Turmoil in Libya (2011) and post-Gaddafi blowback

[JMesh]

Canada at war with Libya

Jessica Earle, ctvedmonton.ca

Stephen Harper is giving fighter pilots a green light to fire when necessary against Moammar Gadhafi's regime. The sanction comes as a coalition of countries started using force to prevent the North African dictator from killing more of his people.

On Friday, six CF18 jets flew out of Quebec, en route to enforce a No-Fly zone ordered by the United Nations. Officials say 140 Canadian men and women will join French forces who are already patrolling Libyan skies and attacking Gadhafi's resources.

Andy Knight, a University of Alberta professor who specializes in military analysis, says Canada is entering legitimate enemy territory and will likely suffer casualties.

"Some of them could be shot down and then you're going to have individual pilots taken captive or killed, so this really puts the country at war with Libya," he said.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay admits it's a dangerous undertaking.

"The Libyan Air Force is active, we know that," he said from Halifax on Saturday. "So it isn't without risk, let's put it that way."

More at link: http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110319/EDM_libya_110319/20110319/?hub=EdmontonHome

 

[Edward Campbell]

I agree with Prof. Jennifer Welsh who has explained in this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, why we are making a potentially very unpleasant mountain out of a pissant mole hill:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/force-of-international-military-transforms-libyas-arab-spring-into-civil-war/article1948773/

Force of international military transforms Libya’s Arab Spring into civil war

JENNIFER M. WELSH

Special to Globe and Mail Update
Published Sunday, Mar. 20, 2011

Early evening on Saturday, European time, the full force of Operation Odyssey Dawn – the military mission hastily assembled by the French, British, American, Canadians, and other European and Arab partners – became apparent to Moammar Gadhafi's forces and the people of Western Libya.

This massive show of military might will transform, in an instant, the grass-roots Arab Spring into an internationalized civil war. And despite America's squeamishness about using military force without an 'exit strategy' (supposedly the great lesson of Vietnam), it isn't at all clear what the end game will be.

Earlier this week, it all looked very different: an unprecedented level of international consensus around the need to protect civilians, particularly in and around Benghazi, and a new lease on life for the United Nations. The Arab League – comprised of Mr. Gadhafi's regional neighbours – had requested the Security Council to impose a no-fly zone in order to save ordinary Libyans from potential slaughter. The Security Council looked ready to respond, and without the heavy hand of the United States. It was the UK, France, and Lebanon that led the diplomatic charge.

But the UN Resolution 1973 (2011) went further than a no-fly zone. It also contained ambiguities about the ultimate goal of international action, which could come back to haunt its drafters and split apart the international consensus. Indeed, it was precisely these ambiguities which led five key countries on the Security Council (China, Russia, India, Brazil and Germany) to abstain. The Council authorized 'all necessary means' to protect civilians, but also 'civilian populated areas'. With this latter phrase, the international community seemed to be saying to Mr. Gadhafi, 'there are certain cities you cannot attack' – thereby inserting itself into a domestic struggle. U.S. President Barack Obama went even further, giving Mr. Gadhafi an ultimatum to pull back from key cities he had already taken.

There are clearly some members of the new coalition of the willing that are committed to seeing Mr. Gadhafi go; that is the definition of success. However, for other members of the international community (including in the Arab League), the objective is not to intervene decisively on one side of a civil war. It is to protect civilians and bring about the cessation of violence so that a political process can take root. In other words, Libyans must decide their future for themselves.

So what would happen if Mr. Gadhafi offered another cease-fire? Will Operation Odyssey Dawn tolerate a political compromise? Or, is this mission at bottom about the removal of Mr. Gadhafi and his supporters from the country? Every government, including the Canadian one, has to have an answer to this question – not only for domestic publics, but for the Libyan people.

Jennifer M. Welsh is a professor of international relations at the University of Oxford, Somerville College.

I think I understand why this little war might be in the immediate (Mar/Apr/May) best interests of the sitting government of Canada and I also think I can see France’s self interest, too, but, for the life of me, I cannot fathom why any strategically responsible governments are involved.



Edit: corrected hyperlink

 

[GAP]

Hmmm....uh...what about Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, etc. etc.

 

[aesop081]

Hmmm....uh...what about Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, etc. etc.

Who ?

[/sarcasm]

 

[GAP]

Who ?

[/sarcasm]

Uh....you know, those other guys that are fighting and dying for this "Arab Spring" thingy....

 

[MarkOttawa]

As well as providing bases, now (Xinhua):

8 Italian Aircraft Ready to Join Operation over Libya
http://english.cri.cn/6966/2011/03/20/1821s627464.htm

While this would make the coalition perhaps easier to organize and run:

NATO considers joining Libya strikes
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=220&sid=2285355

Mark
Ottawa

 

[nuclearzombies]

Hmmm....uh...what about Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, etc. etc.

