secretary's decision is a significant boost for the rebels' Benghazi-based national transitional council, which is viewed by Britain, as of today, as the "sole governmental authority" in Libya.
At least, the Transitional National Council has now the official recognition in No. 10, because it doesn't seem to be welcome by the rebels at home.
Part 1: Tribal Rivalries Complicate Libyan War Part 2: Gadhafi Played Off Tribes Against Each Other Last week, Omar Hariri, the military coordinator of the Transitional National Council, came to visit Zintan to talk about strategy. But many rebels from the town refuse to take direct orders from such officials. Instead, their allegiance lies with their local command center.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,776695,00.html
Recommend? (4)
Report abuse
Link PraetorianGuard
27 July 2011 5:27PM
Think writers need to catch up.
As outlined by others, Hague et al can see where this is going, Gaddafi's days are numbered, pre-emptive measure, $1.6 million barrels of oil up for grabs, and who knows what's under the sand.
Continent
27 July 2011 5:35PM
The foreign secretary's decision is a significant boost for the rebels' Benghazi-based national transitional council, which is viewed by Britain, as of today, as the "sole governmental authority" in Libya.
Strange, because - according to the American Society of International Law - the UK recognizes only States, not governments. Might just be British humour, or a trick to touch Ghadaffi's nerves, or to encourage the rebels to endure without food and water temperatures of 45 degrees Celsius (113 degrees Fahrenheit) when Ramadan begins next week.
This becomes clear from the fact that several States, whose policy is to recognize only States, not governments (such as Australia, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, and United Kingdom), had no problem with granting such “recognition.†The main purpose of this action seems to have been to express various degrees of political support.
http://www.asil.org/insights110616.cfm
paleologue
27 July 2011 5:38PM
This is another of Hague's wild, unilateral and confused moves. So this raggedy-arsed bunch of bandits send a representative, sorry, ambassador to London and how do they choose this illustrious personage from among the 40 odd members of the Transitional Government? Oh dear I think Billy Hague is in for a very disillusioning experience when the ill-matched and disparate gang finally achieve power and are not able to agree on anything and then what? Civil war most likely until the new strong-man emerges.
SourcePlease
27 July 2011 5:39PM
Gaddafi's days are numbered
Sure, but turns out, there is a certain uncertainty about exact number.
TomLars
27 July 2011 5:40PM
It's not a gamble. It is usually the first move any government does when there's some kind of diplomatic conflict. Even relatively benign ones. At the moment, the UK is engaged in a military operation against Libya under Nato, which is a much greater offense. There's never been as much death in Libya from all sides, than since the start of the Nato bombings. Benghazi was largely pro-rebels, but in the rest of Libya the pro-Gaddafi support in the population is very large.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Tsjt2YyZU0
What is horrible in Libya is the bombing of Libyan people by Nato when all should be resolved through negotiations and elections open to all candidates. The UN security council resolution called for a ceasefire not for the support of one faction in the fighting. It is the first point of the resolution.
Extract from the UNSC resolution 1973
1. Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;
To read the complete resolution: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12782972
The UK army and some other nations under Nato have overstepped the UNSC mandate and are conducting illegal military actions in support of an armed rebellion. It's horrible..
elprofe
27 July 2011 5:45PM
Where does this mandate come from?
How do the French/German/UK etc voting public feel about the loads of money and weapons being showered upon the rebels (AKA "innocent civilians") at their expense?
Not in my name, ta very much.
elprofe
27 July 2011 5:50PM
allantracy: "Payback time for Lockerbie or perhaps you would rather have those good citizens wave a white flag for a having a 747 drop on their head."
As a Scot and (I like to think) a "good citizen", I'd much rather see Hague beheaded than Ghadaffi.
OxIan
27 July 2011 5:51PM
TomLars
27 July 2011 5:40PM
What is horrible in Libya is the bombing of Libyan people by Nato when all should be resolved through negotiations and elections open to all candidates.
In an ideal world, yes. As it is...good luck in convincing Gaddafi on that one.
KhusroK
27 July 2011 5:55PM
Its been tough going for Mr Cameron, Mr Sarkozy and Mr Obama, the latter of course being the "winner" of the Nobel "peace" prize.
