Calls from Misrata late last night asking for,"Medicine, food and weapons," need to be responded to with great caution. For every person I hear who is positive and supportive of the action to stem the attacks against civillians there is another voice bemoaning the fact that we're in another war and there are some who believe Gaddafi's words about injuries to civillians elsewhere. The task is as sensitive in terms of publicity as it is militarily.
We have engaged in 'no fly' zones on a number of occasions over the recent past and this has been the precursor to us having boots on the ground, something that cannot (by resolution) and must not (by design) occur with Libya.
We do need to take a look at providing the people with the means by which they can live and treat their ill and injured but of course supplying arms would, in my opinion, not only be wrong but would also be illegal because it would be actively bringing about a regime change. Mind you, I have a sneaky feeling that there might well be some nations who would not have problems with supplying cash and arms to the rebels through the back door (read Col. Tim Collin's 'Rules of engagement' and you'll get a better picture of what happens behind closed door and in the dark in places like Libya !).
I have heard no talk of the ceasefire and dialogue in the same breath or calls to Gaddafi to engage in dialogue with those who oppose his regime and I wonder why? I have heard people muttering about 'targeting Gaddafi' and wonder why? Are those who are ruling the air hoping to see the man overthrown by military means? Are they hoping Hilary Clinton's half-arsed hope that Gaddafi is going to leave in the middle of the night and become an exile at Butlins, Bognor Regis is true and consider this to be little more than a waiting game?
The first objective has been achieved - command and control has been greatly limited, the air defence systems and the air force have effectively been silenced and the ground forces are aware that big brother is watching them and able, should they continue with the murderous intent, to slap them about a bit. There are still some tanks, troops and snipers who need to be dealt with and whilst the former are a fairly easy target, the task of fighting in built-up areas (FIBUA) is difficult and not one that is easily dealt with from the air (unless one is willing to accept colateral damage, which of course we are not).
So now, as I see it, phase two consists of FIBUA and diplomacy. We do need to see the tanks shelling the hospital in Misrata silenced and the snipers need to stop their work. The first is potentially possible for the air and the second, if reports that some of the SF troops are on the rebel side are true, should be a relatively simple task if they can move them in from Bengazi.
The diplomacy side is less visible but is, I am sure, going on in the background and we can only wait (and pray) until something is unveiled. What we mustn't do is provide those who wish tom undermine the action with the capital that comes from the naysaying and negative attitudes that some are succumbing to - this is a monumental action on the part of the UN and it needs to be made to work to set the Un on a better direction that that of past years.
Pax
Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts
Thursday, 24 March 2011
Wednesday, 23 March 2011
Libya - Invitation to a holy war?
Having watched Gaddafi's broadcast to the world and his invitation to the Muslim world to come and join a 'holy war' against the 'Crusaders' and his denouncement of those who are acting against his unlawful acts against Libya's populace in the words, "This assault ... is by a bunch of fascists who will end up in the dustbin of history," make for interesting news indeed.
Gaddafi's words were accompanied by his firing rounds into the air and a firework display . . meanwhile in Misrata medical facilities are stretched to breaking point and the city is pinned down by tanks and snipers. Talk about fiddling whilst Rome burns, the man's obviously lost the plot.
Meanwhile some of those who supported the resolution that seek to impose a no fly zone are losing the taste for the thing because of the bombing raids. What they don't seem to realise is that the making of a cake requires the breaking of a few eggs and unless the air is made safe, coalition aircraft cannot fly and unless the ability to control ground forces is much restricted, then the inhabitants will remain at risk. The key here is the taking out of legitimate targets and an eye to protecting the civilians and the maintenance of proportionality.
It is the move of a desperate man to seek to bring others to his defence in the name of Islam and hopefully the intelligence and resolve of the Arab League and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference will hold fast - they have acted wisely with compassion and intelligence to the fore and I pray this will continue.
This is not a holy war but a moral battle and we must ensure that we do not cross the line as we seek to bring safety to the people of Libya and the opportunity for them to have a voice in the future of their nation.