Is it really feasible to take action in all these places at once? Seems to me that Quack-daffi is by far the bigger fire burning at the moment. Might as well put him down first and see where we're at after.... 

 

[aesop081]

Seems to me that Quack-daffi is by far the bigger fire burning at the moment.

I dont know if hes the biggest fire burning but hes certainly the one where we have the least strategic interest. As far as everywhere else goes, you are making the assumption that there will be out of Libya fast enough to have a chance to intervene somewhere else and that the public (and politicians) will still have an appetite for foreign expedition.

 

[JMesh]

Shared with the usual caveats

CF-18s wait to join Libya mission
CBC News
Posted: Mar 20, 2011 12:06 PM ET
Last Updated: Mar 20, 2011 1:55 PM ET
Link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/03/20/libya-canada-planes.html

Canadian warplanes committed to a Western coalition air campaign over Libya could require additional time before flying missions, CBC News has learned.

On Saturday afternoon before U.S. and European airstrikes began on Libyan ruler Moammar Gadhafi's forces and air defences, the Prime Minister's Office said the six Canadian CF-18s had only just arrived in the region and needed 48 hours to be ready for action.

But military sources told CBC News it could be as long as 72 hours between the jets' arrival in Italy and an actual flying or bombing mission.

The CF-18s, along with 150 personnel, arrived at a small airbase in Trapani, Sicily, around noon local time Saturday. But the military is considering moving the aircraft to a larger French base near Marseille, the CBC's James Cudmore reported on Sunday.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay is expected to face questions about the deployment during a funding announcement on Sunday afternoon in Wolfville, N.S.

More at link

 

[The Bread Guy]

<hypocrisy tangent>
Kettle, this is Taliban pot - you're black, over.
</hypocrisy tangent>

 

[old medic]

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/20/libya-live-blog-allied-airstrikes-continue-against-gadhafi-forces/?hpt=T1

“Initial operations have been very effective,” Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday morning. “We’ve taken out most of his air defense systems and some of his airfields. But there is still a great deal to be done.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/mar/20/libya-air-strikes-live-updates

Four of Gaddafi's tanks reached the centre of the rebel-held city of Misrata. Two people were killed by snipers on rooftops. One resident in the town said pro-Gaddafi boats in the port were preventing aid from reaching the town.

6.44pm: British military aircraft are taking part in the latest strikes in Libya, UK defence sources have confirmed to the Guardian.

6.54pm: Muammar Gaddafi's armed forces have announced that they will begin a ceasefire at 7pm (GMT).

It's the second announcement of a ceasefire by the regime's forces.......

7.02pm: The ceasefire statement issued by the Libyan regime was accompanied by a call on the country's tribes to take part in a march from Tripoli to Benghazi for talks on reconciliation

A regime spokesman, Ibrahim Moussa, read out the statement, saying: "We, the Popular Social Leadership of Libya, recommend to the armed forces to announce an immediate ceasefire to all military units.

CNN blog

9:04 p.m. in Libya] The Libyan military has called for an immediate cease-fire, an army spokesman announced Sunday.

 

[old medic]

Libyan military calls for immediate cease-fire
By the CNN Wire Staff
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/20/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- The Libyan military on Sunday called for an immediate cease-fire, a day after U.S., British and French forces began to enforce a United Nations-mandated no-fly zone, an army spokesman said.

Earlier, heavy anti-aircraft fire could be seen being fired into the skies of Tripoli, though no allied fighter jets appeared to be approaching or attacking.

"The armed forces issued command to all military units to safeguard immediate cease-fire everywhere," Libyan spokesman Milad al Fuqhi said in a televised address.

The coalition of U.S., European and Arab countries likely won't rely on the word of Gadhafi.

"As with previous cease-fire announcements, we have to wait and see if it's genuine," U.S. Africa Command spokesman Vince Crawley told CNN. "We urge the Libyan government to do everything it can to demonstrate its sincerity."

The coalition of U.S., European and Arab countries likely won't rely on the word of Gadhafi.

"As with previous cease-fire announcements, we have to wait and see if it's genuine," U.S. Africa Command spokesman Vince Crawley told CNN. "We urge the Libyan government to do everything it can to demonstrate its sincerity."

Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi had called the allied nations bombing his country "terrorists."

A U.S. official said that the country's "fixed air defense systems have suffered major damage" as a result of the strikes.

There was violence across the country Sunday, with Gadhafi apparently shelling rebels in the west while allied airstrikes destroyed one of Gadhafi's convoys in the east, according to rebels. There were no immediate reports of whether the call for cease-fire had any quick effect.

As of Sunday night local time, the United States and British military had fired a total of 124 Tomahawk missiles at Libya's air defense sites, Africa Command spokesman Vince Crawley told CNN.

