Tag Archives: UN

AFTER NATO TERROR COME U.N. OCCUPATION FORCES

20110918-011839.jpg

by Stephen Lendman

The peacekeepers are coming! The peacekeepers are coming! War, mass killing and destruction continue, but they’re coming!

In fact, paramilitaries are coming to kill and terrorize Libyans wanting liberation, not occupation.

A blind eye won’t notice mass rapes and sex trafficking, as well as other atrocities and crimes. They’re commonplace, in fact, when Blue Helmets show up, operating as they please with impunity. More on that below.

Moreover, when they come they don’t leave as long as imperial powers want them there. Citizens of occupied countries have no say nor any rights. Their choice is obey or else.

Libya’s corpse belongs to NATO. It’s now Libya, Inc. to be carved up for profit with paramilitaries deployed for enforcement.

Under the UN Charter, the Security Council may act to maintain international peace and security, including by deploying peacekeepers host countries request.

The UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations then enlists member states to provide contingents once the Security Council approves.

In place, they’re supposed to restore order, monitor the withdrawal of combatants, maintain peace and security, build confidence, enforce power-sharing agreements, provide electoral support, aid reconstruction, uphold the rule of law, facilitate economic and social development, help provide essential needs, and remain in place until government officials take over on their own.

A previous article called them occupiers, serving power, not popular interests in Haiti, South Lebanon, Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia, DRC Congo, Sudan, Somalia, various other countries, and its initial UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) since 1948.

Like elsewhere, it, too, failed to bring peace to Palestine. Yet it’s still there, performing no active role. In fact, it opposes the interests of the people they’re sworn to protect.

Since 1948, dozens of “peacekeeping” missions did more harm than good. At present, 16 Blue Helmet operations are deployed on four continents. They include:
• UNMISS in South Sudan, beginning on July 9, 2011 after the country was balkanized as part of an imperial scheme to prevent African unity, and exploit its resources – mainly oil;

• UNISFA in Sudan’s Abysei region bordering the North and South, beginning on June 27, 2011;

• MONUSCO in the Democratic Republic of Congo, replacing an earlier MONUC operation on July 1, 2010;

• UNAMID in Darfur, beginning July 31, 2007;

• UNOCI in Cote d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast), beginning April 4, 2004;

• UNMIL in Liberia, beginning September 19, 2003;

• MINURSO in Western Sahara since 1991;

• UNMIT in Timor-Leste since 2006;

• UNMOGIP Observer Group in India and Pakistan since 1949;

• UNAMA (special political) Assistance Mission in Afghanistan since March 2011;

• UNFICYP in Cyprus since 1964;

• UNMIK in Kosovo since 1999;

• UNDOF in Golan since 1974;

• UNIFIL in Lebanon since 1978;

• UNTSO in Palestine since 1948; and

• MINUSTAH in Haiti since 2004 after US marines ousted democratically elected Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

From inception, it had no legitimacy. In fact, it was the first time UN occupiers enforced coup d’etat authority against an elected president, instead of staying out or backing his right to return.

MINUSTAH, in fact, symbolizes the sham hypocrisy of all Blue Helmet missions and why occupied people deplore them.

UNIFIL in Lebanon never established peace and security. It did little more than take up space or get out of the way when Israel attacked.

UNMIK in Kosovo hid the grim reality of NATO terror bombing, mass killing, destruction, and balkanization of Serbia.

In fact, it collaborated with Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) thugs, its leader Hashim Thaci, and their connection to organized crime. In January 2008, Thaci, in fact, became Kosovo’s illegitimate prime minister, a gangster running a rogue state.

MONUSCO in Congo never brought peace and security. It facilitated the plunder of Africa’s most resource-rich country. It did nothing to stop the immiseration of millions, nor was it deployed to do so.

Credible reports, in fact, linked Blue Helmet forces with mass rapes and other atrocities.

The same ugly story repeats wherever Blue Helmets show up. In December 2004, London Times reports suggested UN staffers committed 150 or more sex crimes, including selling pornographic videos and photos, images of their handiwork.

Congolese women and girls were raped. Congo’s Minister of Defense, Major General Jean Pierre Ondekane, said peacekeepers in Kisangani would be remembered “for running after little girls,” not doing their job.

