West Asia News and Discussions

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 18 Mar 2011 09:37

Frankly, I do not understand the anti-Gadhafi sentiments on this forum. I support his war and hope he wins. An independant Libyan dictator is any day better than a western stooge Libyan dictator for the country. This insurrection is not Libyan, it is Anglo-American (with a joker called Sarkozy thrown in). Hence, the so called 'rebels' are fighting an imperialistic war, not a war for democracy.

---------
If the two arab countries mentioned in Debka report are stupid enough to fight along side the westerners, they will have a real revolution in their own countries

If the west is stupid enough to involve them, it can start a regional conflagaration, if not a World War. Remember that the first two world wars also started as miscalculations by british foriegn services. There was a good chance that they could be prevented if the british had only kept their noses out of affairs that did not concern them.

If a regional conflagaration starts in the most important energy producing region in the world, kiss your economy goodbye - and this goes for every economy in the world. We have had enough of the Anglo saxon neanderthals starting unwanted wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 18 Mar 2011 09:57

Gaddafi is not an Islamists...what is the need of removing him from Libya?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Mar 2011 10:03

gadhafi may not be al-qaeda but has close relation to Pak. the Pakis purchased around 70 old Mirage-III airframes for spare parts iirc and he facilitated the Khan network to obtain uranium from chad or niger per reports.

anytime friends of the pakis descend into chaos is another stream of revenue and support that weakens - though with Pakis firmly a chinese geisha now they do not need libya anymore.

also the "west" embroiled in these wars is less attention they can pay to pump up the steroidal rat in our yard. or fish in troubled waters in our pond. we sit out and quietly build up capabilities and the economy. they chase rebels across the sands of the sahara.

starting these fires through proxies is how the lizard keeps enemies off balance as it creeps forward into the CAR, caspian basin and persia.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 18 Mar 2011 10:10

Singha wrote: a showpiece B52 strike on the leading libyan army brigade on the benghazi road would give them pause and maybe destroy most of fixed assets

Methinks, Ombaba will do a repeat of what Bill Clinton did to the Sudanese chemical factory in 1997, i.e. launch a few Tomahawks from the USS Providence.

Geopolitically, Quadhafi is traditionally against Nigeria's rise, however he has friends in Sub-Saharan Africa who want to see him remain on the throne. Chad and Mauritania are prominent ones.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Mar 2011 10:21

Xinhua:-

The Libyan government, with confidence boosted by its military victories, has begun to consider its oil policies when situation stabilizes.

Deputy Foreign Minister Kaim said Wednesday that Libya may adopt preferential policies when renewing its oil contracts with other countries, and the new measures will be reflected in Libya's cooperation with other countries in oil-related fields.

He said Libya will continue to respect the existing contracts with oil companies of the West, adding that the country's national oil company still maintains contact with some partners of the West, including several U.S. companies.

Kaim expressed the hope that the safety of all people will be secured in Libya and those who left the country temporarily due to the current turbulence will return to the country to resume work soon. But Kaim admitted that the current crisis will inevitably affect its cooperation with some Western oil companies.

Earlier, the head of Libya's National Oil Corporation, Shukri Ghanem,said all oil fields in the country had remained intact, though some armed groups looted oil companies' production bases and warehouses in costal cities such as Ras Lanuf and Brega, taking cars, heavy machinery and other supplies, and interrupting the facilities' normal operation.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 18 Mar 2011 11:45

USUK alliance wants to remove Gadhafi because a few years ago, huge reserves of oil were discovered in Libya.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 18 Mar 2011 11:52

Can we focus on what India's interest is rather than on being reflexively anti-American?

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 18 Mar 2011 12:03

Isn't it the right time to have a presence of formal air and naval assets in Oman? How feasable is it to integrate Oman military into the Indian army? nway the princes are from Mayo....will GOI stand upto it?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Mar 2011 12:03

logistics of libyan no-fly zone
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011 ... 167743.htm

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 18 Mar 2011 12:19

Arjun wrote:Can we focus on what India's interest is rather than on being reflexively anti-American?

I think Abhishek has a point. We need to understand the motive behind this Libyan war. I don't see anybody asking the question how could facebook/twitter rebels hold so long against Gaddafi's brutal army.

