Yemen President won’t give up power by force

Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who escaped an attempt on his life by opponents, will only cede power through the ballot box and the country will descend into civil war if he is forced from office, his foreign minister said.

A popular uprising against Saleh’s 33-year rule, high profile defections, and an assassination attempt in June which left him with severe burns and forced him to undergo eight operations have all failed to persuade him to give up.

“President Saleh made this very clear. He repeatedly said he is ready to transfer power anytime, but through early elections, through the ballot box and by adhering to the constitution,” Abubakr al-Qirbi told Reuters in an interview.

“Now the issue is for the ruling party and the opposition parties to agree on a date for early elections,” he said.

Saleh, 70, has brought relative stability and unity to the impoverished tribal state, which is awash with weaponry and corruption and beset by separatism in the south, a Shi’ite uprising in the north and a growing al Qaeda presence.

When he first became North Yemen’s president in 1978, Yemen had suffered two decades of civil war and violence, and the two presidents who preceded him had both been assassinated.

The United States and Saudi Arabia, both targets of foiled attacks by a wing of al Qaeda based in Yemen, have been involved in talks to end the crisis and avert a spread of anarchy that could give the global jihadist network more room to operate.

Qirbi said the timetable set for a transfer of power under a deal, brokered by Gulf states and Washington, was not realistic.

High Cost

Under the agreement, Saleh and the opposition have 30 days to form a national unity government after which Saleh would resign and elections would follow 60 days later.

“This time schedule has proven to be difficult to implement … Elections cannot take place in 60 days. Therefore, if President Saleh resigns after 30 days and no election can take place in 60 days we will run into a constitutional vacuum in the country,” Qirbi said.

“The president is not scrapping the agreement. It is just the timetable for the implementation that need to be readdressed,” he said.

The GCC mediated three deals with Yemeni opposition parties under which Saleh would step down and be spared prosecution for bloody crackdowns on pro-democracy protesters who took to the streets, emboldened by Egyptians and Tunisians who ousted their autocratic leaders.

Each time, Saleh backed out at the last minute.

Qirbi said his government was trying to start a dialogue with the opposition to agree on “a feasible and practical election date” under the supervision of international and regional observers.

He said six months of street fighting and political protests had cost the economy as much as $5 billion, scared away tourists and investors, and swollen budget deficits.

Some of Yemen’s biggest losses are related to fuel in a country that relies on oil for 60 percent of its income. He said Yemen has had to import gasoline and diesel, at a high cost.

Damaged pipelines have also cut off an important source of income for the world’s 32nd largest oil exporter and 16th biggest seller of liquefied natural gas.

“We had about three to four months stoppage of our oil exportation because of attacks on pipelines. As result we had to import a lot of gasoline and diesel.”

“We are in a very difficult situation. We are trying to get out of it. The solution has to be a political and it has to be a Yemeni solution. Now we have to save the future of our country.

Even before the uprising, Yemen was in deep trouble. The government, reliant on foreign aid and dwindling oil revenue, was running out of cash.

Four out of 10 of the population live on less than $2 a day. Two thirds of Yemen’s fast-growing population of 23 million people are under 24. Unemployment stands at around 40 percent.

The turmoil has also renewed fears Yemen could become a failed state on the doorstep of Saudi Arabia, which holds the world’s biggest oil reserves.

Rivalling Pakistan and Afghanistan as an incubator and shelter for al Qaeda, Yemen shows signs of becoming a serious international threat.

Qirbi said al Qaeda was the main beneficiary from the chaos convulsing the country. It has mobilised its militants and tried to take control of the southern Abyan province, he added.

“The political crisis creates the right atmosphere for extremists and for al Qaeda to take advantage of,” he added.
Qirbi said failing to reach a political agreement would be disastrous.

“There are many scenarios as to what will happen. The worst case scenario unfortunately maybe civil war, maybe fragmentation of the country,” he said.

“I think the majority of people neither want civil war nor to see Yemen divided again, but this will depend really on wisdom prevailing amongst policymakers on both sides — on the government side and the opposition side.”

