EU 'ready to send troops to Libya'
Europe is ready to send an armed force to Libya to ensure delivery of humanitarian aid.
The proposal by the European Union to deploy the armed force to escort humanitarian aid drew an immediate warning from Muammar Gaddafi's regime that this would be tantamount to a military operation. France's foreign minister also said he was hostile to such a deployment.
The new tactics seem to have been spurred by the continued deadlock after two months of fighting between Gaddafi's army and rebel forces. There has also been growing international concern over the fate of the besieged rebel city of Misrata, where Nato has been unable to halt heavy shelling by Gaddafi's forces with airstrikes alone.
Misrata, Libya's third-largest city, has been under siege for nearly two months, with rebels holding on to seaside positions in the port area. In recent days, Libyan troops have pounded the city with shells and rockets.
Nato officials acknowledged that they were having trouble destroying Gaddafi's mortars and rocket launchers from the air, for fear of inadvertently harming civilians in such strikes.
"It's not a conventional war," said Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, chairman of Nato's military committee. He would not say just how much of the regime's firepower has been eliminated or put out of action by Nato's operations so far.
The fighting in Libya has been deadlocked for the past month. Gaddafi is holding on in the west, while the rebels control the east. Nato airstrikes have kept Gaddafi loyalists in check, but the rebels, a poorly trained group with little military experience, have not been able to score military gains, either.
The EU could deploy an armed force to Libya within days to ensure the delivery of humanitarian supplies, said a spokesman for EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton.
The EU has no standing army, and the personnel and equipment would have be donated by member countries.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said he was "totally hostile to the deployment of troops on the ground."
As the war in Libya continues, observers are foreseeing protracted, bloody conflict with considerable loss of life. While the rebel forces appear strongly supported in the Eastern part of the country, the Gadaffi regime seems to have support in the Western portion. There is also a mounting refugee crisis as Libyan citizens and many non-Libyan workers in the country's oil and gas industry are fleeing for their lives.
AntwortenLöschenThe two European NATO countries which have spearheaded the intervention in Libya, the United Kingdom and France, are calling for an intensification of the intervention.
A stalemate and a continuing civil war are not in the interests of the people of Libya. Therefore we should pay serious attention to attempts at mediation and a cease-fire.
http://peoplesworld.org/a-peaceful-solution-in-libya-is-feasible-but-nato-stands-in-the-way/
US president reverses previously cautious approach to Libyan conflict and signs America up to more muscular intervention
AntwortenLöschenhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/15/obama-sarkozy-cameron-libya?intcmp=239
The goal clearly is a "regime change". Nothing to do with "humanitarian aid".
AntwortenLöschenI am still trying to figure out WHAT had been promised to Russia and China to abstain at the UN...
This can only stop if the UK and FR people resists their own governments' involvement.
AntwortenLöschenUnfortunately, such "resentment" shows up only after the dead bodies begin to arrive home.
good point ... good dig
AntwortenLöschenIt was brought up to my attention by another member...
AntwortenLöschenwell i knew they had abstained, should have thought in terms of them profiting in some way and then sitting back criticizing, going to snoop around
AntwortenLöschenhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13132654
AntwortenLöschenFrom your link:
AntwortenLöschen"Analysis
Jonathan Beale Defence correspondent, BBC News
William Hague insists this limited deployment does not mean "boots on the ground". The British military officers will not be in uniform and will not join the battle.
We are told they'll be providing "non-lethal assistance". But those carefully chosen words can't hide their real purpose - that is to make the rebels a more effective fighting force.
The rebels will be trained in the communications, logistics and intelligence skills used by a modern military. It's hard to see this intervention as purely a humanitarian response, though the government insists the assistance falls within the mandate of the UN Security Council.
It will still be interpreted as "mission creep". It will also prompt more questions as to what could follow.
The foreign secretary says there are no plans to send in British combat troops to Libya - what he interprets as real boots on the ground. But he hasn't ruled out arming the rebels. "
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
AntwortenLöschenA war by any other name would ........
BTW... the headline says EU. European Union... How is that possible? It is a "prepare the minds of the lay people" move.
AntwortenLöschenEU is not UK+FR
Make no mistake, the UK and France are doing as much as they can to exert their considerable combined leverage on the EU. You have to remember that the EU is under economic pressure at the moment with the financial bailouts required by Greece, Ireland and now Portugal. There is great need for member countries not to seem divided at this moment in time. I think that's why the EU as a whole may very well fall in line behind the plans of the UK and France over Libya. There is 'mission creep' no doubt about it, and the UK and France will do whatever they think they can get away with under the umbrella of the UN mandate.
AntwortenLöschenAs a Brit, I have seen what Gaddafi is capable of in terms of financing terrorist attacks here - he's done it before after all. I have no doubt that if he remains in power now he will take revenge on this country in some form or other. I think the original involvement in the internal conflict in Libya was a mistake, a huge mistake, but I admit to feeling very divided about what to do now. I think the prevailing feeling here, certainly from my point of view anyway, is that we have been dragged into something from which there may now be no turning back.
I am after the hypocrisy of the UK/FR "statesmen" (my ass), who have been in bed with Qaddafi for over two decades now.
AntwortenLöschenI am sure you do not want me to produce evidence of it.
Now... they are after an ill-defined adventure no one sees the end of it.
I know about the sordid state of the finances of the EU. However, the UK is NOT part of it not having signed up for the EURO.
Furthermore, GERMANY seems to be the MASTER of the EURO finances, not FR. And Germany has been AGAINST this adventure.
Who cares about Portugal, Spain, Ireland or Greece? Think of Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Germany, Austria, Sweden as EU....
The EU needs the UK and France to help cough up the money to support the countries needing bailouts though, and Germany knows that. They may well not raise a strong voice of dissent to protect the EU as an entity.
AntwortenLöschenThis 'ill-defined adventure' is probably going to leave your average Libyan no better off and a considerable number of them dead, quite probably more of them than if we had stayed out of it. That's the way I see it anyway. The fact that we now seem to be engaged in yet another bloody war, another one which I didn't want or get asked about, frankly sickens me.