23 August 2011 — Stop NATO
- U.S. Flies 27% Of NATO’s 20,000 Air Missions Over Libya
- Libya: West Engaged In Information Warfare
- Egyptian Military Junta Recognizes Libyan Rebels
- CFR Chief Haass: NATO Boots On The Ground In Libya
- Israeli Daily Celebrates NATO ‘Victory’ Over Libya
- NATO Intervention In Syria May Lead To Wider War
U.S. Flies 27% Of NATO’s 20,000 Air Missions Over Libya
Agence France-Presse
August 22, 2011
US flies a quarter of all NATO sorties in Libya
WASHINGTON: The US military carried out 5,316 flights in Libya since the allied ‘Operation Unified Protector’ began, comprising 27 percent of all NATO missions, the Pentagon said Monday.
The United States, which initially led the air campaign before handing over the lead to NATO, played a support role for the alliance since April 1, mainly providing refueling tankers and surveillance aircraft.
Of 19,877 NATO sorties, US aircraft have carried 5,316 flights so far, with close to 400 of the sorties in the past 12 days, according to figures released by the Pentagon.
US planes carried out 1,210 strike missions, including 101 strike sorties by Predator drones, with 262 bombs or missiles launched, it said. Unmanned US aircraft in the campaign included a total of four Predators, Firescout helicopters and at least one Global Hawk, a large surveillance jet.
…
As of August 19, the United States sold NATO allies and partners about $221.9 million worth of ammunition, repair parts, fuel, and technical assistance.
…
====
Libya: West Engaged In Information Warfare
http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/08/23/55026110.html
Voice of Russia
August 23, 2011
West engaged in information warfare
One son of Muammar Gaddafi, Seif el-Islam said that the West is engaged in an information war against Libya, to sow chaos there.
He refuted the evidence that Tripoli is under rebel control. His words were confirmed by British broadcaster BBC.
According to information from its journalists, the rebels handed over the positions they had and have already left the Libyan capital.
Earlier, the opposition reported that three of Gaddafi’s sons had been arrested, including Saif al-Islam.
However, he met with Western reporters on Monday night in Tripoli, proving that is he is free.
He said that Colonel Gaddaffi is alive and well and at his residence in the Libyan capital.
====
Egyptian Military Junta Recognizes Libyan Rebels
http://en.trend.az/regions/met/arabicr/1921630.html
Trend News Agency
August 23, 2011
Egypt recognizes Libyan opposition goverment
Mohammed Kamel Amr made the announcement in Cairo on Monday during a joint press conference with Abdel Moneim al-Honi, the TNC envoy to Egypt and the Arab League, who defected from Muammar Gaddafi’s camp in early March, PressTV reported.
‘It pleases me at this historical occasion to announce that Egypt recognizes the new regime in Libya and the National Transitional Council that represents it,’ AFP quoted Amr as saying.
…
====
CFR Chief Haass: NATO Boots On The Ground In Libya
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/559804f8-cc7f-11e0-b923-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1VpFrzmHO
Financial Times
August 23, 2011
Libya now needs boots on the ground
By Richard Haass
…
The rebels – in effect a disparate mix (‘coalition’ suggests something more structured than is the case) of individuals and groups, from former regime loyalists to liberal secularists to Islamists – have little in common beyond their opposition to the continued rule of the first family. Now that this goal is about to be realised, their disagreements could take centre stage.
…
The 7,000 sorties flown by Nato aircraft played a central role in the rebel victory. The ‘humanitarian’ intervention introduced to save lives believed to be threatened was, in fact, a political intervention introduced to bring about regime change. Now Nato has to deal with its own success.
International assistance, probably including an international force, is likely to be needed for some time to help restore and maintain order…President Barack Obama may need to reconsider his assertion that there would not be any American boots on the ground; leadership is hard to assert without a presence.
…
It is up to Nato, the European Union and the UN, working with the Libyan opposition, the African Union and the Arab League, to put together a response to the new Libyan reality…
Please respect FT.com’s ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights or use this link to reference the article – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/559804f8-cc7f-11e0-b923-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1VpGp3lMT
The author is president of the Council on Foreign Relations and author of War of Necessity, War of Choice: A Memoir of Two Iraq Wars
====
Israeli Daily Celebrates NATO ‘Victory’ Over Libya
Ha’aretz
August 23, 2011
Gadhafi’s fall: A victory for NATO, but not for Obama
By Anshel Pfeffer
Libya might yet descend into tribal anarchy and civil war as Iraq and Afghanistan did. But on Sunday, with the rebels’ entry into Tripoli, the European leaders who led NATO’s campaign to aid them ? French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron ? could allow themselves a few moments of satisfaction.
Five months after it began helping the rebels, NATO has tipped the scales in their favor. The many skeptics said the West could never unseat Muammar Gadhafi’s regime by air strikes alone, that the strikes hit too many civilians, that this was a waste of military resources.
Two months ago, it seemed as if Europe had lost patience. The rebels were treading water, and calls for stopping the air strikes grew. But in reality, NATO was quietly revamping its mission. It tightened operational coordination with the rebels and gave them arms, equipment, military advisers and trainers. It also posted spotters who spoke both Arabic and English among the rebels…The spotters were trained to identify enemy targets and relay real-time information to NATO aircraft, guiding the bombs to the most important targets.
