Thursday, 18 August 2011

Libya and the end of Western illusions

Libya and the end of Western illusions

The Libyan army soldiersFive months after the bombing began, it is no longer possible to believe the official version of the early events in Libya and massacres attributed to "Gaddafi regime." Simultaneously, we must now take account of legal and diplomatic response of Libyan highlighting crimes against peace committed by TV propaganda, war crimes perpetrated by NATO military, and crimes against humanity committed by political leaders of the Atlantic Alliance.
Just under half of Europeans still support the war against Libya. Their position is based on incorrect information. They actually believe, in fact taht the "Gaddafi regime" was bloodily suppressing demonstrations in Benghazi in February and bombed neighborhoods in Tripoli, while the colonel himself had promised to pour "rivers of blood" if his compatriots continued to challenge his authority.
In two months of fieldwork, I could see for myself that these accusations are borne of pure propaganda, designed by the NATO powers to create the conditions of war, and relayed around the world over their television Al-Jazeera, CNN, BBC and France24.
The reader who knows where to be in this debate and, despite the brainwashing of September 11 and weapons of mass destruction from Saddam Hussein, is reluctant to consider that the United States, France, the UK and Qatar were able to fabricate such lies, however, can form an opinion over time. NATO, the largest military coalition in history, failed bombing in five months to reverse the one she described as a "tyrant." Every Friday, a large demonstration in support of the plan is organized in a different city in the country and all experts now agree that Colonel Gaddafi has at least 90% of popular support in Tripolitania and at 70% across the entire country, including areas "rebels". These people suffer every day of the blockade, aerial bombardment and ground fighting. They never argue with their flesh and blood individual who has committed crimes against them which he is accused by the "international community". The difference between those who believe in the West that Gaddafi is a tyrant who has drawn on his own people, and those who believe that Libya is a hero of the anti-imperialist struggle is that the former live in illusion created by propaganda TV, while others have on-site experience of reality.
This said. There is a second illusion suffered by the West-and I include now in the court "Western", not only but also the monarchies of the Gulf Cooperation Council and Turkey, although Eastern culture that have chosen this camp: they still think it is still possible to devastate a country and kill its people without legal consequences. It is true that, until now, international justice has been a justice of the victors or the powerful. We remember the Nazi official who addressed him the judges at Nuremberg telling them that if Reich had won the war, it would be that the Nazis and the Allies that judges should be accountable for their war crimes. More recently, we saw the use by NATO's International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia to try to justify a posteriori that the war in Kosovo was "the first humanitarian war in history," according to the expression Tony Blair. Or how the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, was used to try to overthrow the Syrian government and to decapitate the Lebanese Hezbollah, and probably soon to accuse the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Not to mention the International Criminal Court, the secular European colonial powers in Africa.
However, the development of instruments and organs of international justice in the twentieth century has gradually established an international order in which the superpowers themselves will have to comply, where they will sabotage to escape their responsibilities. In the case of Libya, there are countless violations of international law. Here are the main, as they were established by the Provisional Technical organ Libyan-ministerial coordination and described by counsel for the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the French Marcel Ceccaldi [1], at various conferences press.
TV channels which, under the leadership of their respective Governments, have manufactured false information to lead to war, are guilty of "crimes against peace", as defined by the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly of the UN adopted in the aftermath of World War II [2]
The journalist-propagandists should be considered more culpable even than the military who carried out war crimes or crimes against humanity, to the extent that any of these crimes have been possible without the one that preceded the "crime against peace."
Political leaders of the Atlantic Alliance who hijacked the Resolution 1973 of the object to engage in a war of aggression against a sovereign state is personally responsible to the International Justice. According to the jurisprudence in the aftermath of World War II by the Tokyo Tribunal, the crimes are not the result of states or organizations, but individuals. Plunder the assets of a state, establish a naval blockade and bombing of infrastructure for hurting people, attacking an army in its barracks and ordered to assassinate enemy leaders, and failing, to terrorize them by murdering their families, are much of war crimes. The commission of systematic, as is the case today, is a crime against humanity. This crime is inalienable, which means that MM. Obama, Sarkozy, Cameron and Al-Thani will be prosecuted by the Justice for life.
NATO as an organization, is legally responsible for material and human damage of this war. There is no doubt right that it must pay, even though it surely will try to invoke a privilege of jurisdiction to escape its responsibilities. It is then for the Alliance to see how to divide the bill for the conflict between Member States, even though some of them are on the verge of bankruptcy. This will be followed disastrous economic consequences for their people, guilty of these crimes endorsed. And in a democracy no one can claim to be innocent of the crimes committed in its name.
International Justice will have to address more specifically the case of "government" Sarkozy-I used here to emphasize that this anglicism now the French president led directly to the policy of his government without going through his prime minister-. Indeed, France has played a central role in preparing for this war in October 2010 by organizing a failed attempt of military coup and then by planning with the United Kingdom as early as November 2010 bombing of Libya and a landing ground which was believed then possible, and finally by actively participating in deadly unrest in Benghazi which led to the war. In addition, France, more than any other power, has deployed special forces on the ground, certainly without their uniforms, and violated the arms embargo on supplying the insurgents, either directly or through aircraft-Qatari. Not to mention that France has violated UN freezing of Libyan assets, diverting some of the fabulous cash of the Fund for the benefit of Libyan ruler puppet of CNT at the expense of the Libyan people who believed the well-being of its children after the oil exhausted.
These gentlemen of NATO hoped to escape international justice in a few days by crushing their victim, Libya, so qu'ellel would have survived to continue, will have become disillusioned. Libya is still there. She filed complaints with the International Criminal Court, the Belgian courts (jurisdiction on which NATO), the European Court of Justice, national courts of aggressor states. It conducts business before the Council of Human Rights in Geneva, the Security Council and General Assembly of the United Nations. It will not be possible for big powers to put out fires all at once. Worse, the arguments they use to escape from a court before they will turn against one another. In a few weeks in a few months if they have not succeeded in destroying Tripoli, they will not have other loopholes to avoid convictions as humiliating to negotiate a high price for the withdrawal of complaints.
Thierry Meyssan