NATO’s Slow Genocide in Libya: Syria is Next
What the world has to look forward to if NATO and the UN gets its way in Syria.
by Tony Cartalucci
April 19, 2012 – While Qatari government propaganda outlet Al Jazeera is busy whitewashing the NATO-led terrorist take-over of Libya with “documentaries” like “Gaddafi: The Endgame – State of Denial,” depicting the evisceration of one of Africa’s most developed nation-states as a pro-democracy revolution yielding a promising tomorrow – Libya in reality has been plunged into perpetual violence, destabilization, and division. And as militants battle each other while carving the once unified Libya into a myriad of fiefdoms, genocidal death squads continue a campaign of extermination nationwide.
Image: The people of Tawargha are Libyans and have been Libyan for generations, settling there from sub-Saharan Africa. They have been brutally persecuted by the NATO-armed terrorists now running Libya. In Syria, expect these to be Alawite, Christian, and secular faces.
One group of Libyans hit hardest are the people of Tawargha – who were either exterminated or exiled from their city of 10,000-30,000 during the NATO-led destruction of Libya last year. Since then, their refugee camps have been raided, and survivors who have not yet fled Libya are being systematically imprisoned, tortured, and murdered.
Now, the very network of corporate-funded and directed NGOs charged with “human rights advocacy,” who assisted the Libyan rebels in willfully lying to the world over violations of “human rights” in the lead up to NATO’s military intervention, are finally reporting the widespread atrocities being carried out by the rebels themselves. In fact, organizations like Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International, both funded by convicted criminal and Wall Street speculator, George Soros, began reporting such atrocities back in 2011, but only long after NATO bombs were already falling on Libya and the process of “regime change” was already irreversible. And, at critical junctures, such as the sieges of Bani Walid and Sirte, where NATO itself was committing systematic war crimes by air in tandem with terrorist forces on the ground – organizations like HRW and Amnesty International were altogether mute.
Image: The desolate Libyan city of Sirte after NATO’s months-long siege – the tragic aftermath of a UN-sanctioned “humanitarian war.” Not a word regarding NATO’s blockade and bombardment of these cities has been mentioned by either HRW or Amnesty International in any terms resembling the rhetoric they used to justify NATO’s intervention in March of 2011.
Now though, with Syria next on the chopping block, many around the world are looking at the “progress” made in Libya to see if the UN and NATO’s proposal for military intervention is justified, warranted, or feasible. What they see is a patchwork of terrorist regimes butchering people systematically, infighting, making duplicitous, self-serving deals with foreign firms and otherwise running the nation into the ground.
Amnesty International, a full-year too late, has published a report titled, “Libya: NTC must investigate death of another Tawargha man under torture,” in regards to the latest case in the NTC’s systematic genocide of the people of Tawargha – a city now rendered a “ghost town.” HRW had published a report last week titled, “Libya: Wake-Up Call to Misrata’s Leaders,” also regarding the systematic genocide of the people of Tawargha. Ironically, both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are giving all inquiring minds a look behind the curtain as to how exactly they are distorting other conflicts – including Syria today.
From the Beginning, Libyan Rebels were Known War Criminals
Long before the first NATO bombs dropped on Libya, genuine geopolitical analysts including Dr. Webster Tarpley of Tarpley.net, noted that the Libyan “rebels” were in fact notoriously brutal racists and led by militias belonging to a listed international terrorist organization responsible for violence not only in Libya, but in Afghanistan and Iraq. On March 1, 2011 Dr. Tarpley spoke on the Alex Jones show warning that Libyan rebels were lynching black Libyans, hailed from Al Qaeda, and that the overall agenda of destabilizing and possibly intervening militarily across the Arab World was to implement “chaos, civil war, and the division of countries,” along with the installation of weak puppet-regimes.