Pax
Gaddafi's words were accompanied by his firing rounds into the air and a firework display . . meanwhile in Misrata medical facilities are stretched to breaking point and the city is pinned down by tanks and snipers. Talk about fiddling whilst Rome burns, the man's obviously lost the plot.
Meanwhile some of those who supported the resolution that seek to impose a no fly zone are losing the taste for the thing because of the bombing raids. What they don't seem to realise is that the making of a cake requires the breaking of a few eggs and unless the air is made safe, coalition aircraft cannot fly and unless the ability to control ground forces is much restricted, then the inhabitants will remain at risk. The key here is the taking out of legitimate targets and an eye to protecting the civilians and the maintenance of proportionality.
It is the move of a desperate man to seek to bring others to his defence in the name of Islam and hopefully the intelligence and resolve of the Arab League and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference will hold fast - they have acted wisely with compassion and intelligence to the fore and I pray this will continue.
This is not a holy war but a moral battle and we must ensure that we do not cross the line as we seek to bring safety to the people of Libya and the opportunity for them to have a voice in the future of their nation.
Pax
Tuesday, 22 March 2011
Libya - 'All necessary Measures'
These are the essential words of UN Resolution 1973.
Yesterday the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) speaking on whether the targeting of Col. Gaddafi was something to be considered, said:
"No, absolutely not. It's is not allowed under the UN resolution and it's not something I want to discuss any further."
That's pretty unequivocal and also, apparently, pretty unpopular with some of those in government here. BUT, it is what makes the British armed forces the force that it is. Whilst some forces have 'all the gear but no idea' the British forces find themselves sometimes poorly equipped but always head and shoulders above the rest when it comes to rules of engagement (RoE) and values and standards. What we have here is yet another example of that.
What is most important now is that as the coalition stop Gaddafi's forces from advancing, which is protecting civilian life, they must also ensure that this does not permit opposition forces to form-up and engage. Although this would be regarded as two combatant forces, thus rendering it outside resolution 1973, it would also mean that by the actions of the intervention a regime change by force had been supported.
A niggling point perhaps, but we have to stand in the middle and keep to the protection of non-combatants, for they are afforded full status under the Geneva Conventions, not facilitate a militia.
Pax
Yesterday the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) speaking on whether the targeting of Col. Gaddafi was something to be considered, said:
"No, absolutely not. It's is not allowed under the UN resolution and it's not something I want to discuss any further."
That's pretty unequivocal and also, apparently, pretty unpopular with some of those in government here. BUT, it is what makes the British armed forces the force that it is. Whilst some forces have 'all the gear but no idea' the British forces find themselves sometimes poorly equipped but always head and shoulders above the rest when it comes to rules of engagement (RoE) and values and standards. What we have here is yet another example of that.
What is most important now is that as the coalition stop Gaddafi's forces from advancing, which is protecting civilian life, they must also ensure that this does not permit opposition forces to form-up and engage. Although this would be regarded as two combatant forces, thus rendering it outside resolution 1973, it would also mean that by the actions of the intervention a regime change by force had been supported.
A niggling point perhaps, but we have to stand in the middle and keep to the protection of non-combatants, for they are afforded full status under the Geneva Conventions, not facilitate a militia.
Pax
Monday, 21 March 2011
Libya - Maintaining the resolution
The object of the UN resolution regarding Libya was to prevent the loss of of civilian life, not to effect or support regime change. Sadly today Defence Secretary Liam Fox proved that he just might not have the nous or experience to be occupying the job.
The reason for this, in my view, is that the silly person responded to his interviewer (who must have been overjoyed at the easy prize afforded him) regarding Gaddafi being targeted:
"Well, that would potentially be a possibility but you mention immediately one of the problems we would have, which is that you would have to take into account any civilian casualties that might result from that."
The aim has to be to get a ceasefire in place and to have the two sides engage in dialogue. Killing Gaddafi would quickly see any support from Arab nations vanish and the people of Libya harden their stance against the Western aggressors and make Gaddafi's 'masters of colonial conquest' claims take on a reality that is at present unfounded!