1. First, we heard that Mr Gaddafi had flown out to Caracas, because the first NATO bombs scared him badly.
2. Next we heard that in this struggle between Libyans, the NATO coalition was to help the "rebels" with advice and arms
3. Then we were told that Mr Gaddafi could stay in Libya (as if he was in some hurry to leave)
4. Now Mr Hague says Britain has recognized the "rebels" as the "sole", "legitimate" "government" in Libya, with full freedom to hand over control of oil to Mr Hague.
5. Mr Hague has pocketed 200,000 pounds per annum for "writing" for the Murdoch mafia. Some might consider this a bribe. And one wonders whether the oil companies also pay him for 'smiling" at them. Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne keep having backdoor and front door meetings with the Murdoch mafia to discuss "appropriate" matters, as nothing "inappropriate" is ever discussed.
6. Let us see where their "adventures" or misadventures take them, and just where they take the British public - which is not guilty of electing them. One wonders though if their low IQ is necessarily a birth defect, and whether something can be done about it.
WebAliceinwonderland
27 July 2011 6:04PM
lloveoreo,
ab Russia okeying the rebels' government, I think it's a little too early to hope for that :o))))
Mind it this is same Russia, that in a quite pro-state newspaper of the oldie name Komsomol Truth:o), just yesterday tossed in a new idea "What is the West doing in Africa?"
The new idea being the Golfstream is steadily cooling down, all areas of favourable agricultural conditions along it are going to become not so agricultural as before:o)))), damn climate of the planet changes, dear Africa mayhap to become not so much a desert it is now, but quite alright for grwoing something to eat. (as it used to be in the prev. planet climate cycle)
Therefore it's not a bad idea to geta footing in it, which the West is doing by installing puppet government.
I am not advocating the value of the proposition, this is just to show how much "Russia" believes it's about democracy and things what is taking place in North Africa. That such options as explanations are considered.
Hooloovoo
27 July 2011 6:08PM
Very proud of our actions in Libya. Frothing lefties will never see it though. Excellent report in this week's Economist on the progress the NTC is making. 10 miles from Tripoli now and strategic towns falling to them. But because lefties view every action taken by US/UK/The West/whoever as evil, it will never be recognised by them
allantracy
27 July 2011 6:15PM
allantracy: "Payback time for Lockerbie or perhaps you would rather have those good citizens wave a white flag for a having a 747 drop on their head." As a Scot and (I like to think) a "good citizen", I'd much rather see Hague beheaded than Ghadaffi.
Well there’s no helping some people.
But anyway, here’s looking forward to the day the perpetrators of that obscenity get a taste of the new regime’s human rights legislation - oh how we will all laugh at the irony of that one.
OK, it could be a while yet but what’s the betting it’s well before a certain type of terminal illness kicks in.
TomLars
27 July 2011 6:21PM
@OxIan
Gaddafi already agreed to it and the UN envoy has proposed a transitional authority composed equally of government and rebels representatives. This is the best solution for immediate saving of life and long lasting peace among Libyans people.
Gaddafi already agreed not to be part of any transitional authority, but probably want to present himself or his son as a candidate in the future democratic elections. Gaddafi's son said so himself so as the Libyan government spokesman.
ROME (Reuters) – Muammar Gaddafi would agree to internationally supervised elections on condition there is no vote-rigging, one of the Libyan leader's sons told an Italian newspaper in an interview published on Thursday.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/16/gaddafi-elections-offer-e_n_877970.html
He also said:
He said the elections could be supervised by bodies including the European Union, the African Union, the United Nations or even NATO, which has been bombing Gaddafi's forces.
"The important thing is that the election should be clean, that there should be no suspicion of vote-rigging," he said.
"I have no doubt that the overwhelming majority of Libyans stands with my father and sees the rebels as fanatical Islamist fundamentalists, terrorists stirred up from abroad, mercenaries on the orders of (French President Nicolas) Sarkozy."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/16/gaddafi-elections-offer-e_n_877970.html
Imagine that. The Libyan government already accepted a democratic election under international supervision!! As long as they can present themselves as candidates. Which we can all agree is pretty fair.
cactuswizzard
27 July 2011 6:26PM
it seems to me that Hague and Cameron are on an internal competition to outdo each other on who can get away with the dumbest decision in current government. Cameron is at the moment obviously slightly in the lead with his decision to employ Coulson as his adviser but don't despair
Hague,s s decision on a no fly zone so far shows that he is not running far behind No doubt the last couple of month bombing campaign have convinced most people apart from the said politicians involved that it has achieved absolutely nothing
especially as the only aircraft carrier that would have been useful to station the planes closer to the target had been retired. and the planes have therefore got a much longer fly path.....