Just days after NATO began its military operations against Libya in mid-March of 2011, Dr. Tarpley confirmed that the Libyan rebels were led by the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), claimed by West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) to have been involved in fighting Western troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq before returning to Libya to then be armed, trained, and led by Western forces in the overthrowing of Muammar Qaddafi.
During the initial phases of NATO’s intervention, HRW and Amnesty International were complicit in covering these facts up and instead focused on lending legitimacy to the now confirmed lies of the NTC regarding human rights abuses perpetrated against them by the Libyan government. It wasn’t until July of 2011 that HRW would admit that Libyan rebels were carrying out systematic abuses of their own, and even then they were whitewashed and excused. And while Human Rights Watch now admits that what the Libyan NTC is doing to the Tawargha people amounts to “crimes against humanity,” they could have just as easily drawn such conclusions backed with ample evidence before NATO intervened militarily and rendered moot the entire “humanitarian” “responsibility to protect” doctrine the entire war was disingenuously based on.
In retrospect, we are meant to believe these organizations simply made a mistake and could not have possibly known the rebels would turn out to be worse human rights violators than those they sought to replace.
HRW & Amnesty Repeating “Mistakes” in Syria, No Mistake
That HRW and Amnesty International appear to be making the exact same mistakes in Syria, even as they finally admit the crimes of the “pro-democracy” rebels in Libya a year later and tens of thousands of lives too late, is certainly no mistake. This is exactly the purpose both organizations are meant to serve along with a myriad of other faux-NGOs – to lend legitimacy to both the Syrian terrorists and the governments of the West arming and directing them as they carry out what is essentially a campaign of foreign military conquest.
The first admissions of Syrian rebels committing atrocities have likewise come a full-year after unrest was triggered in 2011. Human Rights Watch admitted in their report, “Syria: Armed Opposition Groups Committing Abuses,” that Syrian rebels are kidnapping, torturing, and executing people, many of whom have been confirmed to be civilians. Again, geopolitical analysts have stated since the unrest began in 2011 that Syria’s opposition likewise represented not genuine “pro-democratic” forces, but rather proxies for foreign interests, many linked to extremist groups including Al Qaeda, and with Libya’s LIFG commander Abdul Hakim Belhaj literally pledging cash, weapons, and men to the Syrian rebels’ and NATO’s cause.
Indeed, Syria is destined not for a stable democratic-tomorrow, but rather the same division, destruction, chaos, and genocide now rampant across Libya, where self-serving traitors simultaneously sell their nation out from under its people while eliminating their competition through violence and terrorism. As NATO and the UN attempt to court Syria’s ruling business and government cliques, it would be wise for Syrians to look at Libya as an example of just how much worse it can get and the necessity to remain unified against what has been planned from the very beginning to be the end of Syria.
That the West’s war machine extends not only around the world in the form of vast military assets, but with an immense media infrastructure to propagate their agenda, and a gargantuan network of NGOs funded and directed to subvert every form of national institution should be a big enough clue for stake-holders within besieged nation-states that the West has neither the need nor the desire to “share” once they prevail.
Stand United, or Fall Divided: Basic Game Theory
Strategists in the West approach each targeted nation, including Libya and now Syria, employing a form of game theory assuming that those they interact with, friend and foe alike, “play” using the dominant strategy – meaning, each “player” picks the best strategy resulting in the maximum benefit for themselves only, regardless of how other “players” play. This means that the West approaches two opposition factions in any given nation, makes their intentions of moving in known, and offers each the chance to defect. Defectors are given calculated benefits and losses, while their opposition will be eliminated entirely. While in reality, both factions stand the most to gain if they thwart the vastly superior West from plundering their nation, neither considers this an option because of a combination of intellectual flaws, thus both will lose more, even under the most favorable outcomes.
The West specifically targets and favors those faction with the most flaws in character, intellect, motivation etc., as in any conflict, those ruled by emotions and irrational methodology are infinitely easier to manipulate.
