Friday, 11 March 2011

Revolutionary roadblocks


Unfortunately the present situation in Libya is a graphic demonstration of how Revolutions are in a constant state of motion (hence the name) and do not always move forward. Earlier in the week things looked very good for the Revolution, though Gaddafi was able to retake parts of the West, while unfortunate it was quite likely given that Tripoli is in the Western part of the nation and the government had built up a high concentration of loyal forces there, The Eastern revolt had got its act together and began march on Tripoli, major battles took place in both Brega and Ras Lanuf as the below video's show,

Brega


Ras Lanuf


Unfortunately as has been widely reported Gaddafi now feels secure enough to began bringing the full might of his forces to bear against the revolution,. Air strikes and artillery bombardments have become common and have been enough to force the Revolutionaries to withdraw from the city of Ras Lanuf

Government counter attack


However despite the grim news I remain confident that the Revolt will prove in the end to be sucesfull, you will I'm sure notice that the government has only been able to win in clashes where the odds are heavily in there favour such as in the West and when they aren't bogged down in extended fighting like when using Air and artillery this suggests that Gaddafi believes his troops are loyal enough to kill for him but not as he repeatedly claims to die for him. This will probably mean the conflict will take the form of bloody air strikes against population centres in order to break the will of the Revolution. Fortunately at present that will seems to still be very strong as the demonstration by the free women of Benghazi shows.



This is where the issue of a "no fly zone" comes into it. The US,UK and EU nations have been caught in an embarrassing situation, on the one hand Africa and the Middle East have seen an upsurge in mass mostly peaceful demonstrations demanding Democracy and an end to corruption and state brutality, the very ideas the Liberal West prides itself on and has been lecturing those very regions on how they should adopt them. On the other hand every single regime with the exception of Syria and Iran that has been threatened by has been a key ally of the West both in terms of resource acquisitions primarily energy products like oil and gas but also geo-strategically by ensuring other competitors like Russia and China can't get make a claim.

For example guess who makes those Mirage jets that are carrying out bombing runs on the Libyan people? thats right the French Dassault company. This is why the reactions from government on both Tunisia and Egypt have been so pathetic and why they are now bringing up the issue of a no fly zone over Libya since there own "bosses" (Yeah right) the western population is getting pretty annoyed that there governments aren't living up to there ideals.

The issue of a no fly zone is a little contentious with some citing the spectre of renewed imperialism, my problem with this argument is that it seems to ignore the wishes of the Libyan Revolutionaries who lets face it are the most qualified to make statements regarding the situation in Libya. It also seems to imply that the dedicated men and women of the Revolution who have time and again clearly stated that they don't want an armed intervention or military aide, and that they correctly see the governments of the West as opportunists who collaborated in there oppression as soon as the heat from Lockerbie and the IRA arms sales cooled down and the extent of oil supplies were confirmed. Would then just switch off and get back on their knees and welcome business as usual. Furthermore the sooner Gaddafi's air-power is neutralised the sooner he'll be overthrown and the stronger and more energetic the Revolution will be to resist foreign intervention, as they'll have less damage to repair and wounded to treat.

Avaaz a sort of global 38degrees is running a petition to but pressure on the UN to honour the wishes of the Libyan people, I've signed it and I hope anyone reading this will too.

8 comments:

  1. I've signed it, but now I'm gonna play Devil's Advocate ;) Oh come on, you know I was gonna.

    Is it wrong to bomb civilains? Morally - that's questionable because of the root of morals. From a practical standpoint, however...it's ignorant and cruel; these are the people that make you the shekels. Taxes and all. One shouldn't bite the feeding hand and all that. Nor should one shit where they eat.

    But on the other hand: Who are we to impose our will on a foreign nation? It's not our country. We don't pay their taxes. We don't fight for them; die for them. It's not our flag nor our ideals. I.E., we don't have the right.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Its not an imposition when the people it affects make the request of you. Under Article 51 of the UN charter actions taken at the behest of the nation effected are legal. The only grey area is the issue of national sovereignty and over ruling the national government. My rebuttal is that given that at its peak the Revolution controlled most of the national territory of Libya and its population with the Government of Gaddafi only regaining control through the use of violence the national government has lost its legitimacy to the new revolutionary council.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What grey area? It's still a matter of civilian lives?

    Either way, a Muslim country pleading to the U.N. for help is pretty desparate. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them. Oil for food and all that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "What grey area? It's still a matter of civilian lives?" ?????

    "wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them. Oil for food and all that. " What a bigoted outlook you have. Are you sure your following the right blog?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Look mate I appreciate your interest, but I've got to say I'm not interested in seeing your rants about race relations appearing on my blog. Your welcome to stay and can comment, but the comments have to be relevant to actual topic being discussed. You have your views and its your prerogative to express them, but I feel I have to draw a line. Please if you have any arguments/debates or questions of your own kindly keep them on a blog of your own (I see you have two already).

    Consider this a warning, a polite warning but a warning all the same, any future comments from you that are irrelevant spam or bigoted against anyone will be removed.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I was saying that regardless of the amount of territory that the Libyan government has, the U.N. should not wait for a member (as I recall, Libya IS a member) to request help; when civilian lives are at stake, they have an obligation to step in and prevent that; the no fly zone should already be there.

    As a counterpoint to that, the U.N. is not trustworthy as they profited from the Oil For Food Program as much as Saddam did.

    Sorry I didn't extrapolate.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "they have an obligation to step in and prevent that"
    No, no they don't. There seems to be a lot of people out there who don't actually know what the UN is for. The United Nations (the clue is in the name) is set up to mediate international disputes not a humanitarian organisation and not a global police force. That they have aid programs is fine but those are extras and are designed to prevent the escalation of a crisis across borders.
    My argument is since Gaddafi has only been able to maintain control over the territory he has through superior fire-power shows that his government has lost legitimacy compared to the Revolutionary council making there request for a no fly zone legal.

    "they profited from the Oil For Food Program" No they didn't how on earth could an organisation made up of every national government including America "profit" from an aid agreement with a pariah state the same time the US and co are keeping them isolated and over seeing the whole program?

    "Sorry I didn't extrapolate"
    Sorry but that is bullshit "there muslims so I don't trust them" is not a failure of extrapolation its pure bigotry. And anything like it from you again and its gone.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I never said Muslims couldn't be trusted. I said the UN couldn't be.

    I signed that petition because I do not believe in the slaughter of innocents. Period.

    ReplyDelete

Search This Blog

 
#blog-pager { display: block !important; float: none!important; } .blog-pager-older-link, .home-link, .blog-pager-newer-link { background-color: #FFFFFF!important; }