Two or more UN officials left after impregnating local women. In fact, sex trafficking, abuse and rape are commonplace wherever Blue Helmets are deployed.

They have power. Occupied people don’t. Who’ll stop them no matter what they do. They take full advantage, terrorizing local people with impunity.

On November 5, 2009, the London Independent published Bradley Klapper’s AP report headlined, “Fifty UN peacekeepers punished for sex abuses,” saying:

At least 50 were involved in “committing sexual abuses (and exploitation) on United Nations missions since 2007, the UN said today.”

On February 10, 2009, New York Times writer Neil MacFarquhar headlined, “In Peacekeeping, a Muddling of the Mission,” saying:

Besides earlier failures, “the most noticeable (recent ones include) the inability of troops in Congo and the Darfur region of Sudan to stop the violence that is killing civilians.”

In Congo, for example, Blue Helmets near an area where 150 people were killed, “did not intervene,” citing reasons without credibility.

On September 7, 2011, MacFarquhar headlined, “Peacekeepers’ Sex Scandals Linger, On Screen and Off,” saying:

UN missions have a notorious history of “sex scandals from Bosnia to the Democratic Republic of Congo to Haiti….forc(ing) the United Nations to change the way it handles accusations of trafficking, rape and related crimes.”

This week, in fact, hundreds of angry Haitians demanded MINUSTAH forces leave after troops raped a teenage male.

Human rights experts and others accuse the UN of coverup and denial instead of strong disciplinary action against offenders.

In January 2009, Save the Children reported Blue Helmet abuses. They included trading food for sex with girls as young as eight in Liberia. Similar practices are common in Burundi, Ivory Coast, East Timor, DR Congo, Cambodia, and Bosnia. Various other reports cite sex with young girls, rape and trafficking.

On July 16, 2009, IPS writer Marina Litvinsky headlined, “Rape by Regular Army a Growing Problem, HRW (Human Rights Watch) Says,” stating:

In DR Congo alone, “tens of thousands of women and girls have suffered horrific acts of sexual violence at the hands of the government army,” according to a new report, titled “Soldiers Who Rape, Commanders Who Condone: Sexual Violence and Military Reform in the Democratic Republic of Congo.”

Little is done to stop it or hold culpable peacekeepers accountable. As a result, Congolese women and girls are ravaged with impunity. So are others most everywhere peacekeepers show up.

As a result, people live in constant fear that forces allegedly sent to help them will inflict harm.

In September 2009, Kathleen M. Jennings and Vesna Nikolic-Rstanovic prepared the MICROCON (Micro Level Analysis of Violent Conflict) Research Working Paper 17, titled, “UN Peacekeeping Economies and Local Sex Industries: Connections and Implications.”

Examining Blue Helmet missions in Bosnia, Kosovo, Liberia, and Haiti, the paper examined “the interplay between the peacekeeping economy and the sex industry, including domestic sex work, trafficking for sexual exploitation, and sex tourism.”

Despite UN “zero tolerance,” officials haven’t stopped decades of serious abuses. According to MICROCON:

It “suggests that the existence and potential long-term perpetuation of a highly gendered peacekeeping economy threatens to undermine, if not actively contradict, the goals and objectives to gender roles and relations that are generally an implicit or explicit component of most contemporary peace operations.”

In fact, sex trafficking and exploitation is wide-ranging, including slavery and prostitution. The UN calls it “transactional sex,” involving peacekeepers.

In countries like Bosnia and Kosovo, “domestic sex work and sex trafficking have become a seemingly permanent part of the” economy. Their peacekeeping missions affect both supply and demand. They “effectively creat(e) avenues (for) trafficking of women for sexual exploitation into/through these areas.”

Organized crime also gets involved. The prevalence of rape and sex slavery increases. Women and young girls are brutally exploited, and “documented cases of UN soldiers (show) that, far from helping the victims,” they become clients or otherwise are implicated in the trade.

Former prisoners said they saw girls forced into UN vehicles and driven away. International military and civilian personnel are directly involved in the sex industry, including trafficking.