In Libya, had the rebels of Cyrenaica worked with Qaddafi to expel foreign encroachment and worked to divide an intact and unified Libya’s wealth amongst themselves, they would have both vastly benefited more than even the sole victors are now. Instead, the West was able to prey on the arrogance, ideology, animosity, ignorance, and prejudices of both factions, wearing both down, dividing the remaining victor, and will, in time, eventually even eliminate them altogether. The same can be seen playing out in the perpetually divided Iraq and the same will certainly happen in Syria.
The age old axiom of standing united, or falling divided, is just as relevant today as ever. Understanding the true fault-lines running through humanity, between the global corporate-financier oligarchy and everyone else, and disallowing artificial fault-lines to be imposed upon us allows us to stand united against our true enemies and prevail. The moment we begin fighting amongst ourselves, regardless of who prevails, we all ultimately lose.
Engdahl: CIA plays ugly role, trains Syrian rebels [video]
Russia Today
April 14, 2012
Researcher and author of Full Spectrum Dominance, F. William Engdahl talks to RT from across the Syrian border about his take on the latest developments in Syria and Turkey.
RT on Twitter: http://twitter.com/RT_com
RT on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
[hat tip: Land Destroyer Report]
UN to send 300 ceasefire observers to Syria [video]
Russia Today
April 21, 2012
READ ON http://on.rt.com/4ab183
The UN Security Council has unanimously voted to pass a resolution increasing the number of ceasefire observers in Syria to 300. Meanwhile the first wave of observers reached war-torn Homs. The resolution is aimed at enforcing a truce in the conflict between the Syrian government and the opposition, which was signed last week, but has been broken numerous times since.
RT on Twitter: http://twitter.com/RT_com
RT on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
Separate explosions kill 21 security forces, civilians in Syria
PressTV
April 18, 2012
At least 13 security forces and eight civilians have been killed in two separate bomb attacks in the northwestern Syrian city of Aleppo.
On Tuesday, a car bomb targeted a bus transporting Syrian law enforcement members near a gas station in Aleppo’s al-Shaar neighborhood.
The attack left at least four security forces and one civilian dead.
The second bomb exploded under a bridge in the city as a bus, which was also carrying troops, passed by. At least 16 people, including seven civilians, were killed in the assault.
Saudi and Qatari security officials are reportedly accused of being involved in such bombings in Syria. Both Arab states have openly expressed support for an armed insurgency campaign to overthrow the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
[CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE]
[hat tip: Friends of Syria]
Desperate Syrians in Aleppo
Friends of Syria
April 18, 2012
Yesterday there were terrorist attacks in Aleppo, but the International Media today showed bombings in Homs which never happened. Innocent people and armed forces where blown up by terrorist bombs, but that is not worthy as news in the west, because it does not fit in with their agenda of war.
This is the voice of the real Syrian people like Syrian Girl.
Obama’s Friday Afternoon Document Dump for this Week: US Begins Overt Aid to Syrian Death Squads After 13 Months of Covert Support [video]
Webster G. Tarpley, Ph. D.
TARPLEY.net
April 14, 2012
FROM LIBYA TO SYRIA: “WAR IS A RACKET. IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN”
by James Corbett
Global Research
April 14, 2012
“War is a racket. It always has been.” These words are as true now as they were when Major General Smedley Butler first delivered them in a series of speeches in the 1930s. And he should have known. As one of the most decorated and celebrated marines in the history of the Corps, Butler drew on his own experiences around the globe to rail against the business interests that use the U.S. military as muscle men to protect their racket from perceived threats. From National City Bank interests in Haiti to United Fruit plantations in Honduras, from Standard Oil access to China to Brown Brothers operations in Nicaragua, Butler pointed out how intervention after intervention served the business interests of the well-connected even as American taxpayer money went to foot the bill for these adventures. The names and places may have changed, but the old adage holds: the more things change, the more they stay the same.
