West Asia News and Discussions

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 07 Mar 2011 23:25

^^^^
from kaments ection--

"The Spy who lost his underpants" - starring Will Hague as 'M' ; and Mr.Bean as 007 releasing all over Benghazi
in 2011 )

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 07 Mar 2011 23:27

shyamd ji,

is there any Berber vs Arab angle to what is happening in Libya?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Mar 2011 23:29

Most Berbers are gone over the ages. Only Berber carpet made in factories still there.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 07 Mar 2011 23:35

Saudi 'Day of Rage' protests planned

Protesters in Saudi Arabia planned "Day of Rage" protests Monday, authorities said.
Demonstrations against the government were planned throughout the country to demand an end to the royal family's monopoly over policymaking, Debkafile.com, a military intelligence Web site based in Jerusalem, reported Monday.

Last Tuesday, BBC Arabic reported unrest in Saudi Arabia was growing. After the broadcast, Saudi security and intelligence forces raised their alert to the highest level, perceiving the broadcast as a coded call to opposition groups to try to oust 88-year-old King Abdallah, Debkafile.com reported.
After the BBC broadcast, government officials blocked some Web sites to cut down participation in the demonstrations, the intelligence Web site said. quote]
Saudi Arabia: Protests Reach Eastern Province
YouTube user Arabia Today uploads this video of the demonstration in Qatif, where protesters are chanting: “Our presence is peaceful, our demands are legitimate,” and “We will never forget those being imprisoned”:

The Eastern Revolution has also created a Facebook fan page to trace all of movements.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Mar 2011 00:01

RajeshA, I don't think so but not sure. The largest tribe is Werfala (incidentally, I think it means something similar to Vellala (tamil) or Bellala (kanada) which means son of soil equivalent, I may be wrong) who are across from east to west. You need to keep an eye on them. So far there are some of them coming out in protest, but it doesn't seem like their tribal leader has decided to be anti gaddafi. No moves from them yet.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Mar 2011 00:09

Folks, Air surveillance over Libya has been upgraded to 24/7 by Pentagon. Ground invasion is at the bottom of the list.

NATO are having a daily planning briefing on Libya ahead of NATO secdef's meeting on thursday where they will discuss humanitarian and military options.

GCC meet on protests in abu dhabi just finished, countries are evasive on questions relating to GCC fund. Oman conducted a clean sweeped and re organised ministerial portfolio completely to satisfy protest demands.
Omani minister at press conference says they are going to rely less on foreign labour - suggesting a way out for problem.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Mar 2011 00:48

Press conference in Abu Dhabi just started:
As Usual condemnations on libyan violence and they are against western military invasion.
However, they have just called for UN and Arab league to protect civilians by any means necessary including a No Fly zone! They are calling an emergency arab league summit to discuss Libya. Lots of anti Gaddafi statements.
This will be interesting.

UAE FM says libyan authorities refused aid and refused to distribute it.

Oman & Bahrain aid will be discussed and finalised in Riyadh meeting on Thursday. Looks like there is still no full consensus and modalities probably need to be discussed.

Folks its past 11.30pm in Abu Dhabi and GCC FM's now have a meeting on Yemen. Who knows when that will finish.

Just analysing the comments: so basically the GCC is providing cover via Arab League for arab action over Libya most likely via a no fly zone. This will be interesting. I wonder if Egypt will be roped in for landing rights etc (my bet is they probably will).

Okay something has clicked: mullen just said no fly zone is being carefully looked at but there is no UN authority to use that.
US, UK and france drafting UNSC statement. So no fly zone is looking more and more likely now.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 Mar 2011 01:50

shyamd ji,

It seems after the Saudis saw all those dominoes falling down - Tunisia, Egypt and Bahrain in trouble, it is interesting to see, that the Libyan standoff has allowed the Saudis and other GCC to come back into the game and reestablish their influence.

If this thing does land in the UNSC, the vote of China would also be interesting. If Gaddafi had control over the major towns, then China would certainly have come in open support of him, and tried to wean him away from the West, but now China does not know how to vote - if the vote in favor, they are practically saying it is ok to rise up against the government and to overthrow it! If they vote for Gaddafi, then they will be looked upon in the Arab countries as against freedom of the Arabs from their dictators, and if the anti-Gaddafi forces do overthrow him, China would be losing influence. If they abstain, each party would see it has China having given them no support.

I think, as long as Indians are trapped inside Libya, if it comes to voting in UNSC, India would abstain, and can justify her stand by citing security for her citizens. Once Indians are evacuated, I presume Indians would vote in favor, especially as the Arab League has come out in support of no-fly zone!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Mar 2011 02:14

The KSA/Egypt ets were sleeping at the wheel.

The dominoes started falling with Mushy in TSP getting eased out. Massa started pushing for regime change and started dealing with the powers that run the Islamic states i.e. the armed forces directly and agreed for replacing the dictators with elected leaders. However no one connected the picture as TSP was too egregiously dictatorial and wrapped in the enigma of GOAT. So the picture got cloudy.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Mar 2011 02:23

Quick comments:
GCC are just making noise over Libya, they don't like him and would rather see him gone. I really doubt they will do anything. But lets see. The regimes of these countries will not be under threat, however, I see the KSA regime collapsing or at least facing collapse if there is a violent uprising in the East. Which means the backbone of GCC is under severe strain, naturally others will also collapse if KSA collapses.

Read PRC's moves already, they had strong words about Gaddafi from the beginning and moved PLAN ships from Anti piracy duty to assist evacuation of Chinese nationals and also as a threat. Read into it.

More than PRC I am watching Russia, as it is their interests that are now taking a beating. Libya is a big buyer of Russian equipment, and there is every chance that things will go towards US favour. Also, its Russian equipment that the US/NATO will be up against. Gaddafi already threw India and China a sweetner, said that he'll give all oil contracts to PRC and India and kick out western ones.

Ramana, those are interesting observations. But you have to keep in mind that these armed forces in GCC are very different to North African ones. Their control and command structures are very different.

I am very impressed with some of Debka's coverage on Libya, they are fast in response and have been on the money 85% of the time.

Ramana,RajeshA, Lalmohan et al. To understand whats going on please read this, it summarises my posts over the last few hours:

Obama builds up US-NATO military option for Libya

DEBKAfile Special Report March 7, 2011, 10:25 PM (GMT+02:00)
Tags: Libya military action Obama Qaddafi
US AWACS on extra surveillance over Libya

US President Barack Obama launched a number of diplomatic and military steps Monday. March 7 pointing toward preparation for US and NATO intervention in the Libyan civil war - notwithstanding objections from the Pentagon and US military chiefs. debkafile's intelligence and Washington sources report that the administration was behind the appeal Monday by UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahayan for UN Security Council protection for the Libyan people. The appeal's purpose was to extend the sanctions resolution against Muammar Qaddafi to include military intervention. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov responded instantly that Moscow is against any "foreign intervention" in Libya, indicating a Russian veto would block a new resolution.
In Brussels, NATO sources reported that Awacs surveillance flights over Libya would be extended from 10 to 24 hours a day. Our military sources report that the US Air Force alone is capable of this mission, which would be tantamount to preparations for an aerial operation against pro-Qaddafi forces.
White House spokesman Jay Carney denied that the enforcement of a no-fly zone was planned - only operations against Libyan helicopter gunships and air control towers.
He appeared to be signaling that the Obama administration was weighing different options for disabling the Libyan air force without directly intervening in those zones. That limitation was apparently applied in consideration of the objections of US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Command, Adm. Mike Mullen and US Air Force chiefs to putting a large number of US warplanes in jeopardy. They have warned that Qaddafi has enough up-to-date air force and advanced anti-air missiles to blow US warplanes out of the sky.