Gadhafi had said the strikes were a confrontation between the Libyan people and "the new Nazis," and promised "a long-drawn war."

"You have proven to the world that you are not civilized, that you are terrorists -- animals attacking a safe nation that did nothing against you," Gadhafi had said in an earlier televised speech.

Gadhafi did not appear on screen during his address, leading CNN's Nic Robertson in Tripoli to speculate that the Libyan leader did not want to give the allies clues about his location.

Throughout the address, an image of a golden fist crushing a model plane that said "USA" filled the screen -- a monument in Tripoli to the 1986 American bombing of Libya, in which one U.S. plane was downed.

At the same time Gadhafi spoke, his regime was shelling the city of Misrata using tanks, artillery and cannons, a witness said.......

continues at length at the link above.

I find his calling the UN a bunch of Nazi's just over the top.
Hiring goons from Chad, shooting into houses, calling anyone against him a rat.
I hope his fanatics at  Der Sturmer Libya State TV  get dragged into the ICC for calling for rat extermination.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Be careful what you wish for, Gaddafi supporters....

EVEN as the allied intervention began, a group of foreign journalists were taken by bus on a rare visit to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's compound - a labyrinth of concrete barracks, fortified walls and barbed wire designed to deter a military coup.

There, hundreds of supporters offered themselves as human shields, cheering to new dance songs about adoration for their leader. ''House by house, ally by ally,'' the catchiest song went, quoting a Gaddafi speech. ''Disinfect the germs from each house and each room.''

The crowd included many women and children. Some said they had family in Colonel Gaddafi's forces. They said they had volunteered as shields to protect his compound from bombing ....

 

[tomahawk6]

It would be nice if the UN decided to intervene in Syria and Iran as well. Thats something I could support. On the other hand supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in its effort to takeover Libya is something I DON'T support.

 

[The Bread Guy]

1)  Qatar joins the mission:

The Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabor al-Thani says the reason behind the Qatari decision is to stop the killing and targeting of civilians in Libya
Four Qatari planes will soon move into the Libyan zone of operations, a French defence ministry spokesman said yesterday.
“As announced by the Qatari authorities, it will deploy four planes in the zone to be able to take part in the operations, which is another sign of Arab participation in this international operation to protect civilians,” Laurent Teisseire told reporters.
A second official said the Qatari planes should arrive soon, although he did not say where they would operate from ....

2)  So, which is it? 

"Moammar Gadhafi may be personally targeted with air strikes if there is no risk to civilians, Britain's defence secretary indicated on Sunday.  Dr. Liam Fox said coalition forces would not take a "gung-ho attitude," but refused to rule out targeting Gadhafi if the opportunity arose ...."

"The United States does not have Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi on its 'target list' as Western nations intensify their military action on Libya, a top U.S. military official said on Sunday ...."

 

[WingsofFury]

Canadian warplanes committed to a Western coalition air campaign over Libya could require additional time before flying missions, CBC News has learned.

At least they have all the recent upgrades to help with the SEAD and CAP missions they'll wind up flying...

This deployment will also allow the Canadian Air Force to gauge the effectiveness of the 2 Phase Incremental Modernization Project (IMP), which began in 2001 and was completed with delivery of the last fully upgraded CF-18 in March of 2010.

Read the rest of the story HERE.*

*Word of warning about the link - it goes directly to a blog entry which I created yesterday.  Based on my postings, you all know me to be a very big supporter of the Forces and any actions they take so don't expect anything more than a summary of the CF assets being deployed and how the upgrades to the CF-18 are going to be of benefit in this mission.

FYI - 2 separate Polaris refuellers were sent with the Hornets as they departed in 2 groups (3+4 - 1 backup jet).  It is unclear as to whether they will stay as countries are discussing whether each country should use their own refeulling a/c or share the assets already in theatre.

As for whether Gadhafi** is a target or not, I think both responses show that he's not the target as even the resolution outlines that the No Fly Zone is put in place to protect the people and not decapitate the government. 

**insert your spelling of his name here!

 

[57Chevy]

So, Mr. Dale may feel that Germany ought to do more, and he may be right.  But his childish attempt to call the Germans "yellow" is ill-placed and mocks the history of those soldiers from some 200 years ago.

Agreed Techno, a low jab by the author of that article.
Apparently the yellow in the flag has been a long standing slanderish conversation piece to the point that some action was taken by the German Federal Court. 

(Wikipedia excerpts)
The flag of Germany is a tricolor consisting of three equal horizontal bands displaying the national colors of Germany: black, red, and yellow.

The black-red-yellow tricolour first appeared in the early 19th century and achieved prominence during the 1848 Revolutions. Only since reunification on 3 October 1990, the black-red-gold tricolour has been used.