The National Transitional Council that is nominally in charge of what is left of Libya announced this week that they’re beginning a probe of foreign oil contracts brokered during Gaddafi’s reign by his son, Saif al-Islam. Libya is sitting on the largest oil reserves in Africa, and it is no coincidence that within weeks of the start of the NATO campaign last year the rebels had already secured the country’s oil ports and refineries on the Gulf of Sidra and established their own national oil company for negotiating contracts with the invading forces. Although the oil contract probes are supposedly meant to show the transparency of the new “government” and their willingness to root out the graft and kickbacks inherent in the old regime, it’s quietly acknowledged that the process will be used to reward the nations that most visibly supported last year’s invasions and punish those who were more reticent.
Surprising, then, that the first companies on the block are Italy’s Eni and France’s Total. Both countries fostered close ties with the NTC last year and France was the first country to officially recognize them as the government of Libya. But now Libya’s general prosecutor is reviewing documents related to these companies for possible financial irregularities. The SEC is getting in on the act, too, requesting documents relating to both companies’ Libyan operations to check for suspected violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The potential blow to the European giants’ share in the Libyan market is especially painful in light of the upcoming Iranian oil embargo that threatens to squeeze the crude imports of Greece, Italy and Spain. Now, as Libya ramps up oil production to pre-war levels the obvious potential winners in the probe are the American and British majors, who could end up eating up some of Eni and Total’s share in Libya’s oil production should the investigation lead to charges.
China may also have reason to be wary of their standing with the new government. Chinese-Libyan ties were increasingly close in the years leading up to Gaddafi’s ouster, with trade volume having reached $6.6 billion in 2010. In 2007, as the US was beginning to put AFRICOM together and the competitive scramble for African resources was heating up, Gaddafi delivered an address to the students of Oxford University where he praised China’s hands-off approach to investment in Africa. At the time, Gaddafi suggested that Beijing was winning the hearts and minds of Africans with its reluctance to interfere in local politics, while Washington was alienating the population with their heavy-handed interventions. In the wake of the NATO bombing the would-be government of Libya is singing a different tune and relations with China have cooled down. Last August a senior NTC official suggested that China would be punished when it came time to award reconstruction contracts in Libya because of their initial reluctance to support the rebels. Although the statement was downplayed, it was revealed earlier this month that Chinese companies are still waiting to begin negotiations on losses to frozen and outstanding contracts worth $18.8 billion. Relations are still cordial, though, and the Libyan government is assuring China that the contracting companies will be in a better position to resume negotiations after national elections in June.
These latest moves from Tripoli may be as much about projecting the idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government than anything else, though. Armed militias are still waging violent turf wars throughout the country, with 26 people dying in fighting between rivals in the western town of Zwara earlier this month and 150 dying in skirmishes last month in the southern city of Sabha. One militia stormed a hotel in Tripoli and opened fire, then beat and kidnapped the manager after he told a militia member to pay an outstanding room bill. Last week hundreds marched in Benghazi to call for an end to the violence between the armed gangs. The country is deeply divided along tribal lines and armed militias still occupy government buildings and openly flaunt the pronouncements of the erstwhile government. The idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government is a pipe dream at this point, but as long as they keep the oil pumping and the victors of last year’s humanitarian love bombing get their spoils, there’s hardly a peep out of Washington, Paris, or London. Smedley Butler wouldn’t be surprised.
Meanwhile in Syria, the racketeers’ plans for a Libyan repeat are proceeding apace. Last week we reported on the so-called “Friends of Syria” and their agreement to begin openly funding the rebels to the tune of millions of dollars. This week we have been watching the inevitable, pre-scripted “break down” in Annan’s UN-brokered ceasefire. Exactly on cue, unverified reports from unnamed activists have begun rolling in to the usual media mouthpieces via foreign-based NGOs proclaiming so many people have died in continued fighting. The unacknowledged elephant in the room, however, is that, exactly as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has been attempting to point out all month, it’s impossible to expect a cessation in fighting when you are openly arming, training and funding an insurgent proxy army that is hell-bent on toppling the government. However, Lavrov is banging his head against a brick wall. The ceasefire was never meant to be a ceasefire and it’s all political theater at this point anyway. Any and every unverified rumor of fighting or violence in the country will now be taken as a sign that Assad has broken the agreement and the pressure to get Beijing and Moscow to acquiesce to the toppling of the Syrian government will intensify.
