> 'Libya' Does Not Exist
>> By Justin Raimondo. March 13, 2011
>>
>
I mostly agree with that article, and it is close to what I have written on
Libya. Except for this:
"As it is, the rebellion against Gadhafi has turned into a stalemate, with the Eastern part effectively liberated from the eccentric despot’s control."
First, Gadhafi is not an 'eccentric despot' - he's a very shrewd and manipulative bedoin tribesman who speaks to his tribal followers using their language (which is Libyan Arabic with its flowery phrases and symbolism) rather than in diplomacy-speak. This makes it easier to portray him as an unpopular fool by the white press (as they did with Noriega, Arafat, Saddam, etc). But they have always underestimated him, and do so again today. When he speaks crazily of "Al Qaeda" being behind the rebellion, he means the Islamists in Darnah who attempted a coup a decade ago (the split-off group from *Al-Jama’a al-Islamiyyah al-Muqatilah bi-Libya*) and all Libyans know precisely who is referring to.
After ridiculing Qaddafi's claims, the NYTimes finally located the Islamists yesterday in Darnah, though downplayed their fundamentalism: "The Muslim Brotherhood and more militant strands thought to number in the hundreds show signs of organization, many having forged bonds in prison or fighting the government in the 1990s. One of those men is Abdul-Hakim al-Hasidi, who fought for five years in Afghanistan, ended up in Colonel Qaddafi’s jails for four years and now, with hundreds of armed men, runs the defenses of Darnah and its hinterland. "A veteran of the war in Afghanistan [...], who praises Osama bin Laden’s “good points,” but denounces the 9/11 attacks on the United States, [he] runs Darnah’s defenses, and no one seems all that frightened by him." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/world/middleeast/08darnah.html
It has become clear in this uprising that Qaddafi has not just the cowed acquiescence, but even the support of a large segment of Libya including all of Fezzam, and much of Tripolitania - for a myriad of reasons - tribal positioning, economic development projects, historical turf wars, Cyrenaican domination, racial reasons, monetary rewards, etc.
Secondly, the situation is not a 'stalemate' - it's pretty much all over for the rebels. Gaddafi now has control over almost all the oil of the country (through the three ports of Las Ranuf, Zawiya and Brega) ( http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-61T5geuGCe0/TWTjQ_MBYqI/AAAAAAAAAKk/rustlifCYfw/s1600/libya.PNG ), controls the land routes and the water supply to Benghazi (which comes from the desert aquafers in Fezzam - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Manmade_River), and the critical road cutting off Benghazi between Ajdabiya and Tubruk. Benghazi cannot exist for long once Qaddafi reaches Tubruk and cuts off the entire Benghazi peninsula from Egypt and the east. There are no options now for Benghazi, and the only military capable of intervening, the US, will not do so: the oil companies know better.
>From WSJournal:
"In a sign of spreading panic, several international humanitarian groups and
news organizations pulled their staff from Benghazi to the city of Tobruq
near the Egyptian border, citing concerns that, after taking Brega,
government forces might head straight to the frontier. If Mr. Gadhafi's
troops succeeded in capturing Tobruq, they would cut off rebels' supply
lines from Egypt and any hopes of an unimpeded retreat."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704027504576198643063631156.html
Barring some unexpected feat resembling the parting of the Red Sea, it's all over. The best the rebels can hope for is some type of negotiated surrender to avoid a humanitarian disaster.
-- Peter Fay http://theclearview.wordpress.com