Carney added: "The option of providing military assistance to the rebels is on the table."

He was responding to earlier reports from British sources that Washington had asked Saudi Arabia to send weapons to the Libyan rebels. debkafile reports that there was no such request of Riyadh. However, Monday night, the Libyan rebels were reported to have taken delivery of a batch of anti-air missiles. (Remember what I said earlier, cheapest option is to give these kids some stingers and assorted weapons)

For the first time, Washington and Brussels have received certain information partially supporting Muammar Qaddafi's claim that al Qaeda is calling the shots for the Libyan rebellion. If this intelligence is confirmed, Obama may have to back down from his intended military intervention on the side of the anti-Qaddafi insurrection.

It was also rumored in Washington Monday, that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who had strongly objected to US military action in Libya had reconsidered her position and informed the president she was now in favor.

Then please read this. I think this is one of the best articles I have read on the bigger picture. I know its long, but I think its one of the best articles that articulate the US position on all this going on.

From Saigon to Baghdad

March 4, 2011 - 12:25 am - by Michael J. Totten
Share |

Reading Rick Francona’s bio makes me feel like I’ve hardly left my home office. He served as a lieutenant colonel in the US Air Force as an intelligence officer, and he worked with the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the Central Intelligence Agency in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and the Balkans. He flew aerial reconnaissance missions over Laos and Vietnam, worked as a liaison officer to the Iraqi armed forces directorate of military intelligence during the Iran-Iraq War, flew sorties with the Iraqi air force, tried to foment a revolution and a military coup against the government of Saddam Hussein, and led a special operations team on a manhunt against Serbian war criminals in the Balkans. He is fluent in Arabic and Vietnamese and was inducted into the Defense Language Institute Hall of Fame in 2006.

Most US military sources I’ve spoken to are familiar with Iraq and the Persian Gulf but know relatively little about the Levant (the Eastern Mediterranean) and even less about distant North Africa. Francona knows Iraq and the Gulf, and the Levant and the crucial parts of North Africa. I spent several days with him in Israel during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, and recently met up with him again at his home in Oregon where we discussed the wave of revolutions sweeping the Middle East.

Rick Francona at home

The view on a winter morning from Rick Francona's back deck on the Oregon coast

MJT: I am amazed at what’s happening in Libya.

Rick Francona: I must admit that I am also surprised. I thought Qaddafi had tighter security controls in place to prevent this kind of uprising, yet it appears he is being boxed into a small area around Tripoli. With the Tobruk and Benghazi areas out of his control, I wonder if he will be able to retain his position. He doesn’t appear to be reticent about the use of force against his own citizens.

If the media reports are true, that Libyan military and security forces are using helicopters, fighter aircraft, armored vehicles and snipers against the civilian population, the regime will have achieved a new low in its already abysmal human rights record. And Libya is a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

I listened to both Qaddafi’s and his son Saif al-Islam’s speeches in Arabic. The son’s tone was defiant, but it was at least coherent. The father’s nonsensical ramblings showed a mix of a warped sense of history and what I would call narcissism. I am not a psychologist, but it seemed to me that Qaddafi was truly shaken by the thought that he is not thought of as the “hero of the Libyan revolution,” as he sees himself. If he really believes what he said in his speech, he’s in denial. The only thing that might keep him in power is his willingness to slaughter people.

Qaddafi poster, Tripoli, Libya, 2005

At some point, the world must react. I was shocked to hear a State Department statement that the Obama administration was looking at the text of Saif al-Islam’s speech for “indications of commitment to meaningful reforms.” I hope someone at Foggy Bottom loses their job over the thought that we can deal with the likes of Saif al-Islam Qaddafi. There needs to be a change of government in Libya, and we should be assisting however we can. When this is all resolved and there is a new government in Tripoli, the Libyan people hopefully won’t accuse the United States of supporting yet another autocracy in the Middle East.

Looking beyond the savagery that is taking place inside Libya, this uprising has had a more immediate impact in the West than the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, and the demonstrations in Bahrain, Jordan and Yemen. In the long run, though, the changes in Egypt will likely have the greatest effect on the region. Egypt is the cultural center of the Arab world. It sets the tone for much of the political thought in the Middle East. It shares a border with Israel and, along with Jordan, has made peace with the Jewish state.

Libya’s impact was much more immediate and reverberated not only politically, but economically as well. The possibility of interrupted oil flows from Libya has a much more profound impact on the price of crude than the perceived potential shut down of the Suez Canal. I think US oil futures are trading over $100 a barrel; European futures are well above that. As you know, the price of oil affects the prices of almost everything.

As for the claims by a defecting official that Qaddafi personally ordered the attack on Pan Am 103, I don’t buy it for a minute. I have always thought it was an Iranian-sponsored, PFLP-GC -executed operation; the two Libyans were co-opted by Ahmad Jibril’s people and were not operating with Qaddafi’s sanction. If they had been authorized by Qaddafi, there is no chance that they would have been given up for trial. Countries do not offer up their intelligence officers for carrying out orders. If so, no officer would ever undertake these missions again. As I learned in the intelligence business years ago, defectors often tell you what they think you want to hear in hopes of getting favorable consideration. Qaddafi is guilty of a lot of things, but I doubt the Lockerbie bombing is among them.

MJT: I have no opinion on this myself, but you aren’t the only former intelligence source who says this about Qaddafi and Lockerbie. Reza Kahlili, a former CIA agent who worked inside Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, also said Iran’s government is responsible in his book A Time to Betray.

Anyway, I think you’re right that what happens in Egypt will matter more in the long run than what happens in Libya.

Cairo, Egypt, 2005

Rick Francona: Egypt is extremely important not only to us but to the whole area. If there is a major shift in Egypt’s government structure, it could collapse the peace process as we know it. If the Israelis can’t count on a stable southwestern border, they will truly feel surrounded. They’ve got Lebanon to the north which is now basically run by Hezbollah. They’ve got the continuing problem with Syria to the northeast. They look across to Jordan which has a weak government where the Hashemites survive through compromise. And without the Egyptians providing some stability in the region, this could get ugly. And we get tied up with what the Israelis are doing whether we like it or not.

I’m a little concerned with what I see as the American willingness to allow the Muslim Brotherhood to play a greater role in Egypt than maybe they should. They’re going to be involved. There’s no escaping that—it’s just reality—but legitimizing them by saying we want the “non-secular” players in the equation isn’t helping.

Cairo, Egypt

MJT: What do you suppose the Obama administration was thinking when it made that statement?

Rick Francona: I think they had good intentions and were trying to ratchet down a volatile situation where the government in Egypt might have collapsed. I think they were trying to say there are compromise options out there, that if the government talks to the different players it could avoid a total collapse. Maybe it worked. Omar Suleiman said he was willing to make concessions.

But I’m not sanguine about the Brotherhood’s motives. They say what they know we want to hear. They’re planning for the long term. We’re looking to the next election, but they’re looking decades down the road where they might create an Islamic state.

MJT: Do you think they would actually tear up the peace treaty with Israel?

Rick Francona: That would be insane. Stability is a precious commodity in the Middle East. We’ve had thirty years of stability between the Egyptians and the Israelis. It’s the foundation of the peace process. We need to move the Syrian track along and decrease Iran’s influence in Lebanon, but all that is secondary to peace with Egypt. We’ve all heard the adage, “No war without Egypt, no peace without Syria.” If the peace treaty gets scrapped, which is a possibility we have to consider, Israel may have to re-orient its defenses toward Egypt.