In the end, this will not be a carbon copy of Libya. There will be no NATO-led bombardment or large-scale military intervention, because Russia couldn’t allow that to happen. Besides, Syria has Russian supplied surface-to-air missiles and no compunction about using them. Instead, political pressure will increase for Assad to step down and the funds and arms to the rent-a-rebel force will continue increasing until the government is toppled. The dangerous factor in this equation is that neither the west nor China/Russia have blinked yet and there is a significant amount of face to lose for one side or the other in this proxy struggle. The one with the most to lose is clearly Iran, which all things being equal would be a dominant power player in regional politics. All things, however, are not equal. With their oil increasingly embargoed, the sanctions getting progressively tighter, and one of their key allies in the region threatening to topple in favor of a hostile Sunni insurgency, Iran has to know that when and if the Syrian domino falls, it falls on them.
At the same time, attention is turning once again to another of the war racketeers’ key interests: Pakistan. There has been newfound congressional interest in the so-called “Free Baluchistan” movement seeking independence for Pakistan’s Baluchi nationals. Citing human rights violations, Rep. Rohrbacher (R-California) has introduced a resolution calling on Pakistan to recognize Balochi self-determination. He has even written an op-ed in the Washington Post where he begins his argument with recourse to human rights and switches seamlessly in the fourth paragraph into noting with evident glee the region’s natural gas, gold, uranium, and copper reserves.
Interestingly, Russia agreed last week to pony up $1.5 billion in financing and technical assistance for a proposed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. The projected course of the pipeline? It would start in Iran’s southern Assalouyeh Energy Zone and enter Pakistan from the west, crossing straight through Baluchistan. Coincidence, surely. The IP pipeline has had a tumultuous history, complete with plans to run the pipeline all the way to India (an idea from which India has distanced itself but never completely abandoned) and the potential involvement of China, which has flirted with the idea of incorporating the pipeline into a planned logistical network running from the port of Gwadar in Pakistan’s southwest all the way to Xinjiang province. Now, with a proposal for Russian funding on the table the pipeline looks closer than ever to becoming a reality.
From the outset, the US has used every bit of leverage it has to get the parties involved to scrap the idea. Diplomatic pressure has been brought to bear on China, Pakistan, and India, with Beijing and New Delhi both appearing to buckle under the pressure and pull out of the project. The US has backed its own alternative pipeline, a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India route, but that idea is looking less feasible by the day. Iran has nearly completed its share of the proposed IP pipeline, but Pakistan has been hesitant. Now along come the racketeers to fund yet another rebel movement in another geostrategically vital corridor, and before you know it “Free Baluchistan” might derail the project altogether. Look for US pressure on the Pakistani government regarding Baluchistan to increase as the pipeline comes closer to completion.
Butler was right. War is a racket, after all. These days the muscle men are rent-a-mobs and insurgents more so than the U.S. military, but the idea is the same: fund, arm and train the fighters to secure the resources and control the strategic areas. In Libya the NATO-backed rebels wrested the oil spigot from the unpredictable Gaddafi. In Syria the “Friends of Syria” are overthrowing a key Iranian ally and taking over an important square on the geopolitical chessboard. In Pakistan, American-backed rebels may succeed in driving a wedge through a key Iran-Pakistan pipeline. And the racket continues. One would do well to remember the grand finale of Butler’s speech: “To hell with war!”
|
In order to access the Corbett Report: http://www.corbettreport.com
|
|
| James Corbett is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by James Corbett |
PN 