THE Libyan people and their armed forces are more than giving NATO a run for its money. In fact they are bringing the ‘mighty war machine’ to its knees.
Libyan TV has been reporting on the NATO bombing of of Misratah, Al-Aziziyah and Sirte, showing the results.
A military official said that ‘this morning 13 April Tripoli Street in the city of Misratah was subjected to bombing by the colonialist crusader aggression.
‘The street is considered to be one that is populated with residents.’
The same military official also said that the town of Al-Aziziyah, about 35 miles south of Tripoli, was subjected to bombing by the colonialist crusader aggression, which shook the Umar Askar hospital in Al-Subay’ah.
The official also said that the city of Sirte was subjected to bombing and an on-screen ‘urgent’ news caption added that there had been a ‘number of martyrs’ in Misratah, and that ‘each missile or bomb dropped by the crusaders on Libyans is paid for by the governments of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates’.
The report later showed a video of what the presenter said was the aftermath of the bombing of Sirte.
The night-time footage shows rough, open ground lit up by lights, with the camera focusing on tangled concrete and metal debris.
Meanwhile a plane chartered by the French government with 10 tonnes of medicines aboard arrived in Benghazi, the base of the Libyan counter-revolutionaries, on Wednesday 13 April.
The Airbus, which was also carrying NGO members, is the first ‘humanitarian flight’ to be chartered by the French authorities.
It landed at Benghazi airport the day of the Doha meeting of the Contact Group on Libya, at which the ‘rebels’ called for greater international recognition, and more aid.
Last Friday, Italy announced that it was sending a military C130 loaded with 14.5 tons of medical equipment enabling 60,000 patients to be treated, particularly people hurt in the fighting with the loyalist forces of Muammar al-Gadaffi.
The French government yesterday asked its NATO allies in Berlin not just to mobilise its aerial forces more extensively against the Al-Gadaffi troops, but also to strike the targets rapidly for greater effectiveness.
‘Collectively we must be capable of guaranteeing our mission in Libya, which is to protect the civilians effectively. For this, greater operational flexibility is required,’ an official told journalists on the eve of the meeting of NATO foreign ministers in the German capital.
He explained that France and Britain on Tuesday pressed the other NATO countries intervening in Libya to step up their efforts, in view of the fear of becoming bogged down in the conflict – without so far having succeeded in rallying all of their partners.
‘There are more planes than required involved in monitoring the no-fly zone and not enough from the point of view of air-to-ground capacity,’ he said.
‘Six allies out of 28 are participating in air-to-ground missions and two are carrying out 50 per cent,’ he emphasised.
According to allied military sources, the two countries doing half of the work are France and the United Kingdom, with 29 and 10 aircraft respectively. The four doing the other half are Belgium (six F-16 aircraft), Canada (seven F-18s), Denmark (four F-16s) and Norway (six F-16s).
The six Gripen aircraft deployed by Sweden, which is not a member of NATO, and Italy’s four Tornadoes take part in reconnaissance operations and the location of targets, but do not bomb them, as they do not have the authorisation of their national authorities.
‘The allies have the resources to make up the shortfall’ caused by the withdrawal of around 50 American aircraft on 4th April, said the French official.
Another allied diplomat said that ‘the NATO military command had asked for more planes a few days ago’ and that at this stage, after the contribution of an additional four British planes, ‘there is still a shortage of 10 or so planes’.
‘France is not the one that is going to place these resources at NATO’s disposal. The gap could usefully be plugged by others on the military and the political front,’ the French official emphasised.
However, in his view the operations pose another problem. ‘If NATO’s rules of engagement are as robust as those of the coalition’ which preceded it from 19 to 30 March, ‘the “dynamic” targeting, in a few hours, of the targets for bombing is harder to do’, the French official explained.
‘The priority is keeping up the military pressure’ and, in order to do this, strike quite hard to protect civilians, and quite rapidly, by ‘cutting down as far as possible on the cycle of dealing with targets’ from identification to destruction, he said in essence.
A NATO official stressed that ‘the gap has already begun to be plugged’, thanks to the four Tornado aircraft supplied by London, but also because ‘some of the countries already involved in the strikes have stepped up the pace of their operations’.