A 2002 Turin Conference on Trafficking, Slavery and Peacekeeping report said “peacekeepers are often part of the problem.” Connected to organized crime, it’s well known that human trafficking provides “an important revenue source.”

UN “zero tolerance” is more rhetoric than policy. Wherever they’re deployed, peacekeepers serve power, not populations they’re mandated to protect.

Libya Soon to Be Occupied

Libyans will now experience what other UN occupied countries fear. They already live through daily hell as war rages. Insurgents are murdering anyone thought to be pro-Gaddafi. Black African guest workers are especially vulnerable.

On September 15, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Philip Gordon, gloated about another imperial trophy, saying:

The Libya operation is “in many ways a model on how the United States can lead the way that allows allows allies to support.”

“What is new about Libya is the approach that the United States would do an initial phase that only the United States could do, and then that Europeans were playing a leading role in certain aspects.”

In fact, Pentagon commanders are fully in charge. US forces continue playing a leading role without publicly “taking center stage.” In all wars involving America, it leads, never follows, or plays back seat to any other nation.

No matter who’s out in front publicly, Washington’s fully in charge. It didn’t matter that Cameron and Sarkozy showed up in Tripoli yesterday, not Obama. He did his gloating at home.

The British and French leaders did theirs at a press conference with National Transitional Council (NTC) puppet head Mustafa Jabril, a figurehead stooge for Washington.

Given continuing violence in the capital, they didn’t stay long. Heavy security also accompanied their arrival and departure. NTC officials said they’ll stay in Benghazi until NATO’s campaign ends.

However, it may not be over when it’s over. Divisions in the ranks of victors are emerging. Islamist leaders openly criticize Jabril. AP reported that Tripoli military council spokesman Anes Sharif called for his resignation, saying:

“He’s been living for the last six months outside the country. He is appointing people depending on their loyalty to him, not depending on their worth and their activities in the revolution. We think he’s a project for a new dictator.”

Muslim cleric Ali al-Sallabi made similar comments. So have others. On August 30, New York Times writers David Kirkpatrick and Rod Norland headlined, “Tripoli Divided as Rebels Jostle to Fill Power Vacuum,” saying:

“There are growing hints of rivalry among the various brigades over who deserves credit for ‘liberating’ the city and the influence it might bring.”

Open divisions within rebel leadership ranks emerged, “but also between secularists and Islamists.”

Internal power struggles “illustrate the challenge a new provisional government will face in trying to unify Libya’s fractious political landscape.”

Given considerable tribal influence, greater fissures may emerge for something much different than what Washington has in mind, and for sure ordinary Libyans who yearn for former peace and stability under Gaddafi.

Moreover, Islamists and secularists have conflicting visions of a new Libya. Abdel Hakim Belhaj, a former Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Al Qaeda leader/now CIA asset heading rebel forces in Tripoli, openly criticized Jabril. A close aid said he’ll “be gone soon.”

Ali Sallabi, Etilaf head, an Islamist umbrella group, called for his resignation, accusing him and other NTC officials of planned profiteering and “a new era of tyranny and dictatorship.”

On September 14, Times writers Kirkpatrick and Norland headlined, “Islamists Growing Sway Raises Questions for Libya,” saying:

At issue is “the ultimate character of the government and society that will rise in place of (Gaddafi).”

Likely conflict-producing power struggles may prove more troublesome than whether secularists or Islamists prevail. In various countries, Washington has allies in both camps. At issue only is if they’re client or independent states. Gaddafi’s “sin” was the latter.

Whoever finally takes charge, protracted conflict will continue after NATO declares victory and stops bombing.

So far it continues unabated. According to Cameron, “We must keep up with the NATO mission until civilians are all protected and this work is finished.”

Given the massive death and injury toll, there may not be many left or a Libya fit to live in when terror bombing and rebel rampaging ends.

Nonetheless, Sarkozy said, “We have done what we did because we thought it was the right thing to do.”

They committed grievous crimes of war and against humanity. It’s ongoing serial killing on an industrial scale.

It won’t stop across the region soon. According to General Carter Ham, AFRICOM commander, new campaigns ahead are planned to control all Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.

As a result, expect NATO’s killing machine to select new countries to destroy as part of its “responsibility to protect humanitarian mission.”