But why would the Egyptians want to go to war with Israel? They can’t win.

MJT: I’d like to say they must know that, but the Arab world is rife with delusions about supposed victories against Israel that were actually losses. Surely you’ve seen the ridiculous monument to Egypt’s “victory” against Israel in 1973.

Rick Francona: Yes.

MJT: Have they actually convinced themselves that they won the Yom Kippur War?

Rick Francona: According to the Egyptian account of the war, it was a victory. Hosni Mubarak was part of that process, and Anwar Sadat was a hero of the crossing of the Suez Canal. Of course they neglect what happened next, when the Israelis came within a hundred kilometers of Cairo. Still, it looked like they might win in the beginning of the war, and that gave them a feeling of pride.

Military officers who were there know they lost. They know they were qualitatively and quantitatively outgunned by the Israeli Air Force. They know they were outclassed on the ground. They have to know they can’t win a war.

I also don’t think external players will allow them to have a war, at least not for very long.

MJT: Who do you mean by external players?

Rick Francona: The United States. Maybe the Russians and Europe. This has always been factored into warfare in the Middle East. If you read Sadat’s plan for the 1973 war, and also Hafez al-Assad’s in Syria, you’ll see that they wanted to take as much as they could and as fast as possible and sue for peace. They said, “let’s take what we can and have the UN stop it.”

Today, though, Egypt has nothing to take. Egypt has Egypt. What, do they want Gaza?

MJT: They don’t want Gaza.

Rick Francona: Nobody in their right mind would want Gaza.

Rick Francona stood next to me while I took this picture of Gaza City during Operation Cast Lead in 2009

MJT: The Israelis don’t want it and would be thrilled if Egypt took it back.

Rick Francona: It would be one less thing they’d have to worry about.

I don’t think any serious Egyptian leader would tear up the peace treaty with Israel. It provides them with stability. They may say they’re going to do it.

MJT: I suspect that’s what’s happening.

Rick Francona: The Muslim Brotherhood leaders have to say that to that to their base, but nobody in their right mind would want to have a war with Israel.

MJT: [Laughs.] Sure, but we’re talking about the Middle East here. Not everyone in that part of the world is in their right mind.

Rick Francona: I think the Muslim Brotherhood is somewhat pragmatic. I mean, they know what they want, but they also know they can’t do just anything to get it. They have to be smart. Starting off small might be the first step. They’ll agree to be part of the parliament and probably win 25-30 percent of the seats if there’s a free and fair election. Thirty percent isn’t bad. It’s a good start. Look how far Hezbollah gets in Lebanon with 30 percent. Hezbollah and its allies had 11 seats out of 30 in the cabinet and were able to collapse the government.

MJT: Hezbollah also has guns, though. The Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t, at least not at the moment.

Rick Francona: There were clashes in the streets of Cairo, but with rocks not guns. Just wait until this spreads to Yemen.

Shibam Wadi Hadhramaut, Yemen

MJT: There are more guns than people in Yemen. There are more guns than people in Lebanon, too. I’m amazed the guns don’t come out more often in Lebanon than they do.

Rick Francona: The Lebanese are traumatized by civil war. They don’t want to go there.

MJT: But every family is armed.

Rick Francona: Of course.

MJT: They can all bust out the guns whenever they want.

Rick Francona: It was the same in Iraq. Everyone could have an AK-47 for personal protection. And look at what happened.

MJT: They seem to have serious gun control in Egypt.

Rick Francona: Yes. Gun control in Syria is also very effective.

MJT: You worked at the embassy in Damascus as an intelligence officer, so you know Syria pretty well. Can you imagine an uprising happening there?

Rick Francona: No. The people are so cowed by the regime. They remember what happened in Hama in 1982 [when Hafez al-Assad killed as many as 30,000 people in one weekend alone]. That was a long time ago, but they still remember it, and they still talk about it.

You’ve talked to Syrians. You know what they’re like. They’re afraid to say anything. They believe there’s a pervasive security apparatus waiting to pounce on them, and the reason they believe that is because there’s a pervasive security apparatus waiting to pounce on them. Syria has overlapping security organs that monitor everything. And they’re blatant about it.

They used to follow me around, and it wasn’t the kind of sophisticated surveillance operation that we or the British or the Israelis would mount. They would just lock onto my back bumper and sit there all day. They followed me everywhere I went. They didn’t care that I knew. It was their country and they were going to follow me around.

It was illegal to own a fax machine when I arrived because communication, they believed, is the first step toward an organized resistance. After I was there for about a year there was a notice in the paper saying that the Syrian security service now had enough fax machines to monitor everyone’s faxes, so it was okay to have a machine. So everyone knew that while it was suddenly okay to send a fax, the Syrian government was going to read it.

Our phones were tapped at the embassy.

Bashar al-Assad, Damascus, Syria

MJT: I’m sure they were.

Rick Francona: We had a unit that could create a secure line if we used a key, but if during a call we said, “let’s go secure,” the line would go dead. Obviously the Syrians were listening and didn’t want us to talk privately. They would rather us talk around the subject so they could try to figure out what we were saying.

So, no, I don’t see Syrians taking to the streets. Syria is not Egypt. The regime isn’t benevolent. Assad will maintain his hold on power.

There is quite a bit of support for the regime, though, not because people necessarily like Assad, but because they think the stability he offers is better than the alternative. If you talk to the Christians or to other minorities like the Alawites, and even to some the Sunnis, they’ll say that stability has a quality all its own even if they have to give up their freedom.

MJT: They’re afraid of the Lebanonization or the Iraqification of Syria.

Rick Francona: Yes. And they’re worried about what would take Assad’s place, that it might be an Islamic state. A lot of Syrians don’t want that, so I don’t expect to see a huge groundswell in Syria.

MJT: What about Jordan? Some analysts predict this wave might hit Jordan. And you know that country pretty well, too.

Amman, Jordan, 2006

Rick Francona: I was an advisor to the Jordanian army. And I spent a lot of time there at the embassy with our counterparts in the Jordanian intelligence services, who I think, by the way, are the most professional in the Middle East.

MJT: How are they different from the others?

Rick Francona: Their intelligence services actually work as intelligence services. Most of the intelligence services in the Middle East, excluding the Israelis, exist to provide information that supports regime longevity. Everything is about the maintenance of the regime. The Jordanians actually collect intelligence to advance their foreign policy or to work with us. They have real professional intelligence gatherers. Their internal security services are entirely separate.

When I was in Iraq in the 1980s, the intelligence services also had a security function. They had the power of arrest. The Jordanian intelligence services don’t do anything like that.

MJT: They’re like the CIA then.

Rick Francona: Very much so. And the Jordanian military intelligence is like our DIA. Our relationship with them is strong, and they’re very professional.

But all that said, Jordan is another one of these artificial countries that was created in the aftermath of World War I. It’s interesting to ask the Jordanians how they self-identify. Are they Jordanians? East Bank Palestinians? Bedouins? Members of various tribes? Jordan is an amalgamation of all these different groups. Everyone has different loyalties. Is the social fabric strong enough to keep that country together with a ruling family that was brought in from the outside? They’re not even from Jordan.

MJT: They’re from the Hejaz, the Mecca and Medina area.

Rick Francona: Right. Exactly. The sharif of Mecca was the father of Abdullah, the founder of the country. There are so many forces the king has to play against each other. He likes to keep the Circassians around because he knows they’re not a threat. They’re not going to take over. He also has to placate the Bedouins and the East Bank Palestinians. It’s a real balancing act. The Hashemite family has done a great job over all these years, but they survive by making concessions.

