Libya on the brink

[Clarke]

Gadhafi's 42 yr reign ends. Here's hoping this is the end of the civil war.

[anotherhawkeye]

Great. Hope this leads to better life for the libyan people.

[ganeshran]

Good for the libyan people that the tyrant has finally been kicked out.

[WC2011INDIA]

I lived in Tripoli, Libya for 3 years. I liked that country a lot. 1) cheap & great food 2) great sea beaches 3) latest hollywood movies/playstation video games available at cheap prices (5-10 dinars) 4) lots of Indian community parties, picnics and functions

[gs]

Hope they replace this nut job dictator with a progressive democracy and not some mullah regime wanting shariah law

[Mariyam]

Good for the libyan people that the tyrant has finally been kicked out.

Interesting choice of words there. Why do you call him a tyrant. He was a dictator and there was nothing legitimate in his rule, no denying that. But was he a tyrant? For the decades that he ruled, did he indulge in any kind of excess against his own people? I'm asking coz I don't know. People generally assume that all dictators are tyrants. That need not be the case.

[Mariyam]

A few days back, when channel flipping, I saw this interview Gaddafi had given to a western journalist when all this started. The journalist asked Gaddafi why he didn't step down. Gaddafi had a very sly reply: " I do not hold any position to step down. Neither am I the president, nor the prime minister, nor the head of the army. What do you want me to step down from? " :D

[pinkfreud]

Gaddafi may be highly eccentric to say the least, but he isn't the tyrant the Western media is making him out to be. They pulled the same crap on Saddam and are yet to provide any evidence whatsoever of his so-called WMDs. Not that the media gives a flying f**k about that. Many Indians who came back from Iraq during the war had positive things to say about Saddam's regime. It's all about the oil.

[Sir john]

war is not over yet.

[pinkfreud]

Make of it what you will: http://www.infowars.com/us-nato-officials-openly-admit-to-arming-training-libyan-rebels-forcing-regime-change/ Anyone who wants to get a mighty laugh considering the link is Alex Jones', don't even bother. The link quotes credible sources. Iraq 2.0, anybody? edit: An added perspective on this from the above site: Global central banks will now get to carve up Africa’s most oil-rich nation while simultaneously divvying up around 144 tons of gold bullion – which might go some way to repaying Hugo Chavez after his announcement that Venezuela is to nationalize its precious metals industry. Unless of course Chavez becomes the next head on the chopping block for another “humanitarian intervention”. ....Although Gaddafi was obviously an autocratic dictator, he did reinvest much of Libya’s oil wealth back into the country, transforming it into one of the most well-developed nations in the whole region, which is why a lot of the middle classes in major cities retained their support for the Libyan leader.

[ganeshran]

Interesting choice of words there. Why do you call him a tyrant. He was a dictator and there was nothing legitimate in his rule, no denying that. But was he a tyrant? For the decades that he ruled, did he indulge in any kind of excess against his own people? I'm asking coz I don't know. People generally assume that all dictators are tyrants. That need not be the case.

You are right that a dictator automatically doesnt translate into a tyrant, but Gaddafi has committed a lot of excesses against his own people. He also supported terrorist activities like that aircraft bombing. This is what wikipedia has to say about him

Gaddafi created Revolutionary committees to keep tight control over internal dissent in 1973. Ten to 20 percent of Libyans worked as informants for these committees, on par with programs in Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Kim Jong-il's North Korea. Surveillance took place in the government, in factories, and in the education sector.[29] The regime often executed dissidents through public hangings and mutilations and rebroadcast them on state television channels.[29][30] In 2011, Libya's press was rated as the most censored in the Middle East and North Africa.[31] People who formed a political party were executed, and talking about politics with foreigners was punishable by up to 3 years in jail. Arbitrary arrests were common and Libyans were hesitant to speak with foreigners.[32] During the 1970s, Libya executed members of the Islamist fundamentalist Hizb-ut Tahrir faction, and Gaddafi often personally presided over the executions.[33][34] Libya faced internal opposition during the 1980s because of its highly unpopular war with Chad. Numerous young men cut off a fingertip to avoid conscription at the time.[35] A mutiny by the Libyan Army in Tobruk was violently suppressed in August 1980.[36] From time to time Gaddafi responded to external opposition with violence. Gaddafi employed his network of diplomats and recruits to assassinate dozens of critics around the world. Amnesty International listed at least 25 assassinations between 1980 and 1987.[29][37] His revolutionary committees called for the assassination of Libyan dissidents living abroad in April 1980, sending Libyan hit squads abroad to murder them. On 26 April 1980 Gaddafi set a deadline of 11 June 1980 for dissidents to return home or be "in the hands of the revolutionary committees".[38] Gaddafi stated explicitly in 1982 that "It is the Libyan people's responsibility to liquidate such scums who are distorting Libya's image abroad."[39] Libyan agents have assassinated dissidents in the United States,[40] Europe,[41] and the Middle East.[29][39][42] As of 2004 Libya still provided bounties on critics, including $1 million for one journalist.[43] During the 2005 civil unrest in France, Gaddafi called Chirac and offered him his help in quelling the resistors, who were largely North African.[44] Following a 1986 aborted attempt to replace English with Russian as the primary foreign language in education,[45] English has been taught in recent years in Libyan schools from primary level, and students have access to English-language media;[46] however, one protester in 2011 described the situation as: "None of us can speak English or French. He kept us ignorant and blindfolded."[47]

