Libya: The real humanitarian problem is around the corner

Friday, August 5, 2011

Indeed, the fratricidal war in Libya is heading toward a nasty point, thanks to NATO’s role in escalating a purely political problem to what it has been since March 19 when the International Coalition inserted itself into the Libyan conflict with the wrong solution tied to their military armaments to be dropped on Libya. The military campaign isn’t solving any problem; instead, it is worsening an existing one.

It is now clear that but for NATO’s intransigence and the wrong-headedness of the political leaders of the so-called Libya Contact Group (especially those of the United States, France, and Britain), better measures proposed by peace-loving people would have been enforced to end the conflict.

Over the past few days, NATO has shifted attention to bombing installations being used for civil, not military purposes, beginning with airstrikes on residential areas in Tripoli and turning to the Libya State Television, killing innocent unarmed civilians in the process. Perhaps, infuriated by the stalemated war, NATO now wants to do anything at all to save its face.

Contrary to its original UN-mandated mission of solving humanitarian problems, NATO has over-stepped all reasonable bounds and is shamelessly creating humanitarian problems instead. Its collusion with the Benghazi-based rebels to launch attacks on pro-Gaddafi territories is now the main reason for the prolonging of the Libyan conflict. Then again, its frontline role in locating and destroying pro-Gaddafi forces serves as an impetus for the rebel fighters to advance further into areas that have been peaceful all along. The spill-over negative effect is what makes the Libyan crisis NATO’s handiwork at this stage.

We can tell from the direct control that NATO exercises over the rebel forces that NATO is the real anti-Gaddafi fighting force. Very often, it takes the lead to destroy pro-Gaddafi forces, paving the way for the rebels’ advance; and it determines when the rebel forces should either advance or retreat from the battlefield. This is not how to solve humanitarian problems.

UNORTHODOX WARFARE (SABOTAGE BY THE REBELS)

The Libyan conflict is definitely heading toward a more frightening point if what the rebels have begun doing to put pressure on the Gaddafi government is anything to go by. They have begun sabotaging vital installations, the latest of which is a key pipeline in the Jebel Nefussa region, a mountainous area southeast of Tripoli, which feeds the country’s sole functioning refinery (as reported by the AFP, August 4, 2011).

According to Deputy Foreign Minister, Khaled Kaaim, “The rebels turned off a valve and poured cement over it,” which would lead to a shortage of electricity in the capital as oil and gas were used at the Zawiyah refinery to generate power.

Kaaim said food and medicine supplies were spoiling in the capital due to long power cuts, drawing complaints from Tripoli residents on Thursday. The extensive blackouts and an acute shortage of gas canisters will worsen the plight of people already traumatized by NATO’s bombing spree. The disastrous impact of this sabotage is not difficult to guess.

This sabotage is happening at the time that NATO continues its airstrikes. As reports from the pro-Gaddafi city of Zliten have it, NATO’s airstrikes on residential areas have killed defenceless civilians, an example being a woman and her three children in a four-member family. The husband was seriously wounded and left desolate. Is this a mission to solve humanitarian problems for which the UN Security Council should give its backing and then look on unconcerned?

GADDAFI GOVERNMENT’S ALLIANCE WITH THE REBEL ISLAMISTS

Seeking to break the back of the opposition, the Gaddafi regime is using all means to forge an alliance with Islamists among the rebels. This move will definitely have a huge impact on the dynamics of the civil war if it succeeds in splitting the fractious Libyan opposition, now reeling from the negative backlash from the assassination of their own military commander, Gen. Abdul Fatah Younes.

Negotiating this alliance with the Islamists raises intriguing questions because of how the Gaddafi government had branded the entire opposition as radical Islamists at the eruption of the rebellion. But now that the tide seems to have changed to warrant a shift in stance to accommodate some segments of the rebel front, the Gaddafi government is reaching out to those it thinks will bite its bait.

Although Seif al-Islam (Gaddafi’s son) has confidently disclosed the reaching of a pact with Ali Sallabi, a leading Islamic cleric in the rebel-held east, comments from the latter say otherwise. Sallabi told the AFP no pact existed, but he acknowledged that talks had taken place with Seif al-Islam.

“Our dialogue with them is always based on three points: Gaddafi and his sons must leave Libya, the capital (Tripoli) must be protected from destruction and the blood of Libyans must be spared. There is no doubt about these constants,” he said.

These are strong words; but underneath them, there could be something concrete to look for to suggest that an alliance was being negotiated, which has the potential to destabilize the rebel front if it succeeds.

INSTABILITY AT THE REBEL FRONT

The rebel-held east is still in the grips of fallouts from the assassination of General Younes. A group of 28 tribes and civil actors have met the insurgent government, pressing for a full and transparent investigation into Gen. Younes’ death. The facts surrounding the general’s death have been opaque, with senior members of the National Transitional Council giving incomplete and contradictory accounts of how he died, who killed him and the motive for the murder.

Tempers are still high and the balance in the rebel camp can tilt at any time that the malcontents decide to take on their own leadership, which will be a welcome relief for the Gaddafi government.

Nor is that all. An influential group of lawyers and judges, known as the Coalition for the Revolution of the 17th of February, has called for the resignations of several top officials, including the defense minister and a prominent judge. The group released a statement on Wednesday night calling for the resignations of the vice chairman of the rebel executive branch, Ali al-Essawi; the judge, Jumaah al-Jazwi al-Obeidy; and the defense minister, Jalal el-Digheily, and a deputy, Fawzi Bukatef, who also leads a coalition of armed rebel brigades separate from the army.

This is a powerful group, which includes many people who helped start the Libyan uprising; and their demand has dire implications for the Transitional National Council. The group, named for a date symbolically marking the uprising’s birth, has also demanded that  dozens of militias that operate in the rebel areas be disbanded, saying, “There is no legitimacy to any other armed force but the national army,” according to a New York Times report (August 5, 2011).

This demand can’t be met easily. Jamal Benour, the justice coordinator for Benghazi, who is helping to oversee the investigation, conceded that despite orders by the rebel leadership for militias to gather under a single leadership, 10 percent of the groups were still holding out.

The instability that is creeping into the leadership of the rebel front will likely continue and probably set the stage for worse things to happen to them.

In this topsy-turvy situation, no one can predict how the Libyan conflict will run henceforth; but one  certainty is that more desperate actions will be taken by either side, which will create terrible humanitarian problems. Ultimately, NATO may cash in on such a situation to deal more devastating blows to pro-Gaddafi forces and territories still under Gaddafi’s control. In this fluid situation, anything can happen, which is not likely to be in the interest of the country (Libya) as a whole.