At present I like GoI's position. Neither support nor oppose.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 18 Mar 2011 13:08

shyam wrote:I think Abhishek has a point. We need to understand the motive behind this Libyan war. I don't see anybody asking the question how could facebook/twitter rebels hold so long against Gaddafi's brutal army.

At present I like GoI's position. Neither support nor oppose.

What is the US game out here? - that's a very valid question to ask in trying to understand the situation. But I would not use it to come to a decision regarding what India should do - in the sense of if Anglo-Americans want something India should be doing the opposite. Maybe India needs to be neutral or take one side - but that needs to be driven by Indian interests. Gaddafi's support for Pakistan is a BIG factor for India.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 18 Mar 2011 13:24

the US is scrambling to reposition itself after having been forced to choose democracy over despotism. china is ofcourse doing the opposite. underlying rationale in both cases is oil

interesting to note that all the BRIC's abstained in the UNSC vote

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 Mar 2011 14:12

The King Abdullah of KSA will announce a new government today.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 18 Mar 2011 14:37

I am not being reflexively anti-American (and do not use labels, or I will label you are reflexively anti-anti-American

)

There are two points in this Libyan issue from India's POV, IMO:
1. Ethical issue - does a foreign imperial power have the right to interfere in the name of democracy in another country, which is both culturally and financially at a different plane?
2. Strategic independence: If global energy resources are concentrated in the hands of a single power, it will hurt both our financial and security independence.

From both point of views, India should support Gadhafi. The west anyway plays a two faced game in the name of democracy, supporting dictators when it suits them, and removing them to claim to be champions of democracy.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 18 Mar 2011 16:21

Ok, guess you are anti-intervensionist - which is fair. Based on the UN vote - all the BRICs seem to be in that camp.

I don't have the answers with me, only the questions. But another issue to consider under the ethical plane is also whether India would land up being on the wrong side of history? How does the Arab street view this - it seems that in this case Arab public opinion is actually for intervention. By being together with the other BRICs, India is following a somewhat safe and conservative strategy for the time being - but there may be difficult choices ahead. As regards energy independence etc - though that part is secondary, it can be negotiated to India's advantage - but all depends on which side prevails finally.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 18 Mar 2011 17:11

^^^ Libya vote is a bad precedent. There are plenty of nations, India included, with exploitable fault-lines, and such logic could easily be applied to India, with the support of our domestic Arundhatis.

This goes to show that Gaddhafi was wrong to give up his nuke option. A timely reminder for the naive that the only law is that which comes from the barrel of a gun.

Anyway, Gaddhafi's only hope was China. Russia has very little appetite these days to go against the "Anglo-Americans" (as some people call them). With the Chinese abstaining not much India can do, other than drawing the right conclusions and keeping the powder dry.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 Mar 2011 17:19

Can someone please post the official reasoning of the MEA to abstain from voting#? Its on MEA website. thanks

Rana · Post by **Rana** » 18 Mar 2011 17:26

The abstaining and wimping out in the Security Council is a bad day for India and its hopes for getting a permanent chair. We have again gone with Russia and China and against the Libyan people. Gaddafi is no saint. Are we going to do the same when it comes to Saudi Arabia (if ever it does)? Is there a fear of Muslim backlash in India? I hope our Muslims know better than that.

We can put on hold our hopes for a veto power for a few decades more. What a waste! And for Gaddafi?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Mar 2011 18:05

Gaddafi condmened India's role in "Kashmir" some time ago. Why does Gaddafi suddenly become someone to be protected by India? If "national interest" should reign supreme, no ethics/values should reign supreme, then why should not that statement from Gaddafi be taken as an indication for his unreliability where Indian interests are concerned?

Just as US or UK have in the past made noises in favour of the Islamists in J&K - thereby proved their unreliability where Indian interests are concerned, Gaddafi fo Libya proved it also. Where the difference is - that USA and UK are still not weak enough or got themselves into such a bind as yet, where India can choose not to defend it with advantage. But as and when such a situation arises - these two should also be helped along on their way to elimination.

