Britain's Failed Intel Operation in Libya: Her Majesty's Bungling
"Secret Intelligence Service"
by Felicity Arbuthnot
"Do not hold the delusion that your advancement is accomplished by
crushing others.": (Marcus Tullius Cicero,106-43 B.C. Roman Statesman,
Philosopher.)
British Style "Liberation": Beware the Ides of March. Part Two
Even by the standards of a near bancrupt island off Europe, run
currently, largely, by a bunch of seemingly gung-ho, out of out of
touch millionaires, the gun boat diplomacy of Messrs Cameron, Fox and
Hague (Prime Minister, Defense Minister and Foreign Minister
respectively) was a monumental farce of historic proportions.
The story unravelled as fast as Britain's Foreign Minister William
Hague's statement on 21st February that Gaddafi had fled to Venezuela
- which prompted London's Venezuelan Embassy to release an emphatic
denial clarifying : " ... the mistaken aspect of such a statement."
A small British diplomatic team ..." according to William Hague, had
entered Libya (illegally) to make contact with the rebel National
Council in Benghazi. Liam Fox, singing from the same hymn sheet (6th
March) told ITN that: "a small diplomatic team" was talking with the
rebels. Not quite. A team of "special forces" officers had been
captured by a group of guards protecting the Al-Khadra Farm company,
eighteen miles from Benghazi, alerted by the deafening thudding of
helicopter rotor blades.
They were apprehended, tied up and delivered to the Benghazi
revolutionary council. A senior member of the council told the
Guardian: "They were carrying espionage equipment, reconnaissance
equipment, multiple passports and weapons. This is no way to conduct
yourself during an uprising ... Gaddafi is bringing in thousands of
mercenaries to kill us, most are using foreign passports ... how do we
know who these people are? They say they're British nationals and some
of the passports they have are British. But the Israelis used British
passports to kill that man in Dubai last year." Indeed.
Rebel sources initially also expressed puzzlement about the mission.
"If this is an official delegation, why come with helicopters? Why not
say 'we are coming, permission to land at the airport?' There are
rules for these things," one said.
Seemingly, the hapless bunch were taken by helicopter from HMS
Cumberland, docked off the Libyan coast, to liase with British man
called "Tom", who had been working at the Al-Khadra farm as an
"administrator" for a few months. He had, however, driven off at 3
a.m., the same night, saying he was going in to Benghazi (as you do,
in the middle of the night, in the middle of a revolution) according
to one of the guards. A Foreign Office official, asked whether it
would not have made more sense to simply dock by boat in Benghazi
harbour and take a taxi to meet the rebel leadership, a mere couple of
miles away, conceded that, yes, that probably would have been wiser.
Former British ambassador to Libya, Oliver Miles, commented dryly that
the antics seemed "a strange way of introducing yourself to a new
regime".
The bungling bunch, are thought to have been assembled by the "Secret
Intelligence Service", a bit of an oxymoron, in the circumstances,
clearly deficit in both intelligence and secrecy. The: "SIS collects
secret intelligence and mounts covert operations overseas in support
of British Government objectives", states their website. The
"objective" in this case is undoubtedly the largest oil deposits in
Africa and the ninth largest in the world. Amongst the "values" which
the SIS "upholds" is : "Integrity - we act within our legal framework
and with the highest ethical and professional standards." (1) Creeping
illegally, in to a sovereign state, in the dead of night, armed to the
teeth, with a bunch of dodgy passports, and surveillance equipment,
seems to fall a little short on the "integrity" front, but we can all
make mistakes. They certainly endorsed Colonel Gaddafi's assertion
that the uprisings were the result of "foreign interference", though.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office hit another high score on the
error front, unable to evacuate an estimated three thousand British
oil workers from the initial chaos, whilst other countries, including
some tiny, some very poor, were having no trouble sending in flights
to bring their nationals home. All descended in to further absurdity,
when it was announced that the war ship HMS Cumberland (from which the
above insurgents deployed) was going to the rescue: "but would not
dock until it was safe."
A plane that was finally chartered, was stuck at Gatwick airport for
ten hours, with a technical hitch, the Foreign Minister and his staff
apparently unable to find any others for charter any where on the
planet. David Cameron said he was: "terribly sorry" for the plight of
the stranded - and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg said he had "forgotten"
he was in charge of the country.
There were no such problems in chartering a 'plane for the staff of
the British Embassy, who closed the building and scuttled out, with
the Ambassador, Richard Northern, on 26th February.
The Prime Minister was touring the Middle East, condemning violence,
with a bunch of arms salesmen in tow. At the same time, in the United
Arab Emirates, fifty British companies had displays at the arms export
show, attended by Libyan Generals, as Cameron declared the force used
in that country as: "completely appalling and unacceptable."
The "appalling and unacceptable", was, in fact being carried out using
U.K., equipment, licensed for sale to Libya as late as 2010,
including: wall and door breaching projectile launchers, crowd control
ammunition, small arms ammunition, tear gas and irritant ammunition.
Sniper rifles were also approved. Further, both Bahraini(2) and Libyan
authorities were invited to attend two recent UK arms fairs:
Farnborough in 2010 and Defence and Security Equipment International
(DSEI) in 2009. (3)
As British nationals were abandoned and Cameron flogged arms and
wandered, smirking, in Cairo's Tahrir Square (4) boasting being "the
first Western leader" to visit after the uprising (British politicians
have a delusional obsession at being "first" or "leading the world",
having a pitiful modern record on both, except in illegal invasions
and mass murder.) Nick Clegg went skiing.