The gunship helicopters did not really make the promised big difference and the current diplomatic effort is just further prove that there is no clear thinking behind any of this action..........
cactuswizzard
27 July 2011 6:26PM
it seems to me that Hague and Cameron are on an internal competition to outdo each other on who can get away with the dumbest decision in current government. Cameron is at the moment obviously slightly in the lead with his decision to employ Coulson as his adviser but don't despair
Hague,s s decision on a no fly zone so far shows that he is not running far behind No doubt the last couple of month bombing campaign have convinced most people apart from the said politicians involved that it has achieved absolutely nothing
especially as the only aircraft carrier that would have been useful to station the planes closer to the target had been retired. and the planes have therefore got a much longer fly path.....
The gunship helicopters did not really make the promised big difference and the current diplomatic effort is just further prove that there is no clear thinking behind any of this action..........
Recommend? (23)
Report abuse
Link unionmaid
27 July 2011 6:35PM
The words 'NATO puppet regime' seem appropriate for this strange alliance of Islamists, ex Gadhaffi henchmen and CIA assets.
I agree with ME Ridley, that the more than £1billion spent on this colonial adventure should have been invested in modernising British industry
paleologue
27 July 2011 6:38PM
Scenario:- The present Libyan incumbents of the Embassy all immediately claim political asylum and go onto benefits and in a few years time form a Transitional National Council in Exile.
One other thing when the present TNC becomes the actual Libyan Government and take power will they even bother with elections? And will all the Libyan exiles at present in this country immediately give up their cushy lives over here and flock back to their mother/fatherland to put their shoulders to the wheel of reconstruction?
zahirulhoque
27 July 2011 6:40PM
THE DESTINY OF A NATION: THE WHITE MEN´S LEGACY One nation´s destiny in the Third World is not an isolated matter. It is closely linked with it´s past and present. In the past their destiny was determined by the western colonial hegemony. Now they are facing it in different form what I termed as “Western Democratic Dictatorshipâ€. The consequences of the past colonialism are so enormous that the people of that part of the world are still trying hard to escape this inhuman nightmare. While they are trying to take a breathing-time of thinking about how to pull their nations from the scratch of ruin, just in this time the west appeared again before the Third World with a wave of war-terrorism. The aim is not only to establish their full-scale ownership on the Third World resources that are needed for their continual survival with their World´s super power image. But also, their other aim is to bring about a complete halt to any prospectus development through massive bombing and destruction of potential development infrastructures there.
I n the ten years-long war in Afganistan, they destroyed there almost every thing. They killed thousands of people. Those who survived, they do not have any hope, any bright future. The consequence of Iraq invasion is more tragic and more horrific. They killed about 205000 people (It is my personal observation. The whisle blower Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, put a different figure) made more than 6ooooo human-beings homeless, destroyed almost all potential infrastructures. After accomplishing their heroic adventures, they quickly ran away from Iraq with their lives which the western media lovingly called “Exitâ€. But they left behind a nightmare-scenario where people would kill people, which nobody knows will come to an end. Once a prosperous and stable country with a maximum level of life security, it is now doomed into chaos, bloodshed, virtually with no future. The same situation has been created in Libya. But in one of my articles I firmly told: …This time too, the Western Grand Design will fail in Libya in the same manner which happened in Afganistan and Iraq.
Look at the story that should not be banished from our living memory.
Obama, the mighty president of so-called mighty America, declared proudly just before conducting the massive air bombing in Libya: Only 2 or 3 days (as far as I can remember). Only 2 or 3 days have already gone away. It is the fifth month of an unaccountable and aggressive air bombing in Libya by the whole body of the entire western power machines. Muammar Gaddafi is still alive, and leading his country, people and military forces. The west is already (about four months ago) defeated and the Libyan won the battle. The west needs to be shamed but not be insulted. The example of Libya provides them a stern warning about their past and present deeds and guilt in the Third World. They need to seek soul-purification and self-pacification. It can only be achieved through their own realization and recognition of their guilt and offence. It can not be achieved through staging of unjust and unethical wars and military muscle. Continued…
WilliamOneTell
27 July 2011 6:45PM
Notwithstanding the comments of the basket weavers and other Gaddafi apologistsosting here, I'm sure at the end of the day, that the Libyans will be mighty pleased to finally get out from under the sandals of Gaddafi and his associated bunch of thugs.
