Stop Nato Updates on Libyan war: 3 April 2011

3 April 2011 — Stop NATO

Libyan War In Third Week As NATO Takes Command

Libyan War: U.S. Agrees To NATO Request For More Air Strikes
Libya Warns Of Catastrophe If NATO Bombs Great Man-Made River
Video And Text: MSNBC’s Longstanding Love Affair With War
Over 200 NATO Warplanes Pounding Libya, More To Come
Libya: NATO Conducts 547 Sorties, 218 Air Strikes In Three Days
Libyan War: 205 Aircraft In 363 Missions Since NATO Took Over
West Will Reap The Whirlwind Over Its Proxy War In Libya
Worrying Global Trend: West Exploits Civil Wars To Advance Its Own Interests
NATO Air Strikes Kill At Least 30 Libyan Rebels
Report: U.S., Egypt Training Libyan Rebels
Libya: CIA’s Civil War

Libyan War: U.S. Agrees To NATO Request For More Air Strikes

news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/us-agrees-to-nato-request-for-more-strikes-20110404-1ctkg.html

Agence France-Presse

April 3, 2011

US agrees to NATO request for more strikes April 4, 2011 – 8:14AM

The United States has agreed to a NATO request to conduct air strikes on Libya through Monday because of “recent poor weather”, the Pentagon said on Sunday.

“Due to recent poor weather in Libya, the US has approved NATO’s request to extend use of some US strike (aircraft)” through Monday, the Pentagon said in a message posted on the microblogging site Twitter.

The US military had planned to begin withdrawing its combat jets and Tomahawk missiles from the air campaign against Libya’s regime this weekend, as NATO allies were to take the lead in bombing Muammar Gaddafi’s forces.

NATO took charge of the coalition effort on Thursday. Last week, US sorties aimed at striking targets in Libya had also been scaled back.

————————————-

abcnews.go.com/International/nato-asks-us-continue-libya-air-strikes/story?id=13287530

ABC News

April 3, 2011

NATO to U.S.: We Need More Strikes in Libya

By Luis Martinez

WASHINGTON: NATO has asked the United States to continue participating in airstrikes over Libya through late Monday, ABC News has learned.

This was done to make up for the bad weather earlier in the week that had hampered targeting of Gadhafi forces and allowed them to push the rebels back to Ajdabiyah.

The United States was supposed to have significantly begun dropping its participation in airstrikes over Libya.

“Due to poor weather conditions over the last few days in Libya, the United States has approved a request by NATO to extend the use of some U.S. strike aircraft,” NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu told ABC News. “These aircraft will continue to conduct and support Alliance air-to-ground missions throughout this weekend.”

A U.S. Defense Department official said the aircraft Lungescu was referring to are the A-10 Thunderbolt jets, Marine AV-8 Harrier jets and AC-130 gunships, which are the best suited for striking ground force targets.

During testimony on Capitol Hill Thursday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen said that beginning Saturday these aircraft would be on stand-by mode if NATO commanders requested them. That appears to have happened.

Several senators at Thursday’s hearing were upset to hear the news, saying U.S. timing to scale back participation was unfortunate given the ongoing rout of the rebels.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., sarcastically called the timing “exquisite.”

Another Defense official said the NATO request was specifically tied to making up for the bad weather that “prohibited strikes from being as effective as they might have been and allowed Gadhafi’s forces to take advantage and regain territory.”

This official said there was no drop off in U.S. strike participation as had been anticipated. New numbers show there was not a dropoff in U.S. flights Saturday.

Through 6 a.m. ET, there were 81 U.S. flights, including 40 strike flights and 40 support missions.

Three Harrier jets were involved in missions Saturday, a Defense official said.

A number of U.S. combat forces had been scheduled [tp] cease operations today, including U.S. Navy destroyers and submarines that have been launching Tomahawk cruise missiles from the Mediterranean.

Military experts said that America’s reduced role in enforcing the Libyan no-fly zone could cripple efforts to keep Gadhafi’s forces from battering the rag-tag army trying to topple him.