Over the last month, NATO planes flew almost 20,000 sorties over Libya and conducted 7,500 air strikes that broke the regime’s resistance. Speed was essential: Next month, NATO was slated to discuss a third extension of the mission, while the UN General Assembly…was planning to assail NATO for exceeding its UN mandate of creating a no-fly zone and protecting civilians.
The mandate definitely didn’t include close aerial support of the rebel forces. But NATO went ahead anyway…
Now, his [Obama’s] administration will have to coordinate a policy on Syria ? once again belatedly. In Syria’s case, the main players are Assad’s patron in Tehran, which will do whatever it can to preserve his regime, and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who is now backing the opposition.
Syrian opposition leaders met in Istanbul yesterday to plan for the day after Assad’s fall. They know who’s in charge ? and he isn’t in Washington.
====
NATO Intervention In Syria May Lead To Wider War
The News American
August 23, 2011
Potential Syria Intervention May Lead to Wider War
Written by Alex Newman
Numerous sources report that NATO is already plotting an invasion as foreign powers covertly arm Syrian rebels. And some analysts believe military intervention against Damascus would merely serve as a prelude to an attack on Iran.
…
But amid widespread international condemnation of Assad, the Obama administration and various American officials have emerged as among the most vocal critics so far. President Obama even called for Assad to step down and leave Syria earlier this month. And the State Department has been busy building international support for its anti-Assad campaign.
‘The United States will continue to work with our partners to turn this growing consensus into increased pressure and isolation for the Assad regime,’ U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a recent press conference, citing European and Middle Eastern governments that had also condemned the Syrian government. ‘President Assad has lost the legitimacy to lead, and it is clear that Syria would be better off without him.’
…
Among the biggest public advocates of military intervention have been American legislators. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), for example, suggested a UN-backed ‘humanitarian’ war similar to the NATO campaign in Libya might be a suitable option.
‘If it made sense to protect the Libyan people against Kaddafi, and it did because they were going to get slaughtered if we hadn’t sent NATO in when he was on the outskirts of Benghazi, the question for the world [is], have we gotten to that point in Syria,’ he told CBS in mid-June. ‘We may not be there yet, but we are getting very close.’
Tensions have escalated significantly since then.
A sought-after UN resolution demanding international ‘humanitarian’ intervention through military force has failed to materialize so far. But the Russian government’s envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, said earlier this month that NATO was already planning a military campaign to overthrow Assad, with the eventual goal of taking down the government of Iran as well.
‘The noose around Iran is tightening,’ he was quoted as saying by Russian state news agency RIA Novosti. ‘Military planning against Iran is underway. And we are certainly concerned about an escalation of a large-scale war in this huge region.’
Citing the potential for devastating international consequences from more war and the lessons learned from Libya, Rogozin said the Russian government would continue to oppose any UN resolutions calling for military intervention. But according to Western officials cited in news reports, blueprints for a NATO attack on Syria have already been drafted.
…
While the uprising has generally been portrayed in establishment media outlets as a peaceful demonstration being brutally suppressed by a power-hungry dictator, the true situation is obviously not that simple. And when protests began in March of this year, news reports showed that there was indeed another side to the story.
According to Israel National News, at least seven police officers were killed by anti-government forces during the early days of the original protests. Rebels also set ablaze the ruling Baath Party headquarters and a local court.
…
‘Syrians want change,’ former British intelligence MI6 officer Alastair Crooke, who serves a high-level EU advisor and runs a non-governmental organization in Lebanon, told the EU Observer online newspaper. ‘But whether Westerners believe it or not, most people in Damascus, in Aleppo, the middle classes, the merchant classes and the [sectarian] minorities believe Assad is the only person who can bring in reforms.’
Crooke said the two things Syrians are most afraid of include civil war and Western military intervention. And he noted that outside forces including foreign Islamists and the U.S. government were largely behind the efforts to bring down the Assad regime — often through deception.
Regardless of what is really going on, however, the geopolitical implications of the situation in Syria are monumental. Analysts have speculated that after ‘regime change’ in Syria, the Islamic dictatorship of Iran will be the next target. And since the Iranian regime maintains close ties with the Russian and Chinese governments, the possibility of a wide-scale war that has been contemplated for years becomes more and more plausible.
The Russian government has also maintained relatively warm links with the Assad regime, emerging as one of its main defenders on the UN Security Council. Russia even sold advanced weaponry to the Syrian government, and it possesses a military base in the country.
So, according to observers, the potential for an expanded conflict certainly exists. And Iran would almost certainly be next on the list.
Retired U.S. General Wesley Clark, who served as the Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO until 2000, made an astonishing claim during a 2007 TV interview that would seem to support such a scenario. Clark said that while serving in the Defense Department in late 2001, he learned of a plan to make war on seven nations including Iraq, Libya, Syria and Somalia — and, eventually, Iran.
American analysts have warned for years about the potential danger of an attack on Iran. But even a military campaign against Syria could lead to massive problems.
‘Any force used on Syria would be a total shot in the dark, a hope the military under attack will turn on the regime,’ cautioned former CIA officer Robert Baer, who served in Syria, as quoted by the Center for Research on Globalization. ‘But when has this ever happened? It didn’t with [late Iraqi leader] Saddam or [Libyan leader] Gaddafi.’
Where the conflict goes from here remains to be seen. Some European governments have recently said a military invasion of Syria was off the table for now. But with the credibility of governments on all sides…increasingly under fire, the truth remains elusive.
The New Dark Age 
Leave a comment