The flag of Germany has not always used black, red, and yellow as its colours. After the Austro-Prussian war of 1866, the Prussian-dominated North German Confederation adopted a tricolour of black-white-red as its flag. This flag later became the flag of the German Empire, formed following the unification of Germany in 1871, and was used until 1918. Black, white, and red were reintroduced as the German national colours with the establishment of Nazi Germany in 1933.
The colour schemes of black-red-yellow and black-white-red have played an important role in the history of Germany and have had various meanings. The colours of the modern flag are associated with the republican democracy formed after World War II, and represent German unity and freedom: not only the freedom of Germany, but also the personal freedom of the german people.

Gold or yellow?
Vexillology rarely distinguishes between gold and yellow; in heraldry, they are both Or (the french word for gold). For the German flag, such a distinction is made: the colour used in the flag is gold, not yellow.
When the black-red-gold tricolour was adopted by the Weimar Republic as its flag, it was attacked by conservatives , monarchists, and the far right, who referred to the colours with spiteful nicknames such as Schwarz-Rot-Gelb (black-red-yellow), Schwarz-Rot-Senf (black-red-mustard) or even Schwarz-Rot-Scheiße (black-red-shit).
On 16 November 1959, the Federal Court of Justice stated that the usage of "black-red-yellow" and the like had "through years of Nazi agitation, attained the significance of a malicious slander against the democratic symbols of the state" and was now an offence. As summarised by heraldist Arnold Rabbow in 1968, "the German colours are black-red-yellow but they are called black-red-gold."
                                        ___________________
Regarding German input to the no-fly zone; 
The Germans are considering sending German-manned NATO airborne warning and control planes for the Afghanistan airspace which would free up AWACS for the Libyan airspace.

 

[57Chevy]

Why, in other words, are we fighting?

Reasons can be many and those reasons can surely be multiplied. I did mention the strategic importance to Europe of the Mediterranean and that would be the obvious choice answer. Another is the "responsibility to protect" emphasised by the UN of which all further action has been primarily based upon.

Obviously many a finger is quickly pointed to the energy assets of that country, but that would be the easy out answer. However it may carry some weight. Another is the implementation of a democratic government decided by the people. But freedom must be the overwhelming response.



The rebels are left with their self imposed dilemma. Their initial protest was not carried out in a peaceful manner, so their intent of forming a government for all Libyans is shattered. There would be no difference to what is already in hand. The possibility of any peace process is not entirely impossible but both parties must first agree that an armed civil conflict will only escalate to more bloodshed.


Regarding the no-fly:
I disagree with the undermining of the resolution by the attack on ground vehicles which are not set to some form of anti-aircraft role. Nor do I agree with the attack of storage tanks, roads, or any structure or building not used exclusively in SAM role.
The "oops" I thought that tank looked like a Gecko launcher is not within the resolution mandate. These things will happen and they already have.

Enforcing the no fly zone (limited as it may be) carries much responsibility regarding civilian casualties. Some may be expected but a minimum target of zero should be diligently sought.
The Colonels placement of some of his missile systems within populated areas are no mistake. Without an immediate ceasefire, I can forsee in the near future the necessity of specialized ground troops used strictly in the destruction or immobilization of SAM systems within built up areas.
The greatest caution must be taken to minimize civilian casualties as the consequences of not doing so may be brutal. As the civilian causality rate increases so does the possibility of escalation and/or engagement of exterior sympathetic forces.

IMO, repeated violations to the mandated resolution regarding civilian casualities could result in an outright UN no-fly mission standown.

In any case the point of no return is surpassed.

 

[willellis]

Given how this Coalition has stated that the government of Libya attacking the civilian population is the driving force behind OP Odyssey Dawn, it should be truly interesting to see how they react to the Ivory Coast, Bahrain, Yemen, Syria, etc. where similar suppression is occurring of the local populous. Will they apply military action in these regions as well? What will be the reasoning if they do not? Truly long and unsure future for Africa/Middle East I believe.

As far as how things are going in Libya since the intervention of the West, I find it truly difficult to say wether it is best for the country or not. The one obvious positive is the limitations that the government will now have as far as air strikes on the civis. The flip side of this coin is that as tomahawk6 mentioned prior, this application of force could be seen as the coalition paving the way for one group of people to eliminate the other in all out civil war. In addition to this, there are reports on BBC News that there were apparent missile strikes on the Gaddafi compound.  I really don't know what to make of any of this...

Just my  :2c:

 

[MarkOttawa]

So, which is it?

 

Everybody is making it up as they go along, not knowing what they are doing or really why in terms of outcome.  Except that Qadhafi is now definitely a very Bad Thing (how embarrassing to all esp. the Euros and Paul Martin).  Plus trying to keep up with the Arab uprising curve (except Bahrain, Yemen, maybe Syria).  Too silly and emotional.  Something...[may] this way come.

Bets on an eventual British or French supreme commander (as it, er, were)?

Mark
Ottawa