This is the chance for Gaddafi in Libya now. That is what should have led to supporting the "intervention" from Indian side. I had also suggested that all these supports should be made conditional - to the entire Arab world uprsings - that India is in favour of modernizing democratic demands wherever they arise. India does not support uprisings or revolts that are aimed at revival of retrogressive ideologies that in essence go against modern principle sof humanitarian framework. This is a perfectly logical standpoint to take. This implies clearly, that AQ or MB inspired or role in any uprisings will not be supported, whereas if a genuine modernizing movement comes up - India will support it. This means J&K separatist uprisings are not supported because they are aimed at establishing an exclusive Sharia ruled Islamist enclave that targets Hindus and Buddhists for elimination. This means Palestinian uprising by Hamas are not supported becauae they aim similarly at establishing an Islamist enclave aimed at elimination of Jews.

It meant that India should have gone further ahead and specified its conditions to the opposition in Libya for Indian support. That they have to commit to forming a modernizing Constitution and give specific systemic framework for implementation of modern humanitarian principles as envisioned within the UN charter. That there has to be institutional guarantees and structures immediatley imposed within the opposition with UN or external participation to ensure compliance.

GOI of course will fall shy of declaring that India will not support and in fact oppose if AQ or MB type elements are seen in Libya, or if sharia and Islmist law and state is sought to be imposed by the opposition.

From realpolitik views, supporting Gaddafi is stupid. This is an outgoing regime for it has severely reduced the intellectual, educational training or building up - with capabilitie sto face international politics - of its general population. It has done so to ensure its dynastic grip. That weakens both the dynasty as well as the nation. The future will lie with the people no matter where they turn.

Congress rejects dynasties and chooses "popular feelings" only if the dynasty is "Hindu" as in Nepal. It is most protective of dynasties if they come from the non-Hindu, it appears! Best if such dynasties have Islamic or Christian roots or affiliations or components!

AKalam · Post by **AKalam** » 18 Mar 2011 18:19

ramana wrote:Akalam good insights. Arab sheikhs left to themselves are not too bad but when they have mullas and money they get nasty.

I think Israel will be come more Asian and less European in outlook. And that has its tectonic effects on Europe and US.

I agree Turki-TSP-PRC nexus is shaping up.

I dont share your view of Iran but could be due to my lack of seeing. Make me understand.

I think Iran is on its 500 year change cycle.

Thanks ramana ji.

Turkey-Pak-PRC axis: Turkey's move in this direction has been very recent. IMO it is an opportunistic and tactical move, not a strategic direction. This will change as soon as situation on the ground changes.

Iran is of course ripe for change like you said, Mullahcracy I believe will be out in about 5-10 years, when there is enough facebook and twitter generation conversion among young recruit in Armed forces including the Basij. The Wind of change in the region is contagious. As soon as this change brings a tipping point, Iran will be out of its current pariah status and hence its need to have any kind of axis with PRC.

I do not want to predict much about Pakistan Army as there are far more knowledgeable brains in BRF to do that, but my hope is that it can be neutered in stages with democratization of Pakistan polity, catching flu from the democratic contagion in West Asia. When Pakistan's foreign policy direction is finally broken free of Pakistan Army control, politicians may be more open towards a more pragmatic approach, calibrating its relations with both PRC and India with more nuance.

The role of Armed forces seems to be the key, as long as the Armed forces are in the driving seat, in collaboration with some element such as Mullah's of Iran, a pseudo democratic facade in Pakistan or a CPC in China, then they seem to have a need to create some kind of bogeyman to incite the public and thus divert attention from lack of economic progress and social justice. For Iran it is the US/West, Israel and Sunni Arabs, for Pakistan it is big bad India and for PRC it is anyone who is a threat to their rise to great power status riding on the 10% gdp growth per year.

Turkey's polity has already grown out of Armed forces control with AKP's rise. Muslim majority countries that break this cycle I believe will follow more or less Turkey's path to development with pragmatic economic opportunism with its accompanying lack of strategic dogma or the need to have any bogeyman, while politicians keep using Islamic populism to consolidate their position among a pious voting public. Hasina led AL in Bangladesh may face some tough times ahead if they cannot deliver good performance in the economic front, considering this trend.