Since Barack Obama, last week told Colonel Qaddafi he should step down
(and was pressured in to suspending a contract to Libya for troop
carriers and military exports, which would also have benefited
Britain's BAE Systems) Cameron has followed his Leader and, this week
with France's President Sarkozy, signed a letter to Herman von Rompuy,
President of the European Union Council, urging: " ... ending of the
suffering of the Libyan people", thus "Muammar Qaddafi and his clique
must leave." Hardly statesmanlike language and hardly legal.
Incredibly they call for plans to "prepare to to help" the insurgency
and preparations for a no-fly zone over Libya.
Patrick Cockburn, in the (London) Independent (11th March)
encapsulated the posturing: "There is something frivolous and absurd
about France's sudden recognition of the Libyan rebel leadership in
Benghazi as a sort of quasi-government. Presumably intended to give
the impression Nicolas Sarkozy has a grip on events, it is evidence he
does not know what to do any more than other European leaders.
"The recognition of unelected and self-appointed leaders in countries
in which civil war is raging is a reminder, rather, of 19th century
imperialism, when the British, for instance, would choose a leader in
a country like Afghanistan who was most likely to be co-operative.
There is usually a price to be paid for this. Leaders backed by
outside powers may obtain arms and money, but their local credibility
is unlikely to be enhanced. In Libya, Gaddafi can more easily deride
his opponents as foreign dupes. If recognition of the Benghazi junta
is aimed at providing political cover for later military intervention,
it is again unlikely to convince anybody that Libyans are taking the
decisions."
As Iraq, sell $millions in arms to a seemingly favored customer, then
impose sanctions, freeze all assets (accounting for seized assets
apparently not necessary) invade and grab the oil fields. They also
demanded all countries now embargo arms: "including supplies to
mercenaries." Since mercenaries from U.S., and U.K., firms such as
Control Risks, Blackwater (now XE) Kellog, Brown and Root, Triple
Canopy, CACI, Titan (the latter two who brought the high standard of
duty of care in Abu Ghraib to the world) of course, outnumber troops
in Afghanistan and Iraq in order of magnitude, the latter ranks a
special category of chutzpah.
As the Arab League too, grapples with the problem, and moots following
the U.S., European Union route of a "no fly zone", the sticky matter
of legality emerges again. As Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus of
International Law at Princeton, points out: "It should be obvious that
a no-fly zone in Libyan airspace is an act of war, as would be, of
course, contemplated air strikes on fortifications of the Gaddafi
forces.The core legal obligation of the U.N., Charter requires member
states to refrain from any use of force unless it can be justified as
self-defence after a cross-border armed attack or mandated by a
decision of the U.N., Security Council."
His colleague, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois
told Al Jazeera (10th March) that the proposed no fly zone was
illegal, and: " ... recognising the Libyan rebels as a legitimate
government", simply signalled intention of interfering in Libya's
affairs, and that all the U.S., was interested in was re-stealing
Libya's oil.
Presenting as altruism, another kleptomanic foray for resources (and
subsequent, inevitable disastrous, quagmire) is important. The buzz
word currently for carpet bombing and invasion is: "humanitarian
intervention." The indisputable tragedy of thirty deaths was "a
massacre." Implication: "intervention" is a moral duty. Yet strangely,
when US/NATO in Afghanistan killed sixty four villagers on 20th
February (locals said twenty were women, twenty nine were children and
young adults, aged seven to twenty, and fifteen, men) it was declared
by spokesmen, not a "massacre" but a "mistake."
On 1st., March when nine children, aged seven to fifteen were killed
whilst collecting firewood, near a village in Kunar province, Defence
Secretary, Robert Gates described their annihilation as a " ... a
setback." The Washington Post (3rd March) described the childrens'
deaths as: "the latest irritant" between US/NATO., forces and the
Afghan government. Killings of protesters in Iraq, by forces of
America's puppet government, are met with silence. There was no call
for a "no fly zone" as Israel decimated Gaza and mercilessly destroyed
fourteen hundred lives, trapped in a tiny land, with no where to hide.
Whatever the undisputed failings of the Libyan regime, the
"humanitarian intervention" aspect does not sit too well in a country,
where, according to the Human Development Index (HDI) (which measures
life expectancy, health, literacy and well being) an "extensive"
social services programme, included a comprehensive pension system,
compensation for sickness and work injury, maternity benefit, free
medical care and education, with a "dramatic" improvement in literacy
over two decades and the lowest infant mortality rate and highest life
expectancy in Africa.
The HDI is the highest in Africa and rates 53rd over all (in context,
Brazil 73rd.) Whilst Colonel Gadaffi's treatment of opponents leaves
plenty to be desired, Abu Ghraib, Bagram, Guantanamo, and secret
torture renditions across the planet, the potential treatment of
Julian Assange and the actual treatment of Bradley Manning, are hardly
platforms from which to preach human rights.
Should anyone harbour doubts as to how casual invasion has become, the
banter between General Petraeus and Robert Gates, on his recent
arrival in Aghanistan, should allay them. 'Apparently unaware of an
open microphone, Gen Petraeus greeted Mr Gates at Kabul airport
joking: "Welcome back, sir, flying a little bigger plane than normal
... you gonna launch some attacks on Libya or something?"
The US Defence Secretary responded to the comment by laughing and
replied, "yeah, exactly." ' (Daily Telegraph, 8th March.)
Since the imposition of sanctions on Iraq in 1990, the subsequent
bombings, George W, Bush's declaration of a "Crusade" before Iraq's
invasion, the carpet bombing of of Yugoslavia in 1999, the bombing,
invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in 2001, the U.S., and U.K.,
have led twenty one, shameful, homicidal, infanticidal, blood soaked
years against Muslim lands.
Enough.
* http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23486
2. Bahrain SIS and UK torture equipment:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23619
3. http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/14172
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23660
------------------------------------
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/