====

Libya Warns Of Catastrophe If NATO Bombs Great Man-Made River

www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gyAl-c-kH34s9akBneIK-y87jIZQ?docId=CNG.34b89149aa6e7d06680c9cf785978729.81

Agence France-Presse

April 3, 2011

Libya warns of disaster if ‘Great Man-Made River’ hit

TRIPOLI: Libya warned on Sunday that NATO-led air strikes could cause a “human and environmental disaster” if they damaged the country’s massive Great Man-Made River (GMMR) project.

Built at a cost of 33 billion dollars, the GMMR extracts water from deep beneath the Sahara desert at a depth of between 500 and 800 metres (1,600 to 2,500 feet), purifies it and transports it to the coastal cities of the north where most of the population is concentrated.

Engineer and project manager Abdelmajid Gahoud told foreign journalists in the ultra-modern control centre on the outskirts of Tripoli, that a “human and environmental disaster” was on the cards if the GMMR was hit.

He said three pipelines, one for gas, one for oil and another for water, run underground parallel to the 400-kilometre-long (248 miles) road from the eastern city of Benghazi to Moamer Kadhafi’s home town of Sirte, through the area between Ajdabiya and Sirte where there have been many coalition air raids.

“If one of the pipelines is hit, the others are affected as well, which could mean a humanitarian catastrophe,” Gahoud said.

“If part of the infrastructure is damaged, the whole thing is affected and the massive escape of water could cause a catastrophe,” he added, leaving 4.5 million thirsty Libyans deprived of drinking water.

Conceived in the 1960s and launched in the 1980s by Kadhafi as part of a plan to make Libya self-sufficient in food, the GMMR provides 70 percent of the population with water for drinking and irrigation.

A total of 4,000 kilometres of pipeline were laid at a depth of two to three metres, he said, crossing the country from south to north and making the GMMR the largest and most expensive irrigation project in history.

It is designed to pump water from Libya’s vast, underground Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System in the south to populated coastal areas in the north where most of the country’s six million inhabitants live and work.

====

Video And Text: MSNBC’s Longstanding Love Affair With War

rt.com/usa/news/msnbc-pro-war-usa-media/

RT

April 3, 2011

Long time love affair between MSNBC and America’s wars

Video

MSNBC is believed by many to be the most liberal of all cable networks. Most who watch would agree that many of the hosts are pro-Obama, pro-choice and pro-union. But it turns out they are also pro-war.

This week on The Ed Show, Ed Schultz said, “Let’s get it done, let’s arm the rebels, let’s give them a chance to fight.”

Blogger, filmmaker and former journalist Danny Schecter said television makes war possible.

“We couldn’t have wars in America if TV networks didn’t glorify them in some way and make them exciting, give action oriented coverage and give what I call militainment,” he remarked.

It’s a sentiment also supported by MSNBC’s most liberal talk show hosts, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell, who defending the effort following President Obama’s speech.

“It seems to me there is a practical war-making tactical success that they believe they could have in this particular country,” O’Donnell said.

“Exactly,” said Rachel Maddow.”He kept describing himself as sort of acutely aware of the risks and the costs of America doing any sort of military intervention so you’re exactly right.”

And it’s not just because the U.S. involvement in Libya falls under a democratic president. It turns out MSNBC’s love affair with war is long-standing.

Reporter Ashleigh Banfield, a rising star in the company, was punished after giving a speech in 2003 at Kansas State University. In her speech she made the case that networks were not giving the whole story.Here’s a portion of that speech:

“What didn’t you see? You didn’t see where those bullets landed. You didn’t see what happened when the mortar landed. A puff of smoke is not what a mortar looks like when it explodes, believe me. There are horrors that were completely left out of this war.”

MSNBC refused to let her out of her contract, but kept her off air for more than a year.

Former independent governor Jesse Ventura said he was supposed to have a show on MSNBC, but it was canceled before it ever aired.

“CNN, Fox and MSNBC got in a bidding war over me. MSNBC won,” Ventura said.”I went to do my show.They were putting together a five day a week show for me and all of a sudden a phone call came.”

One of his employees was asked if it was true that he didn’t support the war.

“Well it turned out they wouldn’t put me on the air,” he told Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks. “They paid me for all three years, they pulled my show. I sat and collected pay checks but I couldn’t say anything because my contract said I couldn’t do any cable or news shows for three years.”

The list goes on, and includes so too, did Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Peter Arnett after giving an interview on Iraqi TV, in which he criticized the Pentagon’s war strategy.