The Command and Control, Communications and Intelligence part of the mission has gone well and resulted in a weakened air defence and command structure. The stopping tanks in their tracks (literally) has posted a warning note to those forces acting under Gaddafi's control that they should cease. That some forces are advancing and progressing is something that needs to be dealt with but caution is the key here.
It would be foolish to see the coalition forces become little more than air cover for the rebel forces and it would be wrong to arm or permit these forces from grouping and forming up to engage the government forces. What we need is to effect a ceasefire and to encourage both sides to engage in dialogue. And should there be, as part of the democratic will of the Libyan people, a change of leadership, then it should come from within and be free from manipulation and political/military subversion on the part of any alien government.
Foreign Secretary, William Hague, needs to be a little more circumspect as well! His ill-measured words this morning supported what Liam Fox has said and this is obviously not the aim of the Un resolution and solidifies the thinking that Gaddafi is, and perhaps will be, viewed as a legitimate target.
Look at the resolution chaps and bring about the outcomes dictated by it. Neither add nor fall short of the required outcomes and we will see this as a shining page on the part of the UN. Fail and we will see a hardening of the Arab/Western world divide.
And speaking of integrity and rules of engagement (RoE) - I see that British aircraft pulled off from a bombing mission because there were civilians present. This is the integrity that needs to be maintained and displayed.
Keep praying people
The reason for this, in my view, is that the silly person responded to his interviewer (who must have been overjoyed at the easy prize afforded him) regarding Gaddafi being targeted:
"Well, that would potentially be a possibility but you mention immediately one of the problems we would have, which is that you would have to take into account any civilian casualties that might result from that."
The aim has to be to get a ceasefire in place and to have the two sides engage in dialogue. Killing Gaddafi would quickly see any support from Arab nations vanish and the people of Libya harden their stance against the Western aggressors and make Gaddafi's 'masters of colonial conquest' claims take on a reality that is at present unfounded!
The Command and Control, Communications and Intelligence part of the mission has gone well and resulted in a weakened air defence and command structure. The stopping tanks in their tracks (literally) has posted a warning note to those forces acting under Gaddafi's control that they should cease. That some forces are advancing and progressing is something that needs to be dealt with but caution is the key here.
It would be foolish to see the coalition forces become little more than air cover for the rebel forces and it would be wrong to arm or permit these forces from grouping and forming up to engage the government forces. What we need is to effect a ceasefire and to encourage both sides to engage in dialogue. And should there be, as part of the democratic will of the Libyan people, a change of leadership, then it should come from within and be free from manipulation and political/military subversion on the part of any alien government.
Foreign Secretary, William Hague, needs to be a little more circumspect as well! His ill-measured words this morning supported what Liam Fox has said and this is obviously not the aim of the Un resolution and solidifies the thinking that Gaddafi is, and perhaps will be, viewed as a legitimate target.
Look at the resolution chaps and bring about the outcomes dictated by it. Neither add nor fall short of the required outcomes and we will see this as a shining page on the part of the UN. Fail and we will see a hardening of the Arab/Western world divide.
And speaking of integrity and rules of engagement (RoE) - I see that British aircraft pulled off from a bombing mission because there were civilians present. This is the integrity that needs to be maintained and displayed.
Keep praying people
Friday, 18 March 2011
Going mad with the Colonel
No, not an invite to rush down to your local KFC but a reflection on the situation in Libya as morning breaks here in the UK.
Gaddafi has spoken of the amazingly quick (for them) and united (no veto from China, Russia and others who abstained) resolution to engage in 'no fly zones' and other involvement stopping short of boots on the ground. His assessment?
"The world has gone mad and we will go mad with them!"
France has said they will be involved 'in hours' and as measures are put in place to protect the people of Libya, we need to pray for this land and its inhabitants, for a balanced and measured intervention and when it's all done ask why the previous government of this land aided Gaddafi in financial, military and other ways.
I don't think the words used by a member of the previous government that spoke of "having to deal with people we would rather not," cut the ice. Libya were probably the greatest supplier of arms, ammunition and explosives to the IRA and the blood of British civilians and military personnel is on their hands.
Integrity and government - strange bedfellows indeed.