[Mariyam]

[Clarke]

The Libyan conflict has been a war about oil if not ÅÇor oil. The country's economy is almost totally dependent on hydrocarbons and a key objective for the transitional government will be to get the wells up and running again as soon as possible. The British and French, meanwhile, are worried about future energy supplies. They are already pushing and shoving over who should get what of the energy proceeds before the political dust has even settled in Tripoli (just as BP and Shell are once again sitting pretty in Iraq following western military intervention there). The U.K. government has been working hand in glove with parts of the oil industry to bring about regime change in Libya. London crude trader, Vitol, held meetings with Britain's International Development Minister Alan Duncan (a former consultant to the firm) and played a key role in keeping the rebels well-supplied with petrol while others tried to starve Muammar Qadhafi's troops of fuel. Was this a practical operation to undermine Qadhafi's military logistics or a potent symbol that western politics and oil are so closely intermeshed that the agendas of both are indistinguishable? Certainly the French blew the gaff on Thursday. Foreign minister Alain Juppe was trying to bury a story run in Liberation that suggested that Paris had tied up an agreement to be given 35 per cent of all the country's oil in future in return for military help. He said it was ÅÇair and logical to him that Libya's new interim government, the National Transitional Council would turn to France in the reconstruction of Libya. The British have not been so public about their expectations but we know that BP has already held talks with the new opposition leaders and are preparing to re-enter the country. Clearly, the role of Vitol, never mind the RAF jets, will require some recognition in the new Libya that emerges at least in the eyes of the U.K. political and oil establishment. And the prospects look good. An executive from the rebel oil company, Agoco, has already said the interests of Britain, France and Italy will all be treated favourably compared with those who equivocated, such as Russia and China. But won't the NTC want to reorganise its oil industry differently, and perhaps do without the West completely? Qadhafi originally kicked out western oil but then invited it back in after U.N. sanctions over the Lockerbie bombing were lifted. The problem for the NTC is that oil provides virtually all of the country's income. Even if nationalisation was their preferred option, getting production back up and running as quickly as possible is the imperative. Libya used to produce 1.6m barrels of oil a day worth an almighty $1.3bn a week at today's crude prices, and money the NTC desperately needs, even if it means sharing the spoils. Tougher terms? Whatever deal is reached, it is unlikely to be all or nothing: nationalisation or capitulation. What the new government will certainly want to do is exact much tougher terms for western oil company involvement. The idea that a third of Libya's oil would be simply turned over to the French, as the Liberation story suggested, is surely nonsense. It would be political suicide for the NTC. What happened in Iraq is instructive. Although BP and others have been given access to reserves in Iraq, they are not on the terms they would ideally have chosen. The auctions there have resulted in ÅÕechnical service agreements? where the likes of BP act as contractors and get $2 on each barrel of oil produced but do not Ã…Ãwn the reserves in the way they do in the North Sea or did in Iraq before they were removed by Saddam Hussein. Western independent oil companies have the most modern technology, easy access to capital market money and a can-do spirit, but they are also on the defensive because they are being gradually muscled out globally by State-owned national oil companies in places such as Venezuela, Brazil and Russia. The desperate and now failed recent attempt by BP to tie up a share-swap deal with Russian State-owned Rosneft, despite all the problems it has had in that country, was just another sign of this. With the North Sea and other mature basins fast running out of oil and a failure to fully invest in lower carbon alternatives, western ministers are also desperately worried about future crude supplies.

[Sir john]

war is not over yet.