If you talk to people in Jordan you’ll hear a lot of Islamic sentiment. Jordan might have a problem down the road. I don’t see a real problem right away, but there’s a strong undercurrent of fundamentalist Islam.

All the Arab countries facing upheaval right now, with the exception of Libya, are at least nominal US allies. We could end up losing the entire Middle East. Lebanon, as far as I’m concerned, is already gone.

MJT: Yes, me too. It’s finished.

Beirut, Lebanon, from a hot air balloon

Rick Francona: Lebanon is gone. Tunisia will probably be okay. Yemen…who knows?

But back to Egypt. Egypt is the key to everything. If we lose all the others but keep Egypt, we’ll be okay. But if we lose Egypt, it doesn’t matter who else we have.

MJT: If we keep Egypt as an American ally, do you think it’s more likely that we’ll keep the others?

Rick Francona: There will be less incentive for the others to break away. If they see that it works in Egypt, they’ll know they can stick with us.

What happens during the next couple of months will be critical, and I’m not sure there’s a whole lot we can do publicly to affect the outcome. I hope we’re working behind the scenes. I’d like to see less talk coming out of Washington and more diplomacy behind the scenes.

MJT: Okay, so you’re a guy whose entire career was behind the scenes. What would you say to Obama administration officials if they brought you in and asked what kinds of things they should be doing that nobody would know about?

Rick Francona: The key is the Egyptian military, and from what I’m hearing there is work going on behind the scenes. [Secretary of Defense Robert] Gates is probably talking to [Mohamed Hussein] Tantawi, his counterpart.

Mohamed Hussein Tantawi and Donald Rumsfeld

The Egyptian army is well-respected. And I think it sent a strong message by placing tanks in Tahrir Square while at the same time not taking action against the demonstrators. The Egyptian army said it’s not going to fire on the Egyptian people, but it is going to maintain some semblance of order. I was heartened to see the army intervene almost on the side of the demonstrators against these thugs from the Mubarak government. It was incredibly stupid what Mubarak did, when he sent in these thugs. Everybody knew Mubarak’s time was up. Even Mubarak must have known his time was up. I don’t know why he prolonged it.

I would tell the administration to say to the Egyptian military that at some point it needs to act like the Turkish military. Egypt needs a short period of martial law as it goes through this transition. The army needs to put somebody in charge and then back away. And I think most Egyptians would accept that.

MJT: Have you personally worked with the Egyptian military?

Rick Francona: I’ve worked with Egyptian military intelligence, yes.

MJT: Okay, so how would you describe the worldview of the army? It doesn’t seem particularly ideological, not at all like the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, but you would have a better sense of it than I do.

Rick Francona: No, you’re right, it’s actually a fairly professional military force, especially compared with the way it was 30 years ago. When we replaced the Russians as their primary advisors the Egyptians were exposed to more Western ideas. The army has evolved into a professional non-ideological military, and I think that’s a good thing.

The Egyptian army of 30 years would not have acted like the Egyptian army is acting today.

MJT: What would the army have done 30 years ago?

Rick Francona: The army would have just been a regime tool. It would have imposed a solution, and it would not have been one we liked. It would have been very ugly, and there would be a lot more dead Egyptians in the streets.

I think we’ve seen remarkable restraint. We should be using our military-to-military ties behind the scenes. Almost every senior Egyptian officer has gone to American staff colleges. Egypt sends us its best and its brightest. We get to meet them, influence them, and develop close personal relationships with them. Gates can pick up the phone and talk to Tantawi one-on-one any time.

We routinely train with the Egyptians. We fly joint formations with them. We have a terrific relationship, and we’re putting a lot of trust in them right now.

The CIA and the Egyptian intelligence service have a similar relationship with each other. Omar Suleiman has probably been talking to Leon Panetta. Actually, he’s probably been talking to [National Intelligence Director James] Clapper who has more in common with him than Panetta does. Clapper came up to DNI through military intelligence.

MJT: I find it fascinating that a wave of instability has hit the Middle East, and all of a sudden no one is talking about Iraq anymore. Has Iraq actually become the one country that we no longer have to worry about?

Baghdad, Iraq, 2009

Rick Francona: Iraq has elections.

MJT: Iraq also has car bombs.

Rick Francona: The Iraqis have been through a terrible process. They still have to get rid of the remnants of the insurgency.

MJT: They still blow stuff up once in a while.

Rick Francona: Twenty years ago the Iraqis were extremely effective.

MJT: Reading about Iraq in your book is surreal. It’s like you’re describing another country entirely. What you saw there in the 1980s, and what I saw before and during the surge, is totally different.

Rick Francona: We eliminated the leadership and wouldn’t let them back in, so many of them joined the insurgency. Iraq has had a terrible brain drain. We got rid of everyone who knew how to lead, organize, and administer anything. Iraq had to start all over again. Iraqis are smart people, though. I don’t think we should tell them how to do internal security. They know how to do internal security. And we need to let them have their own style of democracy. It’s not going to be Jeffersonian. It will be Iraqi.

I’m calling Iraq stable right now.

MJT: I think I agree. I’ve seen Iraq at its worst, when it was horrifically unhinged and unstable, but it’s better now.

Rick Francona: Iraq has emerged.

MJT: Apparently.

Rick Francona: I don’t like the coalition that was bolted together, though.

MJT: I don’t either.

Rick Francona: I think the Kurds were being very short-sighted when they got in bed with the Shia, but they’ll figure it out.

MJT: A few years ago just about everyone in the region shuddered when they looked at Iraq and wanted to make sure that didn’t happen where they live. There must be people in Egypt, Jordan, and Syria who support the regimes for that reason.

Rick Francona: I know that’s the case in Syria. They’re terrified what might happen if that stabilizing force is removed. Not only do they look at Iraq as a problem, they look at what happened in the Balkans as a problem. When Tito went away in Yugoslavia, the place came apart.

MJT: Do you think the US was right to cut Mubarak loose?

Rick Francona: [Pauses to think.] It was in our interests to do so. Was it the right thing to do? I don’t know. You could say we turned our backs on a man who has been our ally for thirty years.

MJT: That’s what the Gulf Arabs are thinking.

Kuwait City, 2008

Rick Francona: Yes, I know. They’re thinking they can’t count on the United States to support them. But they can count on us to act in our own national interests. A stable Egypt is in our national interest, so we’ll be involved in the transition and in the end game.

I’m sure our Gulf allies are watching all this and thinking that we threw Mubarak under the bus, but Mubarak brought this on himself. He amassed 70 billion dollars of Egypt’s wealth for himself.

MJT: That’s an extraordinary amount of money, especially considering that the GDP of the entire country is barely 200 billion. He has more than a third of that all to himself.

Poorer outskirts of Cairo, Egypt, on the road to Giza

Rick Francona: I thinks this sends a message to our other, quote, “allies” in the region that there’s only so much we’ll put up with. In the end, we have to act in our interests. If their interests and our interests coincide, that’s great, but they had better not go overboard against their people. My concern is that we’re often seen as supportive of these dictatorships.

MJT: We do give some of them money. Two billion dollars a year went to Egypt.

Rick Francona: How much of Mubarak’s 70 billion dollars is our money?

MJT: We were accused of supporting Mubarak. And we were accused of supporting Saddam Hussein when you were there working with the Iraqis.