Pax
Ps. Looks like we can add Bahrain to the prayer list (along with Japan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria . . . Just pray for the world!)
Gaddafi has spoken of the amazingly quick (for them) and united (no veto from China, Russia and others who abstained) resolution to engage in 'no fly zones' and other involvement stopping short of boots on the ground. His assessment?
"The world has gone mad and we will go mad with them!"
France has said they will be involved 'in hours' and as measures are put in place to protect the people of Libya, we need to pray for this land and its inhabitants, for a balanced and measured intervention and when it's all done ask why the previous government of this land aided Gaddafi in financial, military and other ways.
I don't think the words used by a member of the previous government that spoke of "having to deal with people we would rather not," cut the ice. Libya were probably the greatest supplier of arms, ammunition and explosives to the IRA and the blood of British civilians and military personnel is on their hands.
Integrity and government - strange bedfellows indeed.
Pax
Ps. Looks like we can add Bahrain to the prayer list (along with Japan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria . . . Just pray for the world!)
Wednesday, 16 March 2011
Europe - 'a pathetic and impotent' force
This is how Europe has been portrayed this morning.
Fearing that they might be drawn into a conflict in North Africa, many of the European nations are content to stand by and watch Gaddafi's forces use air power to suppress an uprising of the general populace against forty-one years of oppression. Talk of 'human shields' (a contravention of Article 51.7 which states that the presence of civilians "shall not be used to... shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations" require someone to act, but the weak and cowardly European forces fear another Iraq and so refrain from doing the right thing.
The bombing of civillians is prohibited (see articles 22 - 25 1923 draft rules on aerial warfare) and yet we see this taking place. Where there are combatants in places where non-engaged civilian populace is to be found, then the rule is that you don't bomb! But we stand by and watch, tutting and shaking our heads, yet do nothing in response.
I am all too aware that Gaddafi would make capital out of any incursion by Western forces, but with the call from the Arab League for a no fly zone we have had the opportunity to support the forces of nations surrounding Libya in imposing such a zone. Mind you, I recall that the same thing was in place for about a dozen years and that ended up with an invasion. But we are looking at minimising civilian casualties and not effecting regime change (another contravention of the conventions).
Obviously Russia and China will veto anything that sees people acting against the right of nations to do pretty much as they wish under the terms of local politics. Understandable perhaps given their amazing histories of human rights breaches themselves, after all they would want people to come a knocking either! But whilst we stand around, taking moral high ground and yet stopping short of doing anything about the situation.
To quote German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle: "We do not want to get sucked into a war in North Africa and we would not like to step on a slippery slope where we all are, at the end, in a war." Again, if action is carried out by the very member nations of the same Arab League Libya is a member of, the potential for escalation and claims of a Western invasion in search of Libya's oil would be hollow.
It is obvious that there is no political pressure that can be brought to bear on Libya, after all Gaddafi has stuck two fingers up against many of the Western world, funding, training and equipping terrorists and acting as it wants and the world has done nothing (except perhaps sell them arms!!). If these people are meant to be politicians, then they should exercise the abilities they have and if they can't then other means must be employed. The fear of being 'sucked into another war' is surely fallacious if the right means are engaged.
We don't want a war, and shouldn't engage in one, but how can we have any integrity when we (the world at large) shake our heads and yet do nothing?
And if we see Gaddafi quell the uprising against him and see him retain power, how many of those whose hands are stayed will be dealing (albeit perhaps secretly) because he has oil. Are we not in danger of (once more) rewarding evil?
Fearing that they might be drawn into a conflict in North Africa, many of the European nations are content to stand by and watch Gaddafi's forces use air power to suppress an uprising of the general populace against forty-one years of oppression. Talk of 'human shields' (a contravention of Article 51.7 which states that the presence of civilians "shall not be used to... shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations" require someone to act, but the weak and cowardly European forces fear another Iraq and so refrain from doing the right thing.
The bombing of civillians is prohibited (see articles 22 - 25 1923 draft rules on aerial warfare) and yet we see this taking place. Where there are combatants in places where non-engaged civilian populace is to be found, then the rule is that you don't bomb! But we stand by and watch, tutting and shaking our heads, yet do nothing in response.