Back when MSNBC was still up-and-coming, its highest rated show was hosted by Phil Donahue – an outspoken critic of the war.

This was well documented in the documentary, “War Made Easy,” presented by the Media Education Foundation.

In one show, talking about Sadaam Hussein, he said, “You know, everybody’s righteous.What a terrible Hitler this is.We were mute when he was doing that. He was our SOB and now we’re sending our sons and daughters to war to fix that mistake doesn’t seem fair to me.”

That show was canceled a few weeks before the start of the war, and putting him in a group with so many others whose criticism of the war ended their job.

====

Over 200 NATO Warplanes Pounding Libya, More To Come

english.ruvr.ru/2011/04/04/48403165.html

Voice of Russia

April 3, 2011

Coalition air power in Libya to grow – NATO

The western-led coalition forces have flown 545 sorties striking 218 targets since NATO assumed command of Operation Unified Protector on March 31, NATO military command said in a statement Sunday.

There are more than 200 warplanes taking part in the operation and their number will grow in the coming few days.

====

Libya: NATO Conducts 547 Sorties, 218 Air Strikes In Three Days

en.trend.az/regions/met/arabicr/1855051.html

Deutsche Presse-Agentur

April 3, 2011

70 air raids over Libya carried out on Saturday, NATO says

NATO conducted 70 air raids over Libya on Saturday, the Western military alliance said Sunday, in its daily report of its previous day’s activities, dpa reported.

On April 2, jet fighters took off 184 times, and performed 70 “strike sorties,” the alliance said. On Thursday and Friday the daily “strike sorties” had numbered 74.

NATO explained that strike sorties “are intended to identify and engage appropriate targets, but do not necessarily deploy munitions each time.”

Since Thursday, a total of 547 sorties and 218 strike sorties have been conducted.

NATO also said that its ships, which are enforcing a naval arms embargo on Libya, hailed four vessels on Saturday “to determine destination and cargo. One boarding was required.”

A total of 34 vessels have been hailed since naval patrols in the central Mediterranean started on March 23, the alliance said.

====

Libyan War: 205 Aircraft In 363 Missions Since NATO Took Over

www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=16113368&PageNum=0

Itar-Tass

April 3, 2011

Coalition AF make 363 mission sorties in Libya since NATO op start

BRUSSELS: Allied aircraft have made 363 mission sorties and delivered 148 air strikes since the transfer of the entire operation in Libya (March 31) to NATO command, the command of NATO’s Operation Unified Protector said in a statement.

In total, the coalition forces include 205 aircraft from 14 countries, and in the coming days their number will be increased.

As part of the alliance’s operation to ensure an embargo on arms supply to Libya, 21 ships are patrolling the coastal waters of this country.

According to NATO release, on March 27, NATO Allies decided to take on the whole military operation in Libya under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.

NATO will implement all military aspects of the UN Resolution. All NATO Allies are committed to fulfil their obligations under the UN resolution. Since the resolution was passed on March 17, Allies have moved swiftly and decisively to enforce the arms embargo and no-fly zone called for in the resolution…

====

West Will Reap The Whirlwind Over Its Proxy War In Libya

en.huanqiu.com/opinion/editorial/2011-04/640644.html

Global Times

April 2, 2011

Backlash for West’s cocky Libya gamble

The West has hailed the defections of Libya’s foreign minister along with other senior officials as being a body blow to the embattled regime, casting the image of Gaddafi as being abandoned by his allies and more isolated by the day.

However, many Western media are pointing out that the chance for a quick resolution to the Libyan civil war from inside is looking tricky. The departure of his inner clique has painted Gaddafi into a corner, and the window for political negations is fast closing.

On Thursday, Gaddafi once again appealed for a cease-fire but vowed to “fight until the last drop of his blood.” This defiant stance seems to be the only genuine card Gaddafi feels he has left to play.

Fact can often be a far crueler mistress than fiction. Loyalists and rebels, with their polar allegiances to Gaddafi and to the West, have stabbed at each other. When seeing the rebels losing ground, the West took the field, encouraging the rebels to topple the regime.

It is irresponsible for the West to abandon all political solutions but to adopt a life-and-death attitude toward the Libyan people. The West is waging a war by proxy, uncaring about the loss of civilian lives.