Rick Francona: When we supporting Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War, it was not about Saddam Hussein. It wasn’t even about Iraq. It was about Iran. Everything we did was calculated to make sure the Iranians did not emerge victorious and become the primary power broker in the Gulf.

During the Second Gulf War we did almost everything wrong for years after the fall of Baghdad. Disbanding the Iraqi army was probably the biggest mistake. It triggered the insurgency and played into Iranian hands. But back in 1987 and 1988, we had to make sure Iran didn’t win. If that meant getting in bed with Saddam Hussein, so be it. But the minute the war was over and the Iranians failed to emerge victorious, we left. That was it. We left and we cut off our support for Saddam because it was never about him or Iraq. And the Iraqis were smart enough to understand that.

MJT: We didn’t cut Saddam loose because he invaded Kuwait.

Rick Francona: Right. There were still some exchanges of intelligence, but it was at a very low level.

In September of 1988 I was in Baghdad. April Glaspie was the ambassador. She had just arrived. After I briefed her and told her what we’d been doing, and she said, “That’s going to stop. I want nothing to do with these thugs.”

Ramadi, Iraq, 2007

Pat Lang and I had one last thing to do for the Iraqis, and then that was it. Glaspie cut off all of our contacts and adopted a more adversarial relationship with Saddam Hussein.

MJT: Somebody, it might have been Robert Kaplan, said something years ago that has stayed with me. He said—and I’m paraphrasing him here—that we have good relations with Riyadh and Cairo, and bad relations with Tehran and Baghdad, but at some point in the future we’ll have bad relations with Riyadh and Cairo and good relations with Tehran and Baghdad.

Baghdad flipped in the meantime. Tehran will flip if the Green Movement overthrows the Islamic Republic. And Cairo will flip if the Muslim Brothers takes over.

Rick Francona: For the past fifteen years I’ve been saying there’s going to be regime-change in Iran within five years. And I’ve been wrong for fifteen years. The problem we’re seeing in Iran right now is the same problem we saw ten years ago in Iraq. Regime-change from the inside might be impossible.

That was the assessment we made in Iraq when I was detailed at the CIA. We tried to foment revolution, and we launched a failed coup attempt in 1996.

Rick Francona in Northern Iraq, 1995

Afterwards we decided there wasn’t enough effective opposition inside Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein. We could see that any regime-change in Iraq would have to be externally driven.

I think we’re rapidly approaching that point in Iran. But who’s going to do it? We aren’t.

MJT: Not now.

Rick Francona: Not after our experience in Iraq.

The army and Marines did a magnificent job in Iraq. The run to Baghdad was classic. That will be studied for years. The logistics were terrific. What the army did out there in the desert was fabulous. But after Jerry Bremer became the viceroy of Iraq and turned our military into an occupation army—something we hadn’t planned or staffed for—everything fell apart. And I think we’ve been so traumatized by what happened during the next five years that there is almost no chance we’re going to impose a regime-change in Iran. The Iranians, I think, are stuck with this regime.

MJT: Do you think they’ll get nuclear weapons?

Graffiti in Jerusalem

Rick Francona: Absolutely.

The only country that ever seriously embarked on a nuclear weapons program and failed to develop a bomb is Iraq, and that’s only because the Israelis stopped it. Every other country that had the will and the material support has succeeded. No one has ever been stopped by technology. Everyone has been able to acquire the fissile material by hook or by crook. It’s no longer magic. It just isn’t.

Non-lethal methods are always better than blowing things up, but I don’t think anything will stop the Iranians short of war. You and I were at the same briefing about this in Israel. The Israelis think Iran can’t be deterred, and I think they’re right.

So we have to do one of two things. We either tell the Iranians that we won’t allow them to develop nuclear weapons, and that we’re prepared to physically stop them, or we start planning for the day when Iran has the bomb.

Rick Francona is the author of Ally to Adversary: An Eyewitness Account of Iraq’s Fall from Grace and is currently at work on his second book, a first-person narrative account of his manhunt for Serbian war criminals in the Balkans. He also has a blog called Middle East Perspectives.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 08 Mar 2011 02:48

The Berbers are not by any means insignificant. Cannot say about the ground situation in Libya now and what the Berber position and influence is on ongoing developments there.

But the Berbers have a strong ethnic identity, a very strong one. I have interacted with Berbers from across North Africa (Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria) and they - uniformly - have no "identity crisis"... They do not regard themselves in general as "Arab". They know they are in a weak position, and they are doing their best to thrive under the circumstances. Their language Tamazight is still alive and although severely restricted, continues to survive. They are generally far more liberal and less rigid about sticking to the letter of the law, so to the speak, as far as religion is concerned - most are Muslim.

What they do not have is effective political organisation. Not that they don't have organised political activity, but rather that it is not yet effective in achieving even some of their limited goals so far.

On the other hand, I haven't been following this issue closely in recent years so... some research on Uncle Google will definitely give a fuller picture.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 08 Mar 2011 03:08

Gaddafi will have to go. It is only a matter of time. We should not assume that USA/NATO has a huge leverage on the gorund situation. The only weakness of the opposition against Gaddafi is the lack of arms and military supplies. However as I pointed out, Africa has other points to supply them even if Egyptians and Algerians are constrained and the Med is controlled by Europeans.

Both Iran and Turkey [with indirect "western" support] can play an underhand role in supporting the "easterners" even if they officially deny any role.

West is trying to play its best bet and salvage the position in a way that they can mediate and retain or recover some influence. Given the constraints, the opposition will have to come to a compromise with the "west" (since neither Russia nor PRC is in a strategic proximity to backup). This is the game that is going on now - as to who can extract how much concession from the other -"west" vs "opposition". Once this is reasonably settled, its finito for Gaddafi.

I would suggest that Gaddafi senses this and will try to pretend (or genuinely) to come to an agreement with the rebels. This may however only postpone but not prevent the outcome.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 08 Mar 2011 09:46

The U.N.'s tough stand on Qaddafi: exception or rule?

http://turtlebay.foreignpolicy.com/post ... on_or_rule

----

The specter of flaming oil ports

http://oilandglory.foreignpolicy.com/po ... _oil_ports

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 08 Mar 2011 11:21

as mentioned earlier, there's only one reason for sending warships.

I don't think they have the numbers to do an iraq style takeover as libyan forces are probably numerous enough to resist it. But I do think they want to establish the 'rebels' as a legitimate party (a fifth columnist inside the country if you will) to take it over at a later date. Hence the threat of force to make Gadaffi negotiate with the rebels. He'd be a fool if he did as his own fate would be sealed.

If Gadaffi had any brains, he's publically announce that US intends to grab his country's oil resources as it did with Iraq!

--------
US, allies edge closer toward formulating military options to halt violence against Libya

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/obama-us-nato- ... 7-439.html

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 08 Mar 2011 12:20

Gaddafi has been so thoroughly painted as a loon that it doesn't matter now. his image is destroyed beyond recovery (DBR). anything that comes out of his mouth is looked at from an angle of insanity/mockery. Gaddafi is done. the powers that be have decided so, and so it shall be.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 08 Mar 2011 15:46

Libyan test for refocused al-Qaeda By Syed Saleem Shahzad

...
Al-Qaeda's most powerful Libyan cluster, al-Jamaa al-Muqatilah (Libyan Islamic Fighting Group), is apprehensive of being marginalized, according to members of the Libyan militant camp in Pakistan's North Waziristan tribal area.

They believe that al-Qaeda needs to kick in to give an ideological mooring to the armed opposition and to prevent the situation from falling into the hands of pro-Western agitators, especially with Western capitals looking for an arrangement to prop up liberal and secular forces, even through direct military intervention.