The toughest nut to crack will be the CPC-PLA combine. My simple solution for any regime that does not pass the smell test of true democracy and secured minority rights is to throw out that entity from WTO, no matter how big or small. The US engaged PRC to bring down the Soviet Union, but as soon as Soviet Union fell, it should have dropped this policy of engagement and given its economic goodies such as market access exclusively to more democratic countries in Asia and world wide. The US/West lost that opportunity out of sheer incompetence of strategic calculations and of course subversion of the billionaire club and the Wall street IMHO. Today it is far more difficult to use that screw driver to tighten the screw on PRC by the West alone, but if there is a world wide consensus among democratic countries, it may still be possible.

Large well fed and well educated civil societies in Burma and Noko are non existent, so their changes will probably come only after the fall of CPC-PLA combine or with some outside intervention and help.

As for UNSC vote on no-fly-zone over Libya, a veto would automatically made the country the enemy of all Muslims and the countries that abstained also lost some points with Muslim public opinion and most definitely with the Arab street.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 18 Mar 2011 19:06

Recent developments in west-asia reminds me of Ramanaji's post on "Hanuman syndrome of India"

Since the beginning of the times, Bharat is the samrat (emperor) of extended Asia {Note the regions Sugriva mentions when he sends vanarasena in search of Sita; and the kings who came to Dharmaraja's rajasuya yajna and accepted Dharmaraja as their emperor}. Kingdoms beyond west asia were satraps of Bharat till middle ages. Ramanaji mentions Turkey king behaving like a satrap to Shajahan.

An emperor can have satraps far and wide and it has nothing to do with local culture and ideology.

Other nations have the historical memory of Bharat as a lion. Unfortunately due to western education Bharat forgot its identity and thinks it is a mouse. Present day Bharat thinks and acts like a mouse. But the other side sees a lion behaving like a mouse and confuses it as some kutila (dishonest/crooked) strategy.

There is no solution to this until Bharat becomes self aware and behaves like the natural leader of the pack. Bharat's misfortunes is that it has a lion as the leader for namesake only.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 18 Mar 2011 19:32

apparently ceasefire declared in libya

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 Mar 2011 20:16

Basically the French have drawn up a plan. They'll neutralise all aircraft that is targeting the rebels. - 20 in fighter planes in all are in working condition. Mig-21, 23 and Sukhoi 22s. He's got 40 helicopter fleet. Which will be harder to take out. Chinooks, Mi 8 , Mi 18 attack fleet.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 18 Mar 2011 20:24

libyan airspace is a short enough hop from bases in southern france and corsica
plus they have enough refuelers and awacs
very much backyard operations

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 18 Mar 2011 20:31

^^^ Do they have any arrangements with the Algerians in place, as part of their colonial.....er bilateral relationship? Algiers would be happy to help just the French alone with airbases while the Brits take other means.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 18 Mar 2011 20:39

i believe spain and qatar have also offered aircraft...

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 Mar 2011 20:41

Of the 4 Mirages, 2 are in Malta when the pilots defected. French intel have spotted Galeb trainer aircraft firing Air to Surface rockets. No details on logistics and where strikes will take place from. US will be doing their things from Egypt as a sound of things.

Gaddafi military is running low of petrol etc as it normally gets this from Italy. Italy has stopped fuel exports to Libya.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Mar 2011 21:11

Misurata has been under attack since last night, even after Gaddafi's declaration of ceasefire. He is definitely pushing for as much as possible to increase his bargaining position.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Mar 2011 21:16

Yemeni casualties at university square is claimed to have risen to 40. Yemeni sector of this "war" seems to be pushed into escalation too. Not sure if the KSA moves to hold back its own - like the latest declaration of billions more in gifts - and a threat to unleash the security forces, within KSA - will hold Yemen.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Mar 2011 21:22

It is a blunder for India not to show support in some sense to the moves against authoritarian regimes in the Muslim world. While at the same time, India must make it clear that it is not in favour of a revivalism of Islamism based theocracies or anti-modernization moves. Where are those Indians that made the journey to show solidarity with Palestine and carried "relief"? Are they not going to make a similar journey in favour of the Muslims fighting for "democracy" and "freedom" from "oppression" from Muslim rulers? Or is that not a good conflict situation to highlight for Indian supporters of democracy and freedom in ME - which only holds good if such moves are made against Jewish "rulers"!

