Libya’s Pathway to Peace - BARACK OBAMA, DAVID CAMERON, and NICOLAS SARKOZY

[slipslidingaway]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/opinion/15iht-edlibya15.html?_r=1

Together with our NATO allies and coalition partners, the United States, France and Britain have been united from the start in responding to the crisis in Libya, and we are united on what needs to happen in order to end it.

Even as we continue our military operations today to protect civilians in Libya, we are determined to look to the future. We are convinced that better times lie ahead for the people of Libya, and a pathway can be forged to achieve just that.

...However, so long as Qaddafi is in power, NATO must maintain its operations so that civilians remain protected and the pressure on the regime builds. Then a genuine transition from dictatorship to an inclusive constitutional process can really begin, led by a new generation of leaders. In order for that transition to succeed, Qaddafi must go and go for good.

...Today, NATO and our partners are acting in the name of the United Nations with an unprecedented international legal mandate. But it will be the people of Libya, not the U.N., who choose their new constitution, elect their new leaders, and write the next chapter in their history.

Britain, France and the United States will not rest until the United Nations Security Council resolutions have been implemented and the Libyan people can choose their own future."

[GeorgeGist]

1. It's the oil, stupid.

[slipslidingaway]

2. And it looks like we are there until a new government is established...

New UN resolution required to oust Gaddafi: French minister
http://m.ibtimes.com/un-libya-nato-france-italy-134875.html

"...Gerard Longuet appeared to be responding to a joint letter signed by the leaders of the US, France and UK that declared that the campaign in Libya will not cease until Gaddafi is toppled. (The current UN resolution on Libya called for a no-fly zone over the country and efforts to protect civilians, but did not specifically seek a regime change in Tripoli).

Longuet told French radio that ousting Gaddafi would be beyond the scope of the current UN mandate.

...Hilary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, and William Hague, the British Foreign Secretary, are reportedly negotiating in Berlin with other NATO countries to increase the number of aircraft they will contribute to launch air strikes on Gaddafi’s military targets..."


http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.com/2011/02/libya-why-oil-profits-are-common-factor.html

"...However Gaddafi has been less generous on the share of the profits than they’d hoped, having demanded an increasing share of those profits and even making noises about possible nationalisation, leaving American oil firms worried he might kick them out altogether (3) – (4).

Similar actions by Mohammed Mossadeq, democratically elected President of Iran, in 1953, resulted in the British and American governments sending CIA and MI6 agents to organise a military coup which overthrew him and installed the Shah’s dictatorship (5) – (7)..."

[sad sally]

3. Yeah, and to make sure there's PEACE, we do this:

So we sold Libya $15 million in aircraft parts in 2009 so we could blow them up in 2011. Good to know the defense contractors will always be kept in business. Military weapons of mass destruction: America's #1 manufacturing.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9LT9N9O1.htm?du

U.S.-approved sales to Libya dropped in 2009, to $15 million from $46 million in 2008. All Libyan sales were restricted to non-lethal equipment. Almost all of the equipment approved in 2009 were aircraft parts, compared to more than $1 million that had been approved in 2008 for explosives and incendiary agents. State Department spokesman Mark C. Toner said earlier this week that the explosives were limited for use in oil exploration, but other officials raised concerns that the material could be converted into crude battlefield munitions.

The AP reported earlier this week that the State Department had also green-lighted a $76.7 million deal in 2009 that would have upgraded at least 50 old U.S.-built armored troop transports for the Libyan army. The deal -- not detailed in the latest figures -- stalled in Congress, bogged down by concerns that it would improve the mobility of Gadhafi's forces. Last week, State Department officials notified congressional committees that the deal was now off the table.

The State figures released Thursday night also detailed sales of U.S. defense items for Egypt ($101 million) and Bahrain ($88 million). The figures show $458,000 in tear gas sales licensed to Egypt, where there were numerous reports that U.S.-supplied crowd control gas suppressed democracy protesters in Cairo. The U.S. authorized $18,000 in tear gas for Bahrain in 2008, but did not license it in 2009, the figures show. Both countries were also authorized shipments of firearms, shotguns and close assault weapons.

Other defense experts cautioned that other countries would quickly move to replace the U.S. in any arms sales stopped for human rights concerns. Matthew Schroeder, an arms expert with the Federation of American Scientists, pointed to a massive surge of $470 million in armaments to Libya by European nations while the U.S. held back.

[slipslidingaway]

4. Thanks for the article ...

at least they cancelled the last deal with Libya.

"...The AP reported earlier this week that the State Department had also green-lighted a $76.7 million deal in 2009 that would have upgraded at least 50 old U.S.-built armored troop transports for the Libyan army. The deal -- not detailed in the latest figures -- stalled in Congress, bogged down by concerns that it would improve the mobility of Gadhafi's forces. Last week, State Department officials notified congressional committees that the deal was now off the table..."