Most of al-Jamaa al-Muqatilah's members come from the Benghazi area and the group has provided some of the best commanders among al-Qaeda's contingents in Afghanistan. These include Abu Laith al-Libi, killed in a drone attack in 2008, who led a failed coup against Gaddafi in 1994. It was after the coup attempt that Libi headed for Afghanistan, where he led several high-profile operations, including the attack on Bagram base outside the capital Kabul in 2007 during then-United States vice president Dick Cheney's visit.

Asia Times Online contacts in the militant camps say that current al-Qaeda ideologue and military strategist Abu Yahya al-Libi is now trying to mobilize of al-Qaeda's cadre in Libya to quickly jump onto the unrest bandwagon. Libi, who comes from Benghazi and who has authored many books, played a significant role in al-Qaeda's mobilization in Yemen and Somalia while living in Afghanistan and the Pakistani tribal areas.

Libi escaped from the US detention facility at Bagram in 2005 and was recently elevated as one of al-Qaeda's main leaders and he now often chairs shura (council) meetings to make important decisions in the absence of Osama bin Laden and his deputy Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri.
...
Al-Qaeda is now reconnecting with Islamic parties, and Libya could be a staring point of bigger things to come.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 08 Mar 2011 18:42

GCC wants no-fly zone over Libya
http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news ... over-libya

It is nice to see the Arabian countries are becoming very sensible nowadays.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 08 Mar 2011 19:08

they just want rid of gaddafi before it gets worse
(besides they mutually loathe each other)

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Mar 2011 19:55

joshvajohn and Lalmohan, please see above for comments on the GCC no fly zone news. Was discussed earlier.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Mar 2011 21:27

Shravan, Syed Shazad article means TSPA sees opportunity to exploit the Libyan crisis as they send fake Al Libbis to exprot the troubles out of FATA/WANA. The problem is near Triploi. Bengahzi is already in non AlQ rebel hands. So what they want to do is send the Libbi contingent to seize the moment from the rebels!

Nightwatch 3/06/2011

Bahrain: Thousands of protesters gathered outside the office of Prime Minister Prince Khalifa bin Salman al-Khalifa, demanding his resignation and that of the royal family, al Jazeera reported 6 March.

Protesters massed at Al-Qudaibiya Palace in Manama, where the Cabinet usually meets, and chanted anti-government slogans against King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa. Protesters also demanded that the 2002 constitution be dissolved as it gives too much power to the monarchy.

Comment: The leaders of the Gulf states seem to have concluded that they will permit no change in government systems; no overthrow of monarchies though Yemen can collapse. Theirs is an atavistic attitude towards the rights of citizens compared to the authority they arrogate to themselves.

The situation cannot last because polarizes the country. It creates a compression scenario in which an explosion of violence becomes the only avenue for vindication of rights and simmering resentment if they fail. Arab kings are destined to become victims of their own national prosperity.

As with the Chinese, it is difficult for even benign dictatorships and monarchies to defend themselves against the people they decided to educate and make prosperous.

{Shades of King George III and American colonists in 1776!

Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabia plans to ban all protests and marches, the Interior Ministry stated 5 March on state television, adding that security forces would use "all measures" to keep public order, Reuters reported.

Comment: See the comment above.

Egypt: Update. Armed men in plain clothes threw bricks and improvised incendiary devices at protesters demanding reform of Egypt's security services outside a police headquarters in Cairo on 6 March. Egyptian soldiers had earlier fired guns into the air to disperse the protesters, according to witnesses.

Mansur al-Issawi, Egypt's new interior minister, took office 6 March, pledging to restore public confidence in the country's police force after protesters stormed a number of security buildings. In his acceptance speech, al-Issawi also pledged to restore stability and security in the streets of Egypt.

Al-Issawi was named to his new post late 5 March and replaces Mahmoud Wagdy, who had been appointed at the end of former President Hosni Mubarak's rule.

Comment: This looks a lot like Mubarak's Egypt.

Libya: Situation summary. Open source reporting, especially US TV news, provides no basis for determining wins and losses over the weekend. Both sides claim victories.

What appears clear is that Qadhafi's fighters tried to recover areas near Tripoli and to expand autonomous pockets they control outside Tripoli. Qadhafi's supporters remain in Tripoli. Outside Tripoli pockets of pro-Qadhafi fighters appear to operate from military bases, where the use as safehavens after a string of consistently inconsequential counteroffensive operations.

The failure of the pro-Qadhafi fighters to take and hold ground is a testament to their ineptitude and Qadhafi's pathetic management because the anti-Qadhafi forces lack any pretense to organization or military training. Supposedly trained and well armed fighters are making no progress against the disorganized zealots of the rebels.

The situation remains inconclusive, but the rebels must capture Tripoli and the Qadhafi family. The situation is starting to resemble the last days of the Ceausescu regime in Romania, in slow motion.

US TV news descriptions of fierce fighting border on hysterical exaggeration for dramatic effect. The fighting looks mostly like skirmishing. If the pro-Qadhafi fighters have artillery and armor, as claimed by the TV reporters, their inability to break through cordons of pickup trucks and sedans is difficult to explain. The impact of Libyan air power is hardly measurable except for one apparently lucky bomb that destroyed an ordnance depot in the Benghazi area.

Libyan Rebels-UK: Eight members of a British diplomatic "mission" who had been captured in Benghazi this weekend boarded the HMS Cumberland and have left the country, Al Jazeera reported March 6, citing opposition officials in the city. According to the officials, one of the detained individuals had in his possession advanced computer equipment, which will be displayed in the near future.

Comment: Other news sources report the British tried to make clandestine contact with the rebel council in Benghazi by inserting a team that included British commandos and intelligence people, all of whom got caught.

The speed of the release indicates the news report is a cover story. The group certainly made contact and made a deal, if only to get released. It is not even certain that the team was only eight people!

The interim Libyan rebel National Council expects to be formally recognized by several European and Arab countries, ex-Justice Minister Mustafa Abdel Jalil, who heads the council, stated to Al Jazeera on March 5, Reuters reported. The Council, based in the rebel-held eastern city of Benghazi, named a three-member crisis committee to cover military and foreign affairs in a bid to streamline decision-making.

Algeria: Update. Algerian police banned political reform marches organized by the National Coordination for Change and Democracy (CNCD) and its dominant affiliate group the Gathering for Culture and Democracy (RCD), Xinhua reported March 5. Police banned marches organized in the Hussein Day and Ain Benian districts and Oran province near Algiers, RCD President Said Sadi stated.

The marches were banned to uphold public order in the capital and the decision has nothing to do with oppressing freedom of expression, authorities said.

Comment: The Bouteflika government apparently is following the Saudi lead.

General comment: The Arab leaders are out of imagination, touch and ideas. There will be more troubles.

{So oil and gold prices will go up.}

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 08 Mar 2011 21:44

Qaddaafi might actually privately welcome Al-Qaeda into Libya to divert some of his troubles, while publicly pointing at them as the enemy. It puts pressure on rebel forces as well as the NATO powers.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 08 Mar 2011 22:04

inviting AlQ would be disaster. he would only be creating more chaos/confusion for his own forces, as to who they're supposed to fight. dividing resources in a multi-frontal war is not ideal. better to have one enemy to focus energies on. also inviting AlQ gives convenient excuse for NATO/US meddling.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 08 Mar 2011 22:09

not to mention that he was politically opposed to the islamists all along, and even started cooperating with the west against them

however, the biggest gift that Col-G gave was to hand over everything that Xerox-Khan provided him to the western intel agencies... hardware, drawings, parts and including chini drawings stuffed inside an islamabad tailor's carrier bag

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 08 Mar 2011 22:52

i read somewhere that CIA was very deeply involved in sabotaging Libyan nuke program by having the manufacturer in Europe make a minor glitch (on purpose) and essentially rendering the whole program useless. i am not very knowledgeable about this and the reading was a long time ago but the gist i remember.

what is interesting is did Qaddafi hand over all the intel after CIA was on to him or before? and what did he know about it? depending on the answers to those questions, we can figure out if Qaddafi was a hapless moron about this nuke program or if he knew his nuclear-goose was cooked long before. that might also help explain behind the scenes feelings of American wrt Qaddafi. helpful in making an assertion on whether the revolution is a televised script written in Washington or really something genuine.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Mar 2011 22:54

He was afraid he would be Saddamized. So he gave all the material that AQK gave him including the dry cleaner's laundry bag with PRC instructions.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 08 Mar 2011 23:01

Saddamized? there has to be a pun in there somewhere. it might actually become official vocabulary.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 08 Mar 2011 23:18

Libya is no Iraq, except for the oil part. So Col-G had to give away all of new-clear collections or else face the wrath. I think he got a good bargain, where he erred is in seeing himself above his nation. And for that he will pay the price. Yet to see an intelligent leader in that part of the world.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Mar 2011 23:36

^^ its so funny because its true! You should see what he said to the arab league guys in his rants. He said one of you could be saddam one day, they were laughing. Well its funny that Gaddafi is staring at the barrell of the gun.

I was actually informed today that one of his close cousins went to egypt libya border.
Aim was to bribe egyptian tribes to take on the eastern rebels. So, he went there and handed out cash and guns etc. Egyptian intel found out about it and arrested him before he could do more damage. The guy is in hotel arrest in cairo currently as he is a diplomatic passport holder, but now that libya is suspended from the arab league, he will formally be arrested probably. He's been there for over 2 weeks.

The eastern part has traditionally always been rebelious. It is controlled by a military council, who's head is this former minister called abdeljalili. Abdeljalili was the first minister to quit. He's liked and well respected among libyans, so keep an eye on him, he may be the next prime minister of libya if the rebels win.
It does appear that the instability in the east has been ongoing since november last year and the action in Tunisia and Egypt really topped everything off.

So, before the west says we didn't know a thing, don't believe them. They are lieing! Gaddafi knew this was coming, as about a month or so ago, he sent his son (not saif) to washington to lobby the US. During the negotiations he told them to stay neutral if protests erupt in egypt.
He also said in return for lack of US support, libya will give them more contracts etc.

So, gaddafi is hoping to control a square block from east of Zawiya to west of benghazi, which is what I presume is Ras lanouf. Zawiya and Benghazi are long gone in Gaddafi's mind.

You have to watch the real power brokers behind the Gaddafi regime, which about 3 of his sons and relatives of his wives and a few other guys.
They are sticking with him so far, only one has joined the opposition.

In libya there is 150 tribes, out of which only 30 matter politically. So its key to watch these moves.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 08 Mar 2011 23:51

Is Moammar Gadhafi looking to step down?
http://www.salon.com/news/libya/?story= ... _step_down

IT seems that Gaddafi is asking for protection of his wealth and family's life. So he is now looking for an escape route. It is good that the opposition groups grant him an amnesty at present except that he should appear in the international court of justice proving his innocense against his killing of his own 2000 + people. His family can be allowed to settle with some money not all 20 billions and more. Unless he is given an escape route the fight will continue. IT is essential that the opposite groups along with the rest of the world should negotiated with him without loosing the question of justice to those whom he killed. Arabian mediators will be good if not African council can mediate at this stage.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Mar 2011 00:03

He is floating a trial baloon to see who comes forward and then off with their heads!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 09 Mar 2011 00:10

^^ pretty good move by the US actually. Apparently Cnn says gaddafi asked for immunity and safe passage out. But White house spokesman said that he may be held accountabel even if he leaves libya.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 09 Mar 2011 00:49

When Gaddafi spoiled his relations with Saudi Arabia, he pretty much set his retirement plan on fire!

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 09 Mar 2011 01:29

Why can't he retire in Russia or PRC ? Why cannot PRC provide him a safe retirement paradise till death in the Mongolian desert ? That is the least they could do for him for safe return of their 300,000,000 citizen laborers to Greece/Malta and the oil too.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Mar 2011 01:37

The standard place for such cases was to go to Mecca for haj and not comeback. Sometimes folks ensure they don't comeback. Recall Akbar's guardian got dispatched while being sent off.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 09 Mar 2011 02:30

^^ I was thinking the same. He'll go to Venezuela, unless USAF etc will forcefully land his plane. I would have thought he would be gutsy and carry on the fight.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Mar 2011 04:58

Op-Ed in Pioneer

OPED | Wednesday, March 9, 2011 |

Deathly silence prevails in PakistanMarch 09, 2011 5:28:32 AM

Gwynne Dyer

While the people of Arab states are overthrowing dictators, Pakistan is sinking deeper into intolerant Islamic extremism. Emboldened by the meek response of the people to the assassinations of Salman Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti, Islamist vigilantes will now become more brutal.

At least with a dictatorship, you know where you are — and if you know where you are, you may be able to find your way out. In Pakistan, it is not so simple.

While brave Arab protesters are overthrowing deeply entrenched autocratic regimes, often without even resorting to violence, Pakistan, a democratic country, is sinking into a sea of violence, intolerance and extremism. The world’s second-biggest Muslim country (185 million people) has effectively been silenced by ruthless Islamist fanatics who murder anyone who dares to defy them.

What the fanatics want, of course, is power, but the issue on which they have chosen to fight is Pakistan’s laws against blasphemy. They not only hunt down and kill people who fall afoul of these laws, should the courts see fit to free them. They have also begun killing anybody who publicly advocates changing the laws.

Salman Taseer, the governor of the Punjab, Pakistan’s richest and most populous Province, was murdered by his own bodyguard in January because he criticised the blasphemy laws and wanted to change them. He said that he would go on fighting them even if he was the last man standing — and in a very short time he was no longer standing. But one man still was: Shahbaz Bhatti.

Shahbaz Bhatti was shot down last Wednesday. The four men who ambushed his car and filled him with bullets left a note saying: “In your fight against Allah, you have become so bold that you act in favour of and support those who insult the Prophet... And now, with the grace of Allah, the warriors of Islam will pick you out one by one and send you to hell.”

Shahbaz Bhatti was not a rich and powerful man like Salman Taseer, nor even a major power in the ruling Pakistan People’s Party that they both belonged to. He was the only Christian member of the Cabinet, mainly as a token representative of the country’s three million Christians, but he had hardly any influence outside that community. Nevertheless, he refused to stop criticising the blasphemy laws even after Salman Taseer’s murder, so they killed him too.

That leaves only Sherry Rehman, the last woman standing. A flamboyant member of Parliament whose mere appearance enrages the beards, she has been a bold and relentless critic of the blasphemy laws — and since Salman Taseer’s murder she has lived in hiding, moving every few days. But she will not shut up until they shut her up.

And that’s it. The rest of the country’s political and cultural elite have gone silent, or pander openly to the fanatics and the bigots. The PPP was committed to changing the blasphemy laws only six months ago, but after Salman Taseer was killed President Asif Ali Zardari assured a gathering of Islamic dignitaries that he had no intention of reviewing the blasphemy laws. Although they are very bad laws.

In 1984 General Zia ul-Haq, the dictator who ruled Pakistan from 1977 to 1988, made it a criminal offence for members of the Ahmadi sect, now some five million strong, to claim that they were Muslims. In 1986 he instituted the death penalty for blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad. No subsequent Government has dared to repeal these laws, which are widely used to victimise the Ahmadi and Christian religious minorities.

Ahmadis and Christians account for at most five per cent of Pakistan’s population, but almost half of the thousand people charged under this law since 1986 belonged to those communities. Most accusations were false, arising from disputes over land, but once made they could be a death sentence.

Higher courts generally dismissed blasphemy charges, recognising that they were a tactic commonly used against Christians and Ahmadis in local disputes over land, but 32 people who were freed by the courts were subsequently killed by Islamist vigilantes — as were two of the judges who freed them.

The current crisis arose when a Christian woman, Aasia Bibi, was sentenced to death last November, allegedly for blaspheming against the Prophet Muhammad. Pakistan’s liberals mobilised against the blasphemy law and discovered that they were an endangered species.

The murders of Salman Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti were bad, but even worse was the way that the political class and the bulk of the mass media responded. A majority of the population fully supports the blasphemy law, making it very costly for politicians to act against it even if the fanatics don’t kill them. Political cowardice reigns supreme, and so Pakistan falls slowly under the thrall of the extremists.

Being a democracy is no help, it turns out, because democracy requires people to have the courage of their convictions. Very few educated Pakistanis believe that people should be executed because of a blasphemy charge arising out of some trivial village dispute, but they no longer dare to say so. Including the President.

“We will not be intimidated nor will we retreat,” said Mr Zardari on March 3, but he has already promised the beards that the blasphemy laws will not be touched. Nor is it very likely that the murderers of Salman Taseer or Shahbaz Bhatti will be tracked down and punished. You could get killed trying to do that.

-- Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 09 Mar 2011 05:45

shyamd wrote:^^ pretty good move by the US actually. Apparently Cnn says gaddafi asked for immunity and safe passage out. But White house spokesman said that he may be held accountabel even if he leaves libya.

My guess is its just propaganda to spread misinformation within Libya that gaddafi is about to flee/step down to embolden the rebels.

Perhaps its also to confuse libya's army which is taking on the rebels into thinking their leader is no more.

Gaddafi won't be going anywhere as there is no place for him to go. He will just be handed back to the new administration which takes over Libya and they will do as US wants and hang him like Saddam.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 09 Mar 2011 05:49

Indo-Saudi Camaraderie: A Strategic Alliance?

In March 2011, the Indian Army is expected to hold joint military exercises with the Royal Saudi Land Force (RSLF) in Saudi Arabia (SA). It is reported that India will also construct a mountain warfare training school there. However, official details are yet to be public

Interestingly, Saudi Arabia’s Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud is expected to visit India at the same time when the joint exercises would be held. Prince Turki is the person who was one of the ‘behind the scenes’ architect of the Mujahideen counterattacks against Soviet troops in Afghanistan during 1979-89.

Oil and energy are the major parameters which define the relationship between India and the Gulf countries, which the former treat as its ‘extended neighbourhood’. However, India is pushing to enhance strategic ties with the region in its bid to realize its post-2005 ‘Look West Policy’.

Thus, a heightened camaraderie between India and Saudi Arabia may have, inter alia, the following implications:

1. India may be attempting to woo SA in order to diplomatically corner Pakistan as SA is a Sunni-Muslim country and a donor to Pakistan. So, having SA by its side, India can try to pressurise Pakistan in the international rostrum.

2. Though behind the scenes maneuvering of White House is hard to be outrightly rejected, however, this cannot be accepted to be the only reason for the joint exercises. It seems natural that Indian Foreign Policy is slowly but surely aligning with USA and its supposed allies in the Middle East: viz Israel and Saudi Arabia.

3. Third, but not altogether insignificant, this joint exercise could be interpreted as fairly routine that Indian armed forces periodically carry out with foreign countries.

Furthermore, Indian ground forces are skillful in desert warfare because it had fought ground wars with Pakistan in the Thar desert region (North-Western part of India). Also, India's Main Battle Tank "Arjun" has specifically been developed for desert warfare.

(? export potential for arjun!!)

As far as counterinsurgency is concerned, the general capability of Saudi troops is still under the scanner as they are yet to fight successfully any sustained internal insurgency. Historically speaking, they have defeated the Yemeni forces in 1969 and also took part in the Gulf War in 1991: both of which were conventional battles. Moreover, in terms of rank, SA is at the 24th position and India is at 4th position in the category of military prowess.
Currently, SA wants to upgrade its anti-terrorist skills (the possible Al-Qaeda threat spilling from Yemen) and seeks help in that regard. Some American forces are still residing in SA in the wake of the Gulf War and the country remains a heavy importer of US defence equipments.

Actually, the landmark visit of King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz to India in January 2006 as the Chief Guest of Republic Day celebrations opened a new chapter in the Indo-Saudi bilateral relations. King Abdullah referred to India as his ‘second home’ and signed the “Delhi Declaration”. It was the first such bilateral document ever signed by a Saudi King. The ‘Delhi Declaration’ provides a comprehensive road map for bilateral relations. Several Agreements/MOUs were signed during the visit including MOU on Combating Crime, Bilateral Investment Protection Agreement and the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement.

It is not difficult to extract American interests in a better cooperation between India and SA. The sole purpose of the US is to erect an alliance of US-Israel-SA-India in Asia so as to counter Iran and China. How both SA and India react to such a covert American ambition is to be keenly watched.

With the ongoing disturbances in west asia, is the above still on cards or postponed.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 09 Mar 2011 07:58

Only 1,700 Indians left in Libya’

India will stick to the March 10 deadline to evacuate its nationals from Libya, an official said yesterday.
Only about 1,700 of Indians are now left in the violence-torn North African country, the external affairs ministry official said.
He said 36 special flights have been operated since ‘Operation Safe Homecoming’ was launched nearly two weeks ago.
Around 18,000 Indians were based in Libya before the uprising against Muammar Gaddafi’s rule began in mid-February.
“Three Air India flights left for Tripoli today to ferry back an additional 1,000 passengers,” the official said.

small article quoting in entirety.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 09 Mar 2011 08:29

When will the protests hit Saudi Arabia?

Saudi Arabia still heavily restricts women, and even the few voices agitating for reform in the kingdom aren't looking to let females get behind the wheel or run for local office.

Abdullah has done what he has always done best - write fat checks and distribute $36 billion to young Saudis who want to build homes or set up a business. He even tossed a small bone in the direction of the women - they will be allowed to vote in local elections this year, but they still can't run.

During the original Arab demonstrations, the women were an inseparable part of the protesters; they marched, demonstrated, held up slogans, were arrested and questioned like the men. But anyone looking for slogans calling for equal rights for women in those countries would have had a hard time finding them in Tahrir or Sidi Bouzid.

In Saudi Arabia, the list of professions forbidden to women is much longer than that of the professions in which they are permitted to work. True, the Saudi king last year allowed women lawyers to practice, but that too was heavily restricted. Female lawyers must be supervised by a male lawyer and cannot appear in court during hearings on matters in which men are being tried.

It will be interesting to see how the demonstrations play out on Friday, the Saudis' planned day of rage. Will men gather on the squares while the women look at them through the windows? And what will Hillary Clinton have to say?
It appears that the Saudi women who want equality will have to arrange their own protests, separately from those of the men. Because even if the men get half of what they are demanding, there will be nothing left for the women.