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Mar 2011 21:25

^^ How is it that IMs are completely quiet on all these issues where Muslim rulers are brutally crushing their own?

Are the massive rallies and stone throwing after Friday sermons ( when Saddam was hanged or Taslima was in India) only restricted only when Kufr kill the faithful but not when its a blue on blue?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Mar 2011 21:26

Well they didn't vote no right.By abstaining they allowed the NFZ at same time showed that they are not too keen on uncertain regime changes. Also showed they are not a poodle in UNSC as folks hoped.

We need to get a readout from KP Nayar or a wikipee!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Mar 2011 21:28

Moves likely to take out Gaddafi's core, tonight. Land forces are scattered so they will need to show surface to air retaliation or attacks. If Gaddafi holds back on direct use of airpower and manages to pound with artillery - the resolution limits the hands of the "allied" forces somewhat. So they will need to provoke Gaddafi a bit.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 18 Mar 2011 21:29

^^^ IMO India is under no obligation to show support or otherwise to anybody. We are boor SDRE country only. We can and should play both sides just like everybody else has been doing all this time.

How is it that IMs are completely quiet on all these issues where Muslim rulers are brutally crushing their own?

Who says they are quite. Just because dilli media is not showing it doesn't mean nothing is happening.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Mar 2011 21:32

brihaspati wrote:Moves likely to take out Gaddafi's core, tonight. Land forces are scattered so they will need to show surface to air retaliation or attacks. If Gaddafi holds back on direct use of airpower and manages to pound with artillery - the resolution limits the hands of the "allied" forces somewhat. So they will need to provoke Gaddafi a bit.

The Gaddafi ceasefire is for the reason that the UN resolution allows use of force if civilians are harmed.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 18 Mar 2011 21:36

It is the foreign intervention part of the UN resolution even without boots on the ground, that spooks India. The text of the speech of Indian rep at UN, clearly mentions that India opposes use of force against civilians.

Gaddhafi must go even from an Indian pov, but using inside forces alone.

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Mar 2011 21:37

Who says they are quite. Just because dilli media is not showing it doesn't mean nothing is happening.

So, which way is the wind blowing in the IM community then?

I cant recall seeing any giant "solidarity" rallies recently anywhere in Desh on this issue..

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 18 Mar 2011 21:38

the rebels will need stiffening up to mount the counter offensive
gaddafi has to 'run out' of spares for his heavy kit
acts of sabotage will take place
strange helicopter flights will take place
men in black chaddis will be apprehended
in a few years movies will be made...

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 18 Mar 2011 21:38

ramana ji,
India after all failed to read the trend of mass politics in the zone. That is the blunder. Even if you are uncertain of the changes in regime, there comes a time when you have to choose sides. From realpolitic or short term views side as well as statesmanship or the long term views side. Indian representative on UN bodies give quite long and elaborate reasons and speeches to explain their position. They could have voted in favour of the no-fly zone, and moved for certain amendments, while specifically highlighting what they are against as far as Libya is concerned and where India differs from others who support the resolution.

These international arena moves are also about sending out certain messages to the world. India could have managed to show its non-poodle nature (which will be difficult anyway given the current wikipee controversy about cash-for-votes-for-nuknergy) by officially differing from objectives and put the resolution as a standard political compromise between maximal and minimal objectives. India uses that all the time - isnt it?

Actually India is under obligation not to support anybody, neither USA blindly nor Gaddafi likes blindly.

Ceasefire is not really being implemented, by the way. He is just using land forces and artillery.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 18 Mar 2011 21:54

Indian govt decision to abstain is a mistake. Their overseas policies are misguided!
Now the question is how Gaddafi should leave the office and give space for him to escape within or outside his country so that his people can decide their fate.

In order to achieve the second part of the above statement (which is an end) Gaddafi and family should be given a let out way so that no more blood shed happens rather a smooth transition of power happens. His family can be spared from what he had done. Some part of his money can be given to his family. After he runs away the evidences for massmuder should be studied and brought out.

Gaddafi calls ceasefire after PM orders UK forces in
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... &ATTR=News