In fact, it’s to colonize and exploit the entire area, carving it up for profit.

Like Afghans and Iraqis, Libyans know what happens when NATO shows up. At least, those still alive can explain it.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

thomasmantell


ALBA countries oppose Libyan rebels’ UN seat

20110917-123923.jpg

Members of The Bolivian Alternative for the People’s of Our America, known as ALBA, totally oppose giving Libya’s UN seat to the NTC. ALBA countries include: Nicaragua, Cuba, Ecuador, Bolivia, Dominica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Antigua and Barbuda. Hugo Chavez predicts that a hot debate over Libya will occur in the UN General Assembly.

Countries belonging to a Latin America trade group oppose giving Libya’s U.N. member seat to the NATO-led rebels who fight the Jamahiriya government, the Venezuelan ambassador said in a Wednesday letter to the new General Assembly president.

Ambassador Jorge Valero wrote to General Assembly President Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser that foreign ministers of the countries in the ALBA group agree that Libya’s United Nations seat should not be occupied by “an illegitimate transitory authority imposed by foreign intervention.”

Rather, they say, the seat should not be filled until “a legitimate government is established” that “reflects the free and sovereign will of the Libyan people.”

Diplomats who have close ties with the NATO-rebels’ National Transitional Council, have continued to staff the country’s U.N. mission offices.

The General Assembly’s new credentials committee agreed by consensus on Wednesday to recommend that the rebels’ council get Libya’s seat, said a U.S. official, whose country sits on the committee. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was closed. It is unclear what this committee is, nor could it have legitimacy, as the vast majority of the world still recognizes the legal Jamahiriya government.

The letter of opposition by regional group increases the likelihood that a formal vote call on the matter will be needed, rather than a simple consensus, when the General Assembly acts on the request in the coming days.

The NATO-rebels’ council has been recently recognized by governments which are under the control of international bankers, but more than 80% of the world still recognizes the legal Jamahiriya democratic government.

The government headed by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has remained steadfast in its longtime support of Libyan leader Gadhafi and the Jamahiriya.

The foreign ministers of the other ALBA countries — Nicaragua, Cuba, Ecuador, Bolivia, Dominica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Antigua and Barbuda — traveled to Caracas last week to discuss the situation in Libya.

Chavez said Wednesday that he foresees lively discussions in this month’s U.N. General Assembly over Libya.

Chavez, a friend and strong defender of Gadhafi, said the assembly would be hotly debating “the Libyan issue, the war, the genocide in Libya.”

(source: Mathaba )

thomasmantell


U.N. HIGH COMMISSIONER DEMANDS THE LIBYA SOLUTION FOR SYRIA

20110914-112116.jpg

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: “PLAN TO TAKE OVER IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, LIBYA, STRIA, SUDAN, SOMALIA,IRAN”

Voltaire Network

Without indentifying what she called “reliable sources, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said that the alleged repression by the Syrian government has claimed 1600 lives since protests began some six months ago, and she requested the same civilian-protection efforts by foreign countries she previously asked for Libya.

In her opening remarks of the 18th session of the Human Rights Council, in Geneva, Pillay said that as to Syria, and according to reliable sources in the field, the death tall reached at least 2 600 since violence broke out by mid March, Telesur reported.

But, Pillay gave her report without explaining who her sources are, or if the information was given by medical or forensic personnel, or by any person or institution authorized and able to give credit to the figures mentioned.

This is not the first time that the High Commissioner gives figures of deaths in Arab nations without explaining the origin of her information. Last February 25, she cited “certain sources” to assure that there could be thousands of dead and wounded people in Libya following the “repression” unleashed by leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Immediately after Pillay concluded her report, 47 members of the UN Human Rights Council favored a draft resolution that excluded Libya of the UN body. But, later, the reports about “thousands” of dead people under bombing and repression by the Gaddafi government in Libya were proved to be false. However, by that time NATO had already launched its attack on Libya.

By mid March protests began against the Bashar Al Assad government in Syria followed by demonstrations of support of that regime, which led to civilian clashes, and the action of infiltrated armed groups that tried to destabilize the Arab nation.