Libya has fallen under the influence of political conflict, marching in lockstep to the beat of Western drums. Western media spare no effort to paint Gaddafi as a consummate villain. Treacherous reports, including some barely more than rumors, are reported and spread rapidly. The only place for Gaddafi to flex his muscles is on the battlefield.

Despite being blessed by oil and awash with subsequent riches, the Middle East remains politically entrenched. As a result, its nations lack the experience to deal with drastic social changes. The disturbance in Libya has turned into a war, threatening to do harm to the whole region.

When observing the situation, outsiders usually have a clearer mind than the Libyans themselves. The Allies have sacrificed the interests of local people to secure their share of the loot, both politically and economically.

For example, Robert Kaplan, a senior fellow at the Center for New American Security, wrote in the Wall Street Journal last week that, from the US’ standpoint, the spread of democracy in the Middle East was second to the power struggle between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

One thing is for certain, the street battles seen across Libya are nobody’s first choice. This leads to heightened body counts and prolonged conflict. The West will find out soon: Following such a policy can only result in sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind.

====

Worrying Global Trend: West Exploits Civil Wars To Advance Its Own Interests

en.huanqiu.com/opinion/commentary/2011-04/640345.html

Global Times

April 1, 2011

Interference in civil wars remains worrying global trend

By Han Xudong*

-Once a civil war happened, the UN would take immediate peacekeeping actions to protect civilians and soften the impact of the conflict. Some big powers might take the advantage of the mandate granted by the UN, if there were any, to fulfill their own national interests. It provided both a chance and a beautiful excuse for intervention in their own interests.

The air raids by Western forces on Libya recently have worried some observers that the trend of external intervention in civil wars might continue.

Interference of foreign powers in other countries’ domestic conflicts for their own interests runs the risk of broadening and complicating the civil conflicts.

Similar conflicts occurred during the Cold War, including interference in civil wars, proxy wars, wars between neighbors, and even the direct intervention of the great powers. The Korean War (1950-53) was a typical example.

After the Cold War, the UN started to play a more prominent role. Resolution 794, passed by the UN Security Council in 1992, authorized UN peacekeepers to use force to protect humanitarian aid from warlords during the ongoing Somalian civil war.

This was only the fourth time such a move had been authorized, following the UN mandate in Korea and the deployment of peacekeepers in Cambodia and the former Yugoslavia.

On March 17, UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973 to impose no-fly zone in Lybia, causing the civil war to develop into a battle involving foreign military forces.

The US often makes full use of UN resolutions to launch its armed intervention in other nations’ civil wars.

In Somalia, the US actions went beyond the mandate granted by the UN. The NATO and US-led coalition forces in Afghanistan, established under the UN Resolution 1386 as a peacekeeping force, have gone beyond their original role since 2006. The blessing of the UN greatly alleviated international pressure for its military operations in Afghanistan.

Presently, the scope and scale of the air assault by Western nations on Gaddafi’s forces has been broadened beyond the UN’s original intentions, causing more casualties.

In the past 20 years, there were many cases of external military intervention in civil wars. In 1999, a NATO and US-led coalition force ran air strikes against Serbian forces in the former Yugoslavia, over the disputed and now independent province of Kosovo, where the Serbian army was accused of performing ethnic cleansing against the Muslim Albanian population. In 2008, Russia dispatched armed troops to Georgia to protect the breakaway region of South Ossetia.

After the Cold War, global military confrontation vanished. Civil wars became the dominant model of military conflict.

Once a civil war happened, the UN would take immediate peacekeeping actions to protect civilians and soften the impact of the conflict. Some big powers might take the advantage of the mandate granted by the UN, if there were any, to fulfill their own national interests. It provided both a chance and a beautiful excuse for intervention in their own interests.

The US and some international economic cooperation organizations are building up their shared military forces, further heightening the risk of intervention once a civil war breaks out in one of the member countries.

Recently, the Gulf Cooperation Council sent 1,000 soldiers from Saudi Arabia to Bahrain. Meanwhile, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) also dispatched observers to watch over the cease-fire operation in the border between Cambodia and Thailand, further enlarging ASEAN’s scope by consolidating its defense ability.

There are still some measures we can take to curb the trend of foreign intervention that goes beyond the scope of the mandates granted by the UN.

The UN should establish a crisis prevention entity body to scrutinize enforcement missions and unauthorized actions. We should endeavor to create a global public sense of respecting a nation’s sovereignty so that external interventions to a nation’s civil affairs are under enormous public strain and are deemed as unreasonable.

The most essential approach to prevent foreign intervention is to bolster national cohesion through reform and maintain political stability.

*The author is a professor at the National Defence University

====

NATO Air Strikes Kill At Least 30 Libyan Rebels

english.ruvr.ru/2011/04/03/48381565.html

Voice of Russia

April 3, 2011

NATO air strikes kill 30 rebels in Libya

NATO planes accidentally killed at least 30 rebels during air raids on the city of Brega east of Tripoli and Ajabiya in the west.

17 rebels were killed as a NATO plane opened fire on their convoy in Brega after some of the rebels had fired shots in the air.

The other 13 were killed in Ajabiya.

NATO planes have carried out 363 raids and 148 air strikes since the alliance assumed command of the military operation in Libya on March 31st.

There have been reports of civilian casualties. The Gaddafi regime has accused the coalition of crimes against humanity.

====

Report: U.S., Egypt Training Libyan Rebels

www.monstersandcritics.com/news/middleeast/news/article_1630370.php/Report-US-Egypt-providing-military-training-to-Libya-rebels

Deutsche Presse-Agentur

April 3, 2011

Report: US, Egypt providing military training to Libya rebels

Washington: US and Egyptian special forces are providing military training to rebels in Libya, according to Al Jazeera broadcaster on Saturday.

The report by the Qatar-based broadcaster quoted an unnamed rebel source who described how he had received military training at a clandestine facility in eastern Libya, the stronghold of the rebel forces.

The source told Al Jazeera that rebels received a shipment of Katyusha rockets via Egypt, and that American and Egyptian special forces had come to Libya to instruct in the use of the new state-of-the art missiles.

On Wednesday, The New York Times reported that the CIA and British intelligence had deployed covert operatives into Libya to gather intelligence for military airstrikes and initiate contacts with rebels seeking to oust leader Moamer Gaddafi. The report cited unnamed US and British officials.

US President Barack Obama has said that US ground troops would not be involved in the ongoing military campaign by the international coalition to protect civilians and enforce a no-fly zone under a UN mandate.

But he has not ruled out providing weapons to the rebels, whose identities are still not clear, US officials point out.

NATO formally took command of the international intervention on Wednesday, after the US led the initial 10-day air campaign.

====

Libya: CIA’s Civil War

www.npr.org/2011/04/02/135072664/professor-in-libya-a-civil-war-not-uprising

National Pubic Radio

April 2, 2011

Professor: In Libya, A Civil War, Not Uprising

Every day we hear reports of rebel advances and retreats in Libya — but who, exactly, is behind the fighting? Host Guy Raz speaks to Trinity College International Studies professor Vijay Prashad about the true identity of the Libyan rebels.

-Khalifa Hafter had to flee Chad, and he fled to a very interesting place. He came to Vienna, Virginia…Firstly, it struck me as interesting how quickly he was able to move from Chad to Vienna, Virginia. You know, when one goes to get a visa to enter the United States, all kinds of complications arise if you’ve been in the military of a foreign power. But for some reason, he was able to come quite quickly with his family to Vienna, Virginia. It happens to be only seven miles away from Langley, Virginia, which some people might recognize as the home of the CIA.

– Prof. PRASHAD: So, Khalifa lived in Virginia for about 25 years. In the 1990s, he created an army called the Libyan National Army. They had a post office box in Virginia and they were conducting operations in eastern Libya.

RAZ: These sounds very familiar, Vijay Prashad. The story you tell about Khalifa Hafter sounds very similar to the story about Ahmed Chalabi.

GUY RAZ, host:

Turning now to Libya. It’s been two weeks since NATO launched a campaign of airstrikes against that country. The biggest beneficiaries for now are the anti-Gadhafi rebels. But who’s in charge?

It’s a question we asked Vijay Prashad. He’s a professor of international studies at Trinity College in Hartford.

Professor VIJAY PRASHAD (International Studies, Trinity College): In Benghazi and the eastern part of Libya, you have a group of people who have been in a long-standing rebellion against the western part of Libya. That rebellion dates back to the Ottoman period.

In the eastern part of Libya, you have the most fierce resistance against Italian colonialism when Gadhafi conducted his coup d’etat in 1969 against King Idris I. King Idris is from the eastern part of Libya. And the regime that Gadhafi created largely benefited people of the west.

So the first answer to the question who are the rebels, they are the people of the east and therefore they have risen up against the west.

RAZ: Let’s talk about some of the personalities. Who are the military leaders? Who is organizing groups of fighters? And are they organized?

Prof. PRASHAD: The earliest leader was the interior – former interior minister, General Abdel-Fattah Younis, was the first face of the armed rebellion from Benghazi. Very quickly, he was joined by a mysterious man, a colonel, who had fought quite bravely, it seems, in the war in Chad on behalf of Gadhafi.

And in the 1980s, he had defected away from Gadhafi and joined army that’s a sort of rebel army based in Chad fighting against Gadhafi in the 1980s. His name is Khalifa Hafter. And when the Chadian government changed power, Khalifa Hafter had to flee Chad, and he fled to a very interesting place. He came to Vienna, Virginia.

RAZ: Uh-huh.

Prof. PRASHAD: Yes, Vienna, Virginia is an odd place. Firstly, it struck me as interesting how quickly he was able to move from Chad to Vienna, Virginia. You know, when one goes to get a visa to enter the United States, all kinds of complications arise if you’ve been in the military of a foreign power. But for some reason, he was able to come quite quickly with his family to Vienna, Virginia. It happens to be only seven miles away from Langley, Virginia, which some people might recognize as the home of the CIA.

RAZ: CIA, yes.

Prof. PRASHAD: Yeah, right.

(Soundbite of laughter)

Prof. PRASHAD: So, Khalifa lived in Virginia for about 25 years. In the 1990s, he created an army called the Libyan National Army. They had a post office box in Virginia and they were conducting operations in eastern Libya.

RAZ: These sounds very familiar, Vijay Prashad. The story you tell about Khalifa Hafter sounds very similar to the story about Ahmed Chalabi.

Prof. PRASHAD: Yes, it’s a similar story. After all, Chalabi also had an army (unintelligible) a post office box somewhere in London. Various attempts inside Iraq to conduct insurgency and was (unintelligible). So, yes, indeed, the parallels are quite striking.

RAZ: Tell me about the man who we’ve been hearing about a little bit lately. His name is Mahmoud Jibril. Apparently, he was one of the Libyan representatives who met with foreign ministers in London last week. Who is he? What does he represent? Where does he come from?

Prof. PRASHAD: Mahmoud Jibril is an interesting person, who was very close to the inner circle of Gadhafi’s regime right through the 1990s. And his role was quite simple. Gadhafi had wanted to somehow make peace with Europe and the United States. He was very eager to solve the problem of Lockerbie, the bombing in Lockerbie. He wanted to start privatizing some of his economy, bringing oil to the markets without too much pressure from foreign governments, et cetera.

Mahmoud Jibril was the perfect person to run interference here. He had a Ph.D. from the University of Pittsburgh in strategic planning, a very able person who was in charge of the National Economic Development Board. He was a regular visitor in the U.S. embassy in Tripoli. Of course, we know all this, thanks to the WikiLeaks (unintelligible). He met the ambassador several times. So Jibril is, in a sense, the person who is abroad settling the political table while others are doing the military work in Benghazi.

RAZ: Are these the people who presumably lead Libya, run the government if Gadhafi is ousted?

Prof. PRASHAD: It is very likely that this is the case. In other words, in other uprisings where there’s not so much (unintelligible) to foreign support. All kinds of different people might come in and become, you know, the leadership.

In Libya, on the other hand, because there is the foreign intervention, military assistance, this section has, in a sense, usurped the energy of the eastern rebellion.

There is no Tahrir Square in Libya. There is no Google executive among them. This is an old-fashioned civil war, and here, the outcome is going to be quite different and less as it were inspiring than what one saw in Tunis and Cairo.

RAZ: That’s Vijay Prashad. He’s a professor of international studies at Trinity College and specialist on Libya.

Vijay Prashad, thank you so much.

Prof. PRASHAD: Thank you.

RAZ: You’re listening to ALL THINGS CONSIDERED from NPR News.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.