As for Gaddafi and his acolytes, I'm mighty pleased that Nato is giving those boys a right pounding. Keep up the good work!
WilliamOneTell
27 July 2011 6:45PM
Notwithstanding the comments of the basket weavers and other Gaddafi apologistsosting here, I'm sure at the end of the day, that the Libyans will be mighty pleased to finally get out from under the sandals of Gaddafi and his associated bunch of thugs.
As for Gaddafi and his acolytes, I'm mighty pleased that Nato is giving those boys a right pounding. Keep up the good work!
Recommend? (14)
Report abuse
Link coffeegirl
27 July 2011 6:46PM
Now Hague has gone back on the offensive, stripping Gaddafi of international legitimacy and making clear that any peace settlement in Libya must be struck, first and foremost, under the auspices and with the full agreement of the NTC, as the only credible representative of the Libyan people.
Of all Libyan people? Including millions who are against rebels?
What has Britain done to deserve such a clown?
TomLars
27 July 2011 6:53PM
It's funny how western diplomats always acts like much hollier than thou while journalists seems have short memory. A few years and months ago those same UK government were supporting Mubarak in Egypt with arms sales and calling him an ally.
Cheney: Mubarak long has been U.S. ally
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/6/cheney-mubarak-long-has-been-us-ally/
“He's been a good friend and ally of the United States,†Mr. Cheney said of Mr. Mubarak,
Tony Blair: Mubarak is 'immensely courageous and a force for good'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/02/tony-blair-mubarak-courageous-force-for-good-egypt
US gov VP Biden: "Mubarak has been an ally of ours [... ]I would not refer to him as a dictator"
Same as they do with the Saudi Arabian sultans now. Obviously that was all before the Egyptian people kick Mubarak out (in a non armed protest btw).
coffeegirl
27 July 2011 7:06PM
@ WilliamOneTell
I'm sure at the end of the day, that the Libyans will be mighty pleased to finally get out from under the sandals of Gaddafi
You are sure? All the Libyans or maybe half of them? What if they are only 1/3 or a quarter? How can you be sure about that, do you know that many Libyans, have you lived among them for years, crossed the country many times and spoke to the folk from towns and villages many times and on many occasions or all your knowledge was spoon-fed by our media? What about civilian casualties of that 'right pounding' of yours or are they a mere collateral damage insignificant to the final 'greater good'?
SourcePlease
27 July 2011 7:09PM
WebAliceinwonderland
Mind it this is same Russia, that in a quite pro-state newspaper of the oldie name Komsomol Truth:o), just yesterday tossed in a new idea "What is the West doing in Africa?"
This newspaper is on the extreme yellow side, so it doesn't matter what it says. Bot on the other hand, also what are saying Medvedev or Margelov. They are just they to say words that please West.
if you want to know real Russian interest, it's quite simple. They have not the best relations with both Gaddafi (who were trying to be on the fence and very stingy with weapon contracts) and with NATO. So if those two pound each other, it's just freaking Christmas.
As for people of Libya, Russia's position is to help them regardless of allegiance. Which is wise, as it will help in future relations regardless of who win in the end.
MOSCOW, July 26 (Itar-Tass) - Russia has sent to Libya another batch of humanitarian aid, sources from the information department of the Russian Ministry for Emergency Situations told Tass on Tuesday. “At 9 am Moscow time, an Il-76 plane tool off from Ramenskoye airfield to Tripoli. The plane will deliver there 36.2 tons of humanitarian cargo - milk preserves, baby food, sugar and rice,†the sources said. This is already the fourth batch of relief for Libya. Early in July, EMERCOM planes airlifted to Benghazi 72 tons of humanitarian cargo. Last week, another 36 tons of humanitarian cargo were sent to Benghazi.
Oh, and China's position is about same, I think.
unionmaid
27 July 2011 7:12PM
Just seen Hague on C4. Its an admission of failure.
You have to ask yourselves what on earth is NATO for? It ( plus it's hangers on minus France) couldn't deliver mission in Iraq, in fact the British forces were driven from Basra by a rag tag Shia militia. NATO can't win in Afghanistan even after 10 years. And now the Libya fiasco, reduced to bombing the water system and bolckading the coast to starve them into submission.