The General People’s Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation responded on Wednesday 13 April, to statement No. 3082, issued by the EU Foreign Affairs Council meeting in Luxembourg on Tuesday.
The committee said: ‘The General People’s Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation has acquainted itself with statement No. 3082, issued by the EU Foreign Affairs Council meeting in Luxembourg, on EU political interventions inside Libya. While it regrets the allegations made in it on Libya’s position, it would like to stress the following:
‘First, Libya has announced its commitment to the contents of UN Resolutions 1970 and 1973 and confirmed this in practice by accepting the African road map.
‘Second, the Libyan authorities are very keen on a ceasefire to spare the citizens the suffering and pain which ensue from the fighting.
‘Since the issuance of Resolution 1970 they have tried to abide by the ceasefire, but the armed gangs did not leave them any option other than to defend themselves.
‘In order to prove their good intention to abide by that, they suggested at the beginning the despatch of international observers on the ground.
‘It is regrettable that the armed gangs categorically rejected the attempt of the high-level African committee to arrange a ceasefire and we expected the various partners to condemn this position.
‘Third, in accordance with a statement issued on 20 March 2011, we announced our acceptance of the comprehensive national dialogue so as to arrive at a practical translation of the Libyan people’s aspirations and we categorically refuse to allow the others to decide on behalf of the Libyan people anything which lies in the heart of their competence.
‘Fourth, we consider any operations carried out by the EU inside Libya to be a flagrant aggression on Libya and a blatant violation of the contents of UN Resolutions 1970 and 1973 ‘on the sovereignty of the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, its independence, territorial integrity and national unity, and the Libyan people will resist such an operation with all means.
‘Five, by embarking on the measures explained in the aforementioned statement, the EU’s stances are not characterised by neutrality and objectivity and its stances, which are marked by bias, are bound to obstruct the solution of the problem in a peaceful way.
‘Six, the EU’s decision to impose more sanctions in the sphere of oil and gas and its intention to strengthen them in the future is bound to increase the suffering of all the sections of the Libyan people. Moreover, these measures contradict the international human law and the international law on human rights, in addition to their deliberate violation of UN Resolutions 1970 and 1973.’
The communique was signed by ‘The General People’s Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation’, and issued on 13 April 2011.
At Doha, the Libya Contact Group announced its hopes to move towards a ‘cease-fire’ on condition that the Libyan regime’s troops withdraw ‘from the towns they have invaded’, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said on Wednesday 13 April.
He announced: ‘We hope to begin moving towards a cease-fire but on condition that it is a real cease-fire that is genuinely monitored, not just an end to the shooting.’
He explained that, in line with the UN Security Council resolutions, a cease-fire of this kind should include ‘the withdrawal of Col Muammar al-Gadaffi’s troops from the towns they have invaded and the return of his force to barracks’.
The Contact Group on Libya, meeting in Doha, gave the green light to ‘material aid for the opposition’s self-defence’.
‘This means arms but not only that, in other words it means also equipment for communication and apparatus for intercepting the regime’s radio communications,’ the Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said on emerging from the talks.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe attended an ‘informal’ meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers yesterday and today in Berlin, where he is urging the Alliance to keep up the military pressure on Gadaffi.
He said that the NATO role must be ‘fully assumed’, and the Alliance efforts so far ‘are not sufficient’. France’s position is supported mainly by Britain and the leaders of those two countries are to meet over dinner in Paris late Wednesday evening to discuss the developments in the Libyan situation.
The French Defence Minister Gerard Longuet has also complained that France was now assuming the bulk of the air strike effort against forces loyal to the Libyan leader.
NATO explained that the situation has changed on the ground and Gadaffi forces are now disguised like rebel forces, which makes operations more complex and dangerous.
‘NATO must not lift the military pressure. Its military actions must be adapted in function of the framework set by the Contact Group,’ the French Foreign Ministry said.
The Libyan people and armed forces are clearly proving that they are stronger and more tenacious than the previously all powerful NATO organisation that was designed to fight the Warsaw Pact.
Victory to Libya!
Victory to Gadaffi!
The enemy is at home!