A sector of the Syrian population demanded constitutional reforms, attended by the government, which decided to implement a series of political changes, such as the annulment of the Emergency Act, in force since 1963; the release of political prisoners, and the renewal of the cabinet.

Damascus denounced that foreign powers have orchestrated a discrediting and destabilizing plan in the country by accusing the government of making strong pressures on the civilian population. The UN High Commissioner called for an effort with the support of foreign countries to protect the civilian population under risk of violence. This was the same request she made six months ago for Libya, a nation where thousands of citizens were killed by NATO.

(source: Libya360)

thomasmantell


LATIN AMERICA OPPOSES NATO REBELS’BID FOR UN SEAT

Latin America has refused to allow NATO puppet force in Libya to have a seat in UN, and opposed any move which would allow NATO militias to gain membership.

This moves comes as the vast majority of the International community has refused to recognized NATO militias as the government of Libya. There are almost 200 independent nations, and the vast majority doesn’t not believe NATO militias represent Libyans.

This comes as fighting intensifies throughout Libya, NATO militias have been killing each other, and also being killed by the Libyan Military, causing panic and fear.

NATO militias fear that NATO might end its terror operations over Libya at Zero Hour.

(source: Ozyism )

thomasmantell


NATO’s War Crimes in Libya : Who Grieves for the Fallen Heroes?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

by Prof. James Petras

‘The conquest and occupation of Libyan is first and foremost a military victory for NATO. Every aspect of the military offensive was spearheaded and directed by NATO air, sea and ground forces. The NATO invasion of Libya was basically a response to the “Arab spring” : the popular uprisings which spread from North Africa to the Persian Gulf . The NATO assault formed part of a general counter-attack designed to contain and reverse the popular democratic and anti-imperialist movements which had ousted or were on the verge of overthrowing US-client dictators.

Political and military considerations were foremost in motivating the NATO invasion: As late as May 2009, the U.S. and European regimes were developing close bilateral military, economic and security agreements with the Gaddafi regime. According the British daily, the Independent (9/4/2011), official Libyan documents found in its Foreign Office described how on December 16, 2003, the US CIA and British MI6 established close collaboration with the Gaddafi government. The MI6 provided Gaddafi with details on Libyan opposition leaders exiled in England and even drafted a speech for him as he sought rapprochement with the outside world.

U.S. Secretary of State Clinton presented Mutassin Gaddafi to the Washington press during a visit in 2009 stating, “I am very pleased to welcome Minister Gaddafi to the State Department. We deeply value the relationship between the United States and Libya . We have many opportunities to deepen and broaden our co-operation and I am very much looking forward to building on this relationship.”(examiner.com 2/26/2011).

Between 2004-2010 the largest oil and petroleum service multinational corporations, including British Petroleum, Exxon Mobil, Halliburton, Chevron, Conoco and Marathon Oil joined with military-industrial giants like Raytheon and Northrop Grumman, Dow Chemical and Fluor and signed enormous investments and sales deals with Libya (examiner.com op cit).

In 2009, the U.S. State Department awarded a $1.5 million dollar grant to train Libyan civilian and government security forces. The White House budget for 2012 included a grant for training Libyan security forces. General Dynamics signed a $165 million dollar deal in 2008 to equip Libya ’s elite mechanized brigade (examiner.com ibi).

On August 24, 2011 Wikileaks released US embassy cables from Tripoli , which described the positive assessment a group of leading Republican senators had made of US-Libyan relations in during their visit in late 2009. These cables highlighted ongoing security training programs involving Gaddafi’s police and military, as well as the US’ strong support for the regime’s repression of radical Islamists, many of whom are now leading the NATO-backed ‘rebel forces’ now occupying Tripoli.

Continue reading


Libya: The Horror…the Horror!

09.08.2011. By Toni Segovia


Colonel Walter E. Kurtz: I’ve seen horrors… horrors that you’ve seen. But you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that… but you have no right to judge me. It’s impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror… Horror has a face… and you must make a friend of horror. Continue reading


IT’S TIME TO ACT PEOPLE

I believe Libya has given us an opportunity to see what our leaders are doing.
Help Libya and in doing so help yourselves.

Green Book

thomasmantell