NATO not fit for purpose and should be abolished
hieros
27 July 2011 7:14PM
this must surely be meant to be a distraction from the govt + murdoch + police crisis which is currently running
zahirulhoque
27 July 2011 7:16PM
THE DESTINY OF A NATION: THE WHITE MEN´S LEGACY One nation´s destiny in the Third World is not an isolated matter. It is closely linked with it´s past and present. In the past their destiny was determined by the western colonial hegemony. Now they are facing it in different form what I termed as “Western Democratic Dictatorshipâ€. The consequences of the past colonialism are so enormous that the people of that part of the world are still trying hard to escape this inhuman nightmare. While they are trying to take a breathing-time of thinking about how to pull their nations from the scratch of ruin, just in this time the west appeared again before the Third World with a wave of war-terrorism. The aim is not only to establish their full-scale ownership on the Third World resources that are needed for their continual survival with their World´s super power image. But also, their other aim is to bring about a complete halt to any prospectus development through massive bombing and destruction of potential development infrastructures there.
I n the ten years-long war in Afganistan, they destroyed there almost every thing. They killed thousands of people. Those who survived, they do not have any hope, any bright future. The consequence of Iraq invasion is more tragic and more horrific. They killed about 205000 people (It is my personal observation. The whisle blower Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, put a different figure) made more than 6ooooo human-beings homeless, destroyed almost all potential infrastructures. After accomplishing their heroic adventures, they quickly ran away from Iraq with their lives which the western media lovingly called “Exitâ€. But they left behind a nightmare-scenario where people would kill people, which nobody knows will come to an end. Once a prosperous and stable country with a maximum level of life security, it is now doomed into chaos, bloodshed, virtually with no future. The same situation has been created in Libya. But in one of my articles I firmly told: …This time too, the Western Grand Design will fail in Libya in the same manner which happened in Afganistan and Iraq.
Look at the story that should not be banished from our living memory.
Obama, the mighty president of so-called mighty America, declared proudly just before conducting the massive air bombing in Libya: Only 2 or 3 days (as far as I can remember). Only 2 or 3 days have already gone away. It is the fifth month of an unaccountable and aggressive air bombing in Libya by the whole body of the entire western power machines. Muammar Gaddafi is still alive, and leading his country, people and military forces. The west is already (about four months ago) defeated and the Libyan won the battle. The west needs to be shamed but not be insulted. The example of Libya provides them a stern warning about their past and present deeds and guilt in the Third World. They need to seek soul-purification and self-pacification. It can only be achieved through their own realization and recognition of their guilt and offence. It can not be achieved through staging of unjust and unethical wars and military muscle. Continued…
Berchmans
27 July 2011 7:24PM
WilliamOneTell
## Notwithstanding the comments of the basket weavers and other Gaddafi apologists##.
Name them.Grow a pair.Dont just leave inflammatory posts weakly hinting at vague and fanciful nonsense. This isnt the fourth form now.
____________
Các anh chị có ý kiến, phê bình gì qua bài viết "Expelling Libyan diplomats is a gamble by William Hague" và một số trong "61 Comments" của đọc giả ?
Các anh chị có thấy có sự "mâu thuẩn" nào trong "chính sách ngọai giao" của Anh đối với tình hình Libya hiện tại cũng như tương lai ??
Và các cường quốc đã và đang "chấp thuận" cho độc tài Gadhafi và gia đình của Gadhafi được ở lại Libya "nếu Gadhafi từ bỏ quyền lực" có ý nghĩa gì với việc tố cáo, cũng như lệnh truy nả "Tội phạm Gadhafi" của Tòa Án Quốc Tế ???
Còn nữa, những người VN bị MẤT NƯỚC vào tay bè lũ PHẢN QUỐC CƯỚP NƯỚC DIỆT CHỦNG BÁN NƯỚC ĐỘC đảng ĐỘC tài csVN có thể học thêm bài học gì qua Cách Mạng LẬT ĐỔ cầm quyền độc tài đã và đang tiếp tục ở Bắc Phi và Trung Đông, cụ thể qua tình hình hiện nay tại Libya ???
Còn nhiều vấn đề khác nữa các anh chị có thể góp ý , thảo luận ...
Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog"
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .
conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
28072011
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment