Bharat Rakshak

While crucial for the Libyan people and of some significance to the world’s oil markets, in our view, Libya is not the most important event in the Arab world at the moment. The demonstrations in Bahrain are, in my view, far more significant in their implications for the region and potentially for the world. To understand this, we must place it in a strategic context.

Tehran’s primary national security imperative now is to prevent a strong government from emerging in Baghdad, and more important, a significant military force from emerging there. Iran never wants to fight another war with Iraq, making keeping Iraq permanently weak and fragmented in Tehran’s interest. The U.S. withdrawal from Iraq sets the stage for Iran to pursue this goal, profoundly changing the regional dynamic.

Iran has another, more challenging strategic interest, one it has had since Biblical times. That goal is to be the dominant power in the Persian Gulf. In addition to being the leading military force in the Persian Gulf, Iran has 75 million people, giving it a larger population than all other Persian Gulf states combined.

Outside powers have prevented Iran from dominating the region since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, first the United Kingdom and then the United States, which consistently have supported the countries of the Arabian Peninsula.

It can covertly support pro-Iranian forces in the region, destabilizing existing regimes. With the psychology of the Arab masses changing, as they are no longer afraid to challenge their rulers, Iran will enjoy an enhanced capacity to cause instability.

The Iranians, who understand the weakness of their military’s logistics and air power, are pursuing a strategy of indirect approach. They are laying the foundation for power based on a perception of greater Iranian power and declining American and Saudi power.

Bahrain, the Test Case
An island off the coast of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are linked by a causeway. For most purposes, Bahrain is part of Saudi Arabia. Unlike Saudi Arabia, it is not a major oil producer, but it is a banking center. It is also the home of the U.S. 5th Fleet, and has close ties to the United States. The majority of its population is Shia, but its government is Sunni and heavily linked to Saudi Arabia. The Shiite population has not fared as well economically as Shia in other countries in the region, and tensions between the government and the public have long existed.

The toppling of the government of Bahrain by a Shiite movement would potentially embolden Shia in Saudi Arabia, who live primarily in the oil-rich northeast near Bahrain. It also would weaken the U.S. military posture in the region. And it would demonstrate Iranian power.
If the Saudis intervened in Bahrain, the Iranians would have grounds to justify their own intervention, covert or overt. Iran might also use any violent Bahraini government suppression of demonstrators to justify more open intervention. In the meantime, the United States, which has about 1,500 military personnel plus embassy staff on the ground in Bahrain, would face the choice of reinforcing or pulling its troops out.

The Iranians clearly have an interest in overthrowing the Bahraini regime. While the degree to which the Iranians are involved in the Bahraini unrest is unclear, they clearly have a great deal of influence over a cleric, Hassan Mushaima, who recently returned to Bahrain from London to participate in the protests. That said, the Bahraini government itself could be using the unrest to achieve its own political goals, much as the Egyptian military used the Egyptian uprising. Like all revolutions, events in Bahrain are enormously complex — and in Bahrain’s case, the stakes are extremely high.

Unlike Libya, where the effects are primarily internal, the events in Bahrain clearly involve Saudi, Iranian and U.S. interests. Bahrain is also the point where the Iranians have their best chance, since it is both the most heavily Shiite nation and one where the Shiites have the most grievances. But the Iranians have other targets, which might be defined as any area adjoining Saudi Arabia with a substantial Shiite population and with American bases. This would include Oman, which the United States uses as a support facility; Qatar, headquarters of U.S. Central Command and home to Al Udeid Air Base; and Kuwait, the key logistical hub for Iraqi operations and with major army support, storage and port facilities. All three have experienced or are experiencing demonstrations. Logically, these are Iran’s first targets.

The largest target of all is, of course, Saudi Arabia. That is the heart of the Arabian Peninsula, and its destabilization would change the regional balance of power and the way the world works. Iran has never made a secret of its animosity toward Saudi Arabia, nor vice versa. Saudi Arabia could now be in a vise. There is massive instability in Yemen with potential to spill over into Saudi Arabia’s southern Ismaili-concentrated areas. The situation in Iraq is moving in the Iranians’ favor. Successful regime changes in even one or two of the countries on the littoral of the Persian Gulf could generate massive internal fears regardless of what the Saudi Shia did and could lead to dissension in the royal family. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Saudis are moving aggressively against any sign of unrest among the Shia, arresting dozens who have indicated dissent. The Saudis clearly are uneasy in the extreme.

Iran’s Powerful Position
With the Saudis diverted, this would ease the way for Iranian influence in Iraq. At that point, there would be three options: Turkey intervening broadly, something it is not eager to do; the United States reversing course and surging troops into the region to support tottering regimes, something for which there is no political appetite in the United States; and the United States accepting the changed regional balance of power.

Two processes are under way. The first is that Iran will be the single outside power with the most influence in Iraq, not unlimited and not unchallenged, but certainly the greatest. The second is that as the United States withdraws, Iran will be in a position to pursue its interests more decisively. Those interests divide into three parts: eliminating foreign powers from the region to maximize Iranian power, convincing Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region that they must reach an accommodation with Iran or face potentially dangerous consequences, and a redefinition of the economics of oil in the Persian Gulf in favor of Iran, including Iranian participation in oil projects in other Persian Gulf countries and regional investment in Iranian energy development.

The Iranians are in a powerful position whatever happens given the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Combine this with a series of regime changes, or simply destabilization on the border of Saudi Arabia, and two things happen. First, the Saudi regime would be in trouble and would have to negotiate some agreement with the Iranians — and not an agreement the Saudis would like. Second, the U.S. basing position in the Persian Gulf would massively destabilize, making U.S. intervention in the region even more difficult.

vic wrote:Is it reasonable to assume that USA has decided to end the Afghanistan problem by starting from its Middle East Roots?? How far this process will be pushed? I always thought that the Sunni-Shia fight in Iraq was being fanned to set up Revolutions in Middle East. Perhaps Shias will be used to topple Middle East regimes and then these new democratic regimes will be used to topple Iran Shia regime.

Pakistan has always blackmailed the world with the threat to sell nukes to Middle East. Now the potential buyers are falling, one by one.

shyamd wrote:^^ Look. No one knows who is fanning the upheaval across the GCC and the wider arab world. However, patterns are incredibly similar across the GCC and it does appear to be a joint plan. Bahrain and Oman are probably the poorest out of the GCC and they have born the brunt of the unrest. Each country has had a different situation and story. To rule out Iran at this early stage is probably not a good idea. There is inkling that Iran MAY have something to do with it (Based on some of the people backing the protests in the region).

New Delhi hosted a foreign minister-level meeting with Brazil and South Africa on Tuesday, which was to have been an innocuous occasion for some rhetorical "South-South" cooperation. On the contrary, the event soared into the realm of the troubled world order and shaky contemporary international system. The meeting took a clear-cut position of nyet vis-a-vis the growing Western design to impose a "no-fly" zone over Libya.
[...]
Obama's tryst with history is indeed bugging him in his decision-making over Libya. Robert Fisk, the well-known chronicler of Middle Eastern affairs for the Independent newspaper of London, wrote a sensational dispatch on Monday that the Obama administration had sought help from King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia for secretly ferrying American weapons to the Libyan rebels in Benghazi, for which Riyadh would pick up the tab so that the White House would need no accountability to the US Congress and leave no traceable trail to Washington.

The moral depravity of the move - chartering the services of an autocrat to further the frontiers of democracy - underscores Obama's obsessive desire to camouflage any US unilateral intervention in Libya with "deniability" at all costs.

Now comes the body blow from the Delhi meeting. The three foreign ministers belonging to the forum that is known by the cute acronym IBSA (India-Brazil-South Africa) thwarted Obama's best-laid plans by issuing a joint communique on Tuesday in which they "underscored that a 'no-fly' zone on the Libyan air space or any coercive measures additional to those foreseen in Resolution 1970 can only be legitimately contemplated in full compliance with the UN Charter and within the Security Council of the United Nations".

Brazilian Foreign Minister Antonio de Aguiar Patriota told the media in Delhi that the IBSA statement was an "important measure" of what the non-Western world was thinking". He said, "The resort to a 'no-fly' zone is seen as expedient when adopted by a country but it weakens the system of collective security and provokes indirect consequences prejudicial to the objective we have been trying to achieve." Patriota added:

It is very problematic to intervene militarily in a situation of internal turmoil, Any decision to adopt military intervention needs to be considered within the UN framework and in close coordination with the African Union and the Arab League. It is very important to keep in touch with them and identify with their perception of the situation.

He explained that measures like a no-fly zone might make a bad situation worse by giving fillip to anti-US and anti-Western sentiments "that have not been present so far".

Equally significant was the fact that the trio of foreign ministers also penned a joint statement on the overall situation in the Middle East. Dubbed as the "IBSA Declaration", it reiterated the three countries' expectation that the changes sweeping across the Middle East and North Africa should "follow a peaceful course" and expressed their confidence in a "positive outcome in harmony with the aspirations of the people".

A highly significant part of the statement was its recognition right at the outset that the Palestinian problem lay at the very core of the great Middle Eastern alienation and the "recent developments in the Region may offer a chance for a comprehensive peace ... This process should include the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ... that will lead to a two-state solution, with the creation of a sovereign, independent, united and viable Palestinian State, coexisting peacefully alongside Israel, with secure, pre-1967 borders, and with East Jerusalem as its capital."

Acharya wrote: Has anybody thought that the last goal of this upheaval maybe India - internal chaos - maoists, etc.
Already Dossani is talking about IM as if they are from Arab world.

New Delhi, March 9 (IANS) India expects to wrap up the safe evacuation of its citizens in strife-torn Libya as another batch of 2,400 Indians stranded in the north African country would be home by Thursday.

Nearly 1,000 citizens were flown back Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning from Libyan capital Tripoli on three Air India special flights, according to a statement from the ministry of external affairs.

As scheduled, some 14,000 Indians have been evacuated from Libya since 'Operation Safe Homecoming' was launched nearly two weeks ago, the ministry said.

Naval vessels INS Jalashwa and INS Mysore have been kept in the Mediterranean, just off the Libyan coast but have not been pressed into service, given the successful air-bridge put in place between Libya and India since Feb 26, the statement said.

ramana wrote:ShyamD, There are plots and sub-plots in the west Asia and North Africa. After the regime change in Egypt ,North Africa is a sideshow. What is happening is toppling of regimes by forces unleashed by the Egyptian dawn. Gaddafi stays or gets Caucesued is interesting.

More important is Bahrain. Its the pivot of the new Gulf. If it goes Shia expect a realignment of the forces from Mediterranean to Muscat.

I expect Yehudi-Irani reconciliation. Will undo a lot of bad history from the axial age.

WASHINGTON — The Libyan leader Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi has “tens of billions” in cash secretly hidden away in Tripoli, allowing him to prolong his fight against rebel forces despite an international freeze on many of the Libyan government’s assets, according to American and other intelligence officials.

Colonel Qaddafi has control over the huge cash deposits, which have been stored at the Libyan Central Bank and other banks around the Libyan capital in recent years, the officials said.

Since the protests and fighting erupted, some of the money may have been moved into Colonel Qaddafi’s Tripoli compound, Bab Al Azizia, according to one person with ties to the Libyan government. While United States intelligence officials said they could not confirm such a move, one official said that Colonel Qaddafi “likely has tens of billions in cash that he can access inside Libya.”

The money — in Libyan dinars, United States dollars and possibly other foreign currencies — allows Colonel Qaddafi to pay his troops, African mercenaries and political supporters in the face of a determined uprising, said the intelligence officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

The huge cash reserves have, at least temporarily, diminished the impact of economic sanctions on Colonel Qaddafi and his government. The possibility that he could resist the rebellion in his country for a sustained period could place greater pressure for action on the Obama administration and European leaders, who had hoped that the Libyan leader would be forced from power quickly.

President Obama’s national security team met at the White House on Wednesday to discuss how to oust the Libyan leader, including the possible imposition of a no-flight zone, but made no decisions, according to the White House press secretary, Jay Carney.

The United States has relied so far on imposing financial pain on the Qaddafi government, freezing nearly $32 billion of Libya’s assets, according to Treasury Department officials. The United Nations and the European Union have imposed separate sanctions and have frozen assets as well.

But those actions have been limited to funds in the international banking system and to business investments outside of Libya. Inside the country, the intelligence officials said, Colonel Qaddafi has amassed a huge rainy day fund of cash.

Kenneth Barden, a lawyer who specializes in Middle East financing and advises financial institutions on ways to guard against money laundering, said there were indications that Colonel Qaddafi had moved billions of dollars in assets just days or weeks before the outbreak of violence in Tripoli, apparently to protect his family wealth from global sanctions.

“The money that is kept in Qaddafi’s name is probably small,” Mr. Barden said, “but he’s got a lot in the names of family members and close associates.”

But Colonel Qaddafi probably began hoarding liquid assets far earlier, officials said. He has built up Libya’s cash reserves in the years since the West began lifting economic sanctions on his government in 2004, following his decision to renounce unconventional weapons and cooperate with the United States in the fight against Al Qaeda. That led to a flood of Western investment in the Libyan oil and natural gas industries, and access to international oil and financial markets.

Colonel Qaddafi, however, apparently feared that sanctions would someday be reimposed and secretly began setting aside cash in Tripoli that could not be seized by Western banks, according to the officials. He used the Libyan Central Bank, which he controls, and private banks in the city. He also directed that many government transactions, including some sales on the international oil spot market, be conducted in cash. “He learned to keep cash around,” said the person with ties to Libyan government officials, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of putting them in jeopardy.

The reserves are likely to prove even more critical to Colonel Qaddafi as the government’s revenues dwindle from oil production.

With the unrest, Libya is pumping just 300,000 to 400,000 barrels of oil a day, down sharply from its typical production of 1.8 million barrels a day, according to Holly Pattenden, head of oil and gas analysis at the Business Monitor International in London.

The current levels would be worth about $30 million to $40 million a day, but export markets are now virtually closed to the country, as international banks refuse to provide letters of credit for oil company shipments, according to Greg Priddy, a global oil analyst with the Eurasia Group in Washington.

“I don’t think they are deriving a lot of income from the export market right now,” Mr. Priddy said. “The international banks don’t want to touch it.” Still, several small Libyan refineries remain open, and Mr. Priddy said they were probably refining oil for the domestic market and fuel for Colonel Qaddafi’s military operations.

With other sources of income drying up, the Libyan leader is heavily dependent on his pile of cash, and apparently spending it to stay in power. He is making cash payments to political supporters in Tripoli to retain their loyalty, while also buying the services of African mercenaries.

The person close to the government estimated that 3,000 to 4,000 mercenaries from Mali, Niger and a rebel group operating in Darfur, Sudan, the Justice and Equality Movement, have been hired by the Libyan government for at least $1,000 a day apiece. United States intelligence officials said they could not confirm those numbers or amount of payments.

Intelligence officials and other experts credit Colonel Qaddafi with becoming very adept at hiding his money, and said it had often been difficult to distinguish between the assets of the Libyan government, including its $70 billion sovereign wealth fund, and the Qaddafi family’s assets.

Mr. Qaddafi’s history of financial dealings indicate that he has “surreptitious accounts and unaccounted sums that are significant enough to give him security even if the world caves in on him,” said David Aufhauser, a top Treasury Department official in President George W. Bush’s administration.

Justice Department documents show that Libya had worked with Swiss banks to launder international banking transactions for years, with “hundreds” of senior Libyan officials allowed to surreptitiously move money.

Tim Niblock, an expert on Libya and professor at the University of Exeter in Britain, said he believed that Colonel Qaddafi had hidden cash as far back as the 1990s. He said that it was part of a larger effort by the Libyan leader to protect his money from both the international community and his domestic foes.

“He’s always aware that he faces problems from outside and within,” Professor Niblock said. “It would be quite foolish for him to not amass money for an eventuality like this.”

Helene Cooper contributed reporting from Washington, and David Rohde from New York. Barclay Walsh contributed research from Washington.

France on Thursday announced it was officially recognising the Libyan National Council as the sole representative of the Libyan people, further increasing the pressure on Muammar Qadhafi.

Speaking warmly of India, opposition spokesperson Iman Bougaigis said: “We have had a very good relationship with the people of India and at this juncture we are looking for formal support from India”

Speaking of India, Ms. Bougaigis said: “We would like India, which is such an important democratic country, to support us. Lot of us have been educated by Indian teachers and I personally have fond memories of being taught by Indians.”

She added that the re-emerging Libya would be a democracy, based on rule of law, separation of powers and anchored in a constitution that respected civil liberties and human rights.

Middle East: General warning: Readers should expect anti-government protests after prayers on 11 March from Iran to Morocco.

Bahrain: The Shiite Al Wefaq opposition party called for the cancellation of the 11 March protest march on the royal palace in Manama because it will exacerbate sectarian issues, Agence France-Presse. The Islamic National Accord Association, of which Al Wefaq is a member, opposes the protest, and Al Wefaq lawmaker Ali al-Aswad said.

Comment: The point of this statement is it exposes the rift between the establishment opposition and the youth protestors, who intend to participate in protests. The established political leaders have a far better insight as to the limits of effective protests, but they did not start the movement.

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC): GCC states have agreed to a $20 billion aid package for Bahrain and Oman, according to UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan, The Wall Street Journal reported 10 March. The aid package will fund development projects, in particular housing and infrastructure, over the next 10 years, according to Bahraini Foreign Minister Sheikh Khaled bin Ahmed al-Khalifa. It will be split equally between Oman and Bahrain.

Comment: The Sheikhs evidently have decided once again to try to buy off the protest movements. It seems incongruous that some of the richest states in the world are getting aid programs.

Saudi Arabia: Saudi police shot and wounded three male Shiite protesters in Qatif, Eastern Province, near Kuwait, while trying to disperse a rally. According to witnesses, the shooting occurred when 600-800 protesters, including women, all of whom were Shiite, took to the streets to demand the release of nine Shiite political prisoners. The police shot the protesters just as the demonstration was set to end, according to witnesses.

The Saudi Interior Ministry said police in Qatif only fired over the heads of protesters after they were attacked. The ministry said three people were injured in the protest, one of whom was a policeman, but did not say how the injuries were caused.

Saudi Arabia has raised the level of the undeclared state of emergency within the ranks of its security forces to a maximum in preparation for protest demonstrations on 11 March. The Associated Press reported that Saudi security forces have deployed around Riyadh. Riot police and special forces, armed with batons and tear gas, were observed along main roads and near shopping malls.

Military and security personnel have been recalled to their posts, leaves are canceled and a declaration of a state of emergency is expected.

A US view: U.S. government experts reportedly do not believe the current Saudi unrest poses a significant threat to the country's stability, U.S. officials said, Reuters reported. An official said there are no signs of widespread unrest in the kingdom and argued that the government has greater resources than other nations facing upheaval. The regime has solid control over almost all its territory, including Shiite areas, the official added. The kingdom faces many social issues, such as a large youth population and unemployment, that other Middle East countries face, but the country's wealth provides a buffer for the population, another official said.

Comment: Protests are banned in Saudi Arabia, but have reached the Kingdom nevertheless. It only took two months.

The protestors have shown no propensity to accept bribes to not protest, even when their demands began as more jobs. The wealth of a country has little bearing on the gravity of the protests. The protests in Qatif show that the Kingdom does not have "solid" control of the Shiite areas. The increased alert indicates the government has doubts about its control in Riyadh and is taking every precaution.

Yemen: President Saleh announced plans to form a committee with representatives from parliament and shura councils, youths and "social and society figures" to pave the way for a new constitution that addresses separation of powers, Saba reported.

The committee will be part of an initiative that is due to transfer power to an elected parliamentary system by the end of 2011, shift to full-power local government, and set up regions according to economic and geographic criteria. Also, a new election law will be prepared to include proportional representation. The constitution will be brought to a vote by the end of 2011.

Comment: The announcement signals the onset of a concession phase in the cycle of instability. Predictably, the opposition has described the new plans as too little too late. There will be more protests and crackdowns.

Egypt: Counter-revolution. In a TV interview on 10 March, Prime Minister Sharaf said the government believes there has been a "counter revolution" behind the recent incidents leading to sectarian strife and chaos.

"Let's pray we are wrong," Sharaf said. "The government accepts as true that what's going on is organized and systematic. ... Unfortunately, you can sense that there are people attempting to destroy the state's structure," he said.

Comment: This is bastion language, like that used by Mubarak, and portends a crackdown. For the record, it is difficult to have a counter-revolution when no revolution has taken place first. This prime minister, appointed by the army, sees himself as defending a revolution, instead of a coup.

Security. Egyptian Interior Minister Mansour el-Essawy said the state security apparatus will be restricted to combating terrorism and espionage and apologized for past violations, MENA reported. El-Essawy said the security apparatus will not play any further role in citizens' daily lives, but cannot be dissolved. El-Essawy said the country's regular police force has 269,000 members and state security police force has 170,000 members, and the numbers will be reviewed to ensure that they meet requirements. The restructuring plan will be presented to Prime Minister Essam Sharaf as soon as possible.

Comment: This is the most authoritative public statement of the numbers in the police and state security police. Less responsibility for the same number of personnel.

The Constitution. The Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs has suggested developing a new constitution within 30 days, according to local press. The suggestion rose from concerns that the Egyptian people would reject some amendments because the government had not accommodated recent reservations.

Rejecting the constitutional amendments will adversely affect the reputation of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which has until now held the respect of the people, the council said. The council recommended the formation of a constituent assembly, which would include between 50 and 100 legal scholars and political officials, to draft the document.

Comment: The willingness of the armed forces council to consider the recommendation for a new constitution will reveal its attitude towards political reform and the creation of a more politically neutral culture in the armed forces. The Armed Forces Council promised to form a committee to look into public opposition to the constitutional amendments its scholars drafted that leave intact the strong presidency.

The Council for Foreign Affairs did not indicate a preference as to nature of a new constitution, but by implication it does not seem to favor a strong presidency.

Libya: Libyan leader Qadhafi's son Saif told rebels on 10 March they faced a full-scale assault to crush their three-week-old uprising. "It's time for action. We are moving now," Saif al-Islam Qadhafi told Reuters in an interview. "Time is out now...we gave them two weeks (for negotiations)."

Pro-government forces continued their counter-attack eastward, apparently recapturing the oil port of Ras Lanuf and using air strikes against Brega further east.

Late press accounts affirm that Qadhafi forces now control Zawiyah, previously the only rebel held town west of Tripoli.

Comment: By dint of his education in London and his experience with the modern world, many considered him the vanguard of a more modern Libya. In the event, he is the leader of the hardliners among Qadhafi's children. The great socialist people's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya functions very much like a pre-modern Arab monarchy.

As they move east, Qadhafi's forces face a problem familiar to Coalition forces in Afghanistan. They can take ground, but is difficult to hold it. A well-trained and equipped tank force with air support and a secure, reliable logistics train should have little trouble punching through the resistance and reaching Benghazi. Then what?

It is not clear that Qadhafi has the forces to hold the ground much less keep secure the supply line from Tripoli. The rebels have not yet shown that they have the technology and supplies for IEDs, but they will soon and they will change the fight.

Libya-Netherlands: Update. Three Dutch marines detained in Libya after a botched evacuation operation will be released to a delegation from Malta and Greece, according to Libyan state TV and Dutch state broadcaster NOS. The Netherlands hopes the release happens but it is not definite, a senior Dutch Foreign Ministry official involved in release negotiations said. The Dutch soldiers were captured along with their helicopter 27 February near Sirte.

For the benefit of US Media and the State Department spokesman: The CIA Factbook contains the official title Qadhafi gave to his government: Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. The UNSC passed a sanctions resolution that bans arms sales to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. Under questioning today the State Department spokesman and various news reporters did not know that is the title of Qadhafi's government and does not include the rebels, whose government is the National Transition Council.

Benghazi Council-France: France recognized the Libyan opposition National Transitional Council as the sole "legitimate representative of the Libyan people" and will soon send an ambassador to Benghazi. The announcement followed a meeting by French President Sarkozy with the council's crisis committee chief Mahmoud Jebril and the council's foreign minister Ali al-Essawi in Paris.

President Sarkozy intends to propose targeted European Union airstrikes on Libya in his action plan, which he will present to the European Council on 11 March. NATO surveillance aircraft will monitor Libyan airspace at all times to gather more information on the ground, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on 10 March. NATO defense ministers also agreed to send more naval ships off Libya's coast and to renew military planning for a possible no-fly zone pending a UN mandate, the alliance's chief said.

"It has been decided to increase the presence of NATO maritime assets in the central Mediterranean," NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told a news conference after a meeting of defense chiefs.

Comment: The effect of mounting outside pressure is to spur Qadhafi's fighters to make as much progress eastward as quickly as they can. They are likely to outrun their supply line and make mistakes.

US-Libya: Today was a difficult day for executive branch officials concerning Libya. Director of National Intelligence Clapper testified that Qadhafi's forces will beat the rebels because of superior equipment. That assessment drew fire, but looks accurate based on static, linear capabilities assessments that implicitly assume nothing changes. But one thing is certain in Libya: change.

As reported in the news, the statement did not take into account prior episodes of fighting in which citizen militiamen held off tanks and aircraft for days, until supplies ran out. It also failed to allow that outside intervention in support of the rebels could change the predicted outcome, such as the arrival of a regiment of Foreign Legionnaires. So would Qadhafi's assassination or more defections by his forces.

The assessment might have been more palatable as a warning, instead of a prediction. A warning contains a prediction of potential damage for the deliberate purpose of enabling the decision maker time to apply resources to avert the threat or prepare for its occurrence. That paradox of warning did not emerge from the testimony.

Warning doctrine and lessons are neglected and the consequences and implications of that neglect were broadcast all over the world today. As a warning, the DNI's statement had an impact, but the staff did not support its boss well.

Libya: Jihadis and criminals roaming streets

Foreign advisers arriving in Benghazi, the city at the centre of Libya's insurrection against Col Muammar Gaddafi, are being confronted with a chaotic, fragmented rebellion whose fondness of the West is far from clear.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... reets.html

I've seen three men with long beards, wild hair and beards, confident manner of old campaigners and afghan hats in ras lanuf. #libya

bungdan
Dan Murphy (CSM correspondent)

http://twitter.com/bungdan/status/44778745499893760

Pranav wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... reets.html

Jihadis could be Saudis ... there is no love lost between the Sauds and Gaddafi.