I am all too aware that Gaddafi would make capital out of any incursion by Western forces, but with the call from the Arab League for a no fly zone we have had the opportunity to support the forces of nations surrounding Libya in imposing such a zone. Mind you, I recall that the same thing was in place for about a dozen years and that ended up with an invasion. But we are looking at minimising civilian casualties and not effecting regime change (another contravention of the conventions).
Obviously Russia and China will veto anything that sees people acting against the right of nations to do pretty much as they wish under the terms of local politics. Understandable perhaps given their amazing histories of human rights breaches themselves, after all they would want people to come a knocking either! But whilst we stand around, taking moral high ground and yet stopping short of doing anything about the situation.
To quote German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle: "We do not want to get sucked into a war in North Africa and we would not like to step on a slippery slope where we all are, at the end, in a war." Again, if action is carried out by the very member nations of the same Arab League Libya is a member of, the potential for escalation and claims of a Western invasion in search of Libya's oil would be hollow.
It is obvious that there is no political pressure that can be brought to bear on Libya, after all Gaddafi has stuck two fingers up against many of the Western world, funding, training and equipping terrorists and acting as it wants and the world has done nothing (except perhaps sell them arms!!). If these people are meant to be politicians, then they should exercise the abilities they have and if they can't then other means must be employed. The fear of being 'sucked into another war' is surely fallacious if the right means are engaged.
We don't want a war, and shouldn't engage in one, but how can we have any integrity when we (the world at large) shake our heads and yet do nothing?
And if we see Gaddafi quell the uprising against him and see him retain power, how many of those whose hands are stayed will be dealing (albeit perhaps secretly) because he has oil. Are we not in danger of (once more) rewarding evil?
Wednesday, 9 March 2011
Gaddafi's masterclass
Seems to me that ex-President Mubarak could have learned a few lessons from Col Gaddafi in the way that dictators deal with those who oppose them. Around 1,000 are now dead and something just short of 200,000 have fled Libya.
Yemen has seen almost 100 lose their lives and government forces are using tear gas, stun guns and live rounds to suppress yet another popular revolt.
Having seen the footage from Ras Lanuf and Zawiya it is obvious that the calls for a 'no fly zone' from the Organisation of the Islamic Conference has to be taken seriously. The problem comes in that to do so would not just save lives but would also give Gaddafi some credibility with tbe Libyan populace over his claims that some nations are intent on colonial occupation.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't! But something has to be done.
The situation before us raises many subsidiary questions:
1. Where did the aircraft, tanks, arms and munitions Gaddafi has, come from? He's a despotic dictator but those who supplied him supported him and maintained his reign.
2. Shouldn't Arab nations be the people to impose and maintain the 'no fly zone' - for those who supplied arms to do it would be to legitimise duplicity.
3. If he manages to suppress the popular revolt, will governments recognise him and his government and by doing so endorse his actions
4. Apart from a Sunday mention in the prayers, how many of us (and our churches and fellowships) are really praying for the Middle East?
Pax
Yemen has seen almost 100 lose their lives and government forces are using tear gas, stun guns and live rounds to suppress yet another popular revolt.
Having seen the footage from Ras Lanuf and Zawiya it is obvious that the calls for a 'no fly zone' from the Organisation of the Islamic Conference has to be taken seriously. The problem comes in that to do so would not just save lives but would also give Gaddafi some credibility with tbe Libyan populace over his claims that some nations are intent on colonial occupation.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't! But something has to be done.
The situation before us raises many subsidiary questions:
1. Where did the aircraft, tanks, arms and munitions Gaddafi has, come from? He's a despotic dictator but those who supplied him supported him and maintained his reign.
2. Shouldn't Arab nations be the people to impose and maintain the 'no fly zone' - for those who supplied arms to do it would be to legitimise duplicity.
3. If he manages to suppress the popular revolt, will governments recognise him and his government and by doing so endorse his actions
4. Apart from a Sunday mention in the prayers, how many of us (and our churches and fellowships) are really praying for the Middle East?
Pax
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)