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


Yemen army: 10 militants killed as clashes rage in the south

Yemeni forces said today they killed 10 al Qaeda fighters who attacked their camp outside the southern town of Zinjibar, the scene of fierce clashes between government troops and militants.

Islamists have seized several areas in the surrounding province of Abyan in recent months — raising fears in the West and neighbouring Saudi Arabia that al Qaeda’s Yemen wing is expanding, taking advantage of a security vacuum left by prolonged anti-government protests.

Yemen has been rocked by more than five months of demonstrations against the rule of President Ali Abdullah Saleh. The country was left in political limbo when Saleh flew to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment following a bomb attack on his palace last month.

Yemen’s army launched an offensive last week to push back militants in Abyan, on Yemen’s southern coast, but has so far only regained one military site.

An army spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the al Qaeda fighters attacked one of its camps yesterday night.

“The 10 militants were killed by heavy shells before they could make it to the military camp,” he said, adding that one of those killed was a senior member of the militant group.

An army general told Yemeni television late yesterday evening that the army’s offensive in Abyan was facing fierce resistance.

“Our forces are engaged in difficult clashes with al Qaeda in Zinjibar,” said Mohammed al-Somali. “The fighting is large and violent, on a larger scale than most would probably imagine.”

About 90,000 people have fled the violence in Abyan, most of them heading to the nearby port city of Aden, which lies east of a strategic shipping strait that channels about 3 million barrels of oil a day.

Security analysts have cast doubt on Yemen’s reports that its forces have killed dozens of al Qaeda militants and several senior leaders, noting that many of those fighting in Abyan are likely members of other militant groups.

“It wouldn’t surprise me if there were puritanical militants who want to see closer adherence to what the consider to be Islamic values but didn’t necessarily share the trans national agenda of AQAP (al Qaeda’s Yemen wing),” said security analyst Jeremy Binnie, of IHS Jane’s.

Saleh’s opponents accuse him of letting his forces ease their grip around areas suspected of hosting militants, in order to convince foreign governments that only he stands in the way of a militant takeover.

Both the United States and neighbouring Saudi Arabia, targets of foiled attacks by al Qaeda’s Yemen branch, are wary of growing turmoil in Yemen, which they fear gives room to the militant group to operate.

Washington and Riyadh hoped to bring more stability to Yemen by pushing Saleh into signing a Gulf-brokered transition plan, but the 69-year-old leader has backed out of inking the deal three times.

He has instead vowed to return to Yemen and start a national dialogue, angering protesters in the streets who are still insisting on his resignation.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


Yemen security forces open fire on march

Security forces in Yemen opened fire today on protesters calling for the ouster of President Ali Abdullah Saleh during a march in a main street in the capital, killing one person and injuring eight others, a medical official said.

Security forces also lobbed tear gas at the protesters in the latest of four months of demonstrations calling for an end to Saleh’s 33 years in power in Yemen, activist Mukhtar Abdullah said. The medical official who provided the death toll spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to reporters.

The months of protests and intense international pressure have left Saleh clinging to power. The president is in Saudi Arabia recuperating from wounds he sustained in an attack on his compound on June 3, but he has been able to maintain power through loyal figures, including a son who commands some of the country’s best trained military forces.

The attack by security forces followed a separate protest by about 100 journalists earlier in the day in the capital, Sanaa.

Journalists were protesting harassment and censorship by authorities. One newspaper editor said he was forced to distribute his daily in banana boxes to avoid government censors.

The journalists’ protest was held outside the residence of Vice President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, who is acting head of state while the president is in Saudi Arabia.

The editor of al-Nass newspaper, Osama Ghaleb, said he used to distribute his newspaper to other provinces inside banana boxes to ensure the copies would not be confiscated by security.

“But unfortunately this method was exposed lately,” said Ghaleb.

Security has been deteriorating sharply across the Arab world’s poorest country.

In clashes today between government forces and tribesmen seeking to oust Saleh, five people were killed and six injured from the same family when a government artillery shell hit their home. The shelling hit the village of Beit Zuhra in the city of Arhab north of the capital, said Sheik Hamid Assem of the Arhab tribe. Tribal leaders in the Arhab and Naham mountains, also north of Sanaa, said another 14 people were injured from shelling today.

The artillery fire was the military’s response to a dawn raid by anti-government tribesmen on an army checkpoint that wounded five soldiers, according to tribal leaders. The mountainous region has been the site of frequent clashes between the elite Republican Guard forces and anti-Saleh tribes. Since April, shelling by government troops in this area has killed around 30 civilians and left 200 injured, said Sheik Assem.

Journalists working for independent and anti-government newspapers said they have been attacked and singled-out by security forces.

The Center for Rehabilitation and Protection of Freedom of Press in Yemen has documented 465 cases of harassment of journalists in the past six months, which include threats, aggression, and detention.

Calls by journalists to meet with the vice president have gone unheeded, according to the head of Yemen’s journalists syndicate, Marwan Damaj.

Editors of seven dailies and weeklies said army and security personnel at checkpoints have recently confiscated and burned copies of independent and anti-government newspapers meant for distribution to cities outside the capital.

Seif al-Haderi, chief of a publication house that issues two independent newspapers, al-Shemou and Akhbar al-Youm, said security men in the southern city of Taiz yesterday set fire to a bus carrying the two publications.

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


Yemeni protesters announce shadow government

Senior protest figures in Yemen today announced the formation of a shadow government they say will prepare to run the country should the embattled regime of President Ali Abdullah Saleh collapse.

The move seeks to create a united leadership for the protesters who have filled public square across Yemen for five months, calling for an end to autocratic ruler’s 32-year reign. Still, today’s announcement is unlikely to increase pressure on Saleh significantly.

The new body highlights the gap between Yemen’s protesters and Yemen’s official opposition parties, who protesters say were late in joining the anti-regime rallies inspired by those in Tunisia and Egypt. Many protesters criticize the parties for seeking to negotiate Saleh’s exit instead of trying to bring down his entire regime.

Abdu al-Janadi, a spokesman for Saleh’s government, said the move “pours gas on the fire.”

He said that Saleh is “the legal, democratically elected president, and an alternative will only come though elections, not through an illegal coup.”

Opposition party officials declined to comment.

Protest leader Tawakul Karman announced the formation of a transitional presidential council to reporters in Sanaa today . The 17-member body includes a number of former ministers, one former prime minister, business people and civil society leaders.

Karman said the council will soon choose a leader who will appoint a shadow Cabinet of technocrats. The council will also announce a 501-member “national assembly” that will draft a new constitution.

Karman said the body seeks to “protect the unity of the country before it completely collapses.” When asked how the new body will exercise any power while Saleh’s government remains in place, she said it would count on “revolutionary victory.”

Saleh has managed to cling to office despite the mass protests and an attack on his palace that left him badly injured. He has been in treatment in Saudi Arabia since June 5. His aides say he plans to return to Yemen soon.

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


US envoy urges Yemen’s president to step aside

A senior White House envoy has asked Yemen’s president to sign a deal that would have him transfer power to his vice president and step down in exchange for immunity from prosecution.

President Ali Abdullah Saleh has promised in the past to sign the deal, brokered by Gulf countries, then balked at the last minute.

White House counterterrorism chief John Brennan met Saleh today, in the strongest sign yet of US pressure. The two met at a hospital in Saudi Arabia where Saleh is recovering from wounds sustained in an attack on his presidential compound last month.

The White House says Brennan urged Saleh to sign the pledge “expeditiously.” Brennan says “assistance will flow to Yemen “when the deal is implemented.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


Competing Yemen rallies show national divide

Supporters and opponents of President Ali Abdullah Saleh staged competing marches in Yemen’s capital today, a day after his first TV appearance in a month, highlighting the deep political rift that could tear apart this impoverished, gun-ridden nation.

Saleh appeared on state TV late last night, a first since flying to Saudi Arabia a month ago to treat wounds sustained in an attack on his palace. The video showed the leader with casts on his arms and visibly weakened after a series of operations, reinforcing speculation that he won’t return to Yemen soon.

Saleh did not say if or when he plans to return, adding a new twist to a five-month-old rebellion seeking to topple his authoritarian regime.

The uprising has battered Yemen’s economy and destabilized the Arab world’s poorest nation, which is also home to one of al-Qaeda’s most active branches. The US and others worry al-Qaeda could exploit chaos in Yemen to expand its bases in Yemen’s weekly governed provinces.

Saleh backers responded to the video by firing guns in the air in celebration, and at least 11 people died from gunshot wounds across Yemen. In the capital Sanaa, thousands of Saleh supporters rallied outside his palace today, bearing large photos of the leader and the Saudi monarch, thanking him for hosting Saleh.

Much larger crowds filled squares across Yemen, including the university square in Sanaa not far from Saleh’s palace, indicating that the footage of the injured Salah could deepen the country’s divide instead of paving the way for a the political transition sought by the opposition, Yemen’s Gulf Arab neighbours and the West.

“Different audiences interpreted it (the video) different ways,” said Yemen expert Christopher Boucek at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

In releasing the video, the regime could be sending a message that it is digging in and that Saleh won’t leave despite his wounds, he said. “Others probably look and say, he’s really wounded. How can he govern?”

Saleh’s ability to retain power, despite the ongoing uprising and his absence from Yemen for the past month shows the resilience of his regime, Boucek said. Saleh has installed his sons, other relatives and childhood friends in key positions in the government and security services.

Saleh was injured in an attack on his compound and flew to neighbouring Saudi Arabia for treatment on June 5 after issuing a brief audio address on Yemen state TV. His absence from the public eye fuelled speculation about the severity of his wounds and whether he would return.

In yesterday’s video, Saleh, in his late 60s, sat stiffly in an armchair with casts on his arms and said he’d had more than eight operations.

Saleh made no mention of the US-backed plan proposed by Yemen’s powerful Gulf neighbours that would see him stand down in exchange for immunity from prosecution. Saleh has repeatedly refused to sign the initiative.

Gunfire rang out in cities across Yemen when he appeared on TV and continued through the night yesterday.

Hospital officials said five people died from gunshots in Sanaa, along with four in the town of Ibb and at least two others elsewhere. Most of the shooting was in celebration of Saleh’s appearance, but it was unclear if all the deaths were accidental.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media.

In the restive Abyan province in southern Yemen, government troops have been battling al-Qaeda-linked militants who have seized control of two cities there. Since late March, at least 70 soldiers and 50 militants have been killed in fighting in Abyan, according to a statement today by Yemen’s embassy in the US. More than 300 soldiers and dozens of militants have been wounded, the statement said.

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


Yemen’s injured president makes video address

Yemen’s embattled president, looking weakened and stiff, has made his first public appearance since he was injured in a blast on his palace compound last month, in an apparent bid to dispel growing speculation about his condition.

President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who is undergoing treatment in Saudi Arabia, lashed out at opponents seeking to oust him from power, but his dramatically changed appearance belied his show of defiance.

White plaster casts covered his arms and hands, and his face appeared noticeably darker and thinner than before the attack. He sported a short beard and his hair was covered with a red-and-white-chequered Arab headdress cloth, both unusual for the clean-shaven, suit-wearing leader.

In a pre-recorded video statement broadcast yesterday, Saleh said he’d undergone more than eight “successful operations,” but did not say if and when he would return to Yemen.

The leader of Yemen’s ruling party, who is close to Saleh, said the president’s brief speech helped set the record straight. “His mere appearance on TV has clarified things for people and silenced many tongues by showing that the president is in good health,” said the politician, Yasser Yemani.

However, Mohammed al-Thahiri, a protest leader in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa, said Saleh’s career is over. “It’s clear form the way that he looks that he can’t come back. This man is no longer able to rule the country,” said al-Thahiri.

Wearing a white robe and sitting rigidly in an armchair, Saleh accused “terrorist elements” of carrying out the June 3 attack. He said dialogue is the only way out of the political crisis that has brought this impoverished corner of the Arabian Peninsula to the brink of civil war.

“Where are the conscious people? Where are the honest people? Where are the believers and the men who fear Allah? Why don’t they stand with dialogue?” he said. “They should stand with dialogue so we can find solutions.”

“Many have understood democracy incorrectly, through incorrect practices,” Saleh said in the seven-minute video recorded in Saudi Arabia and broadcast on Yemen state TV. He accused his opponents of practicing the politics of “hijacking” and “arm-twisting” while describing himself as a defender of democracy and stability.

“We love participation, though the constitution, though the law,” he said.

Saleh did not mention the U.S.-backed proposal by Yemen’s powerful Gulf Arab neighbours that would see him transfer power in exchange for immunity from prosecution.

Before his injury, Saleh repeatedly refused to sign the proposal.

More than four months of popular uprising seeking to end his rule have battered Yemen’s economy, spread instability and caused the United States to turn away from Saleh, once considered a key ally in fighting Yemen’s active al-Qaida branch. Many worry al-Qaida could exploit instability in Yemen to expand its operations.

Illustrating the threat, security officials said Thursday that Islamist fighters killed 10 Yemeni soldiers execution-style after stopping their bus at a fake checkpoint. Wednesday attack’s was carried out in the southern province of Abyan, where militants have already seized control of two towns.

In the capital Sanaa, the crackle of gunfire rang out when Saleh appeared on TV, as security forces and Saleh supporters fired in the air. Sanaa protest leader Abdel-Hadi al-Azazi said a small explosion went off in the public square where protesters have camped out injured six people. Its cause remained unclear.

Elsewhere, activists said security forces fired on protest camps in the cities of Taiz and Ibb, where activist Ahmed Aqeel said one protester was killed and dozens were injured.

Saleh last addressed his people in an audio message on state TV before leaving for Saudi Arabia on June 5. His long absence from the public eye raised wide speculation about the severity of his wounds and if they would prevent him from returning to Yemen.

Opposition party activist Hassan Zaid said Saleh’s appearance Thursday confirmed that he will not return to Yemen soon, increasing the need for a political transition. “We now have a duty to act quickly and avoid the Somaliazation of Yemen,” he said, referring to fears that instability will lead to chaos. “We need a fast transition to the vice president and the formation of a transitional council.”

Forty-year-old teacher Sadeq Omar, who watched the speech with friends, said he was shocked by Saleh’s appearance.

“The president seemed really injured. Even his face looked different,” he said. “He didn’t speak as powerfully as he did before.”

Protesters who have camped out in public squares across Yemen and faced deadly crackdowns by Saleh’s security forces said Saleh’s speech would not deter them in their quest to push him out.

“We’ll continue our peaceful revolution until we reach our goals,” said al-Thahiri, the Sanaa protest leader. “As for Saleh, his political career is finished.”

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


Bahrain’s rulers start dialogue with opposition

A Bahraini opposition figure said reconciliation talks between the Sunni monarchy and the Shiite opposition started yesterday for the first time since anti-government protests erupted in the Gulf kingdom.

Washington has pushed for dialogue in the strategic island nation, home to the US Navy’s 5th Fleet. The protests that began in February – inspired by wider Arab uprisings – have been the gravest challenge to any Gulf ruler in decades.

The opposition figure, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media, confirmed that the government-led talks took place behind closed doors in the capital Manama’s convention centre.

The talks are scheduled to last until the end of the month, with about 300 delegates from government-linked groups and opposition parties meeting three times a week.

How the country’s rulers approach the so-called National Dialogue largely depends on how comfortable neighbouring Saudi Arabia is with Bahrain’s Sunni leaders making concessions to the country’s Shiite majority, who comprise around 70 percent of the kingdom’s population of some 525,000.

Saudi Arabia does not have a seat at Bahrain’s crisis talks, but it carries a critical voice in everything from the tone of the debate to the eventual offers on the table.

“Saudi Arabia wants dialogue since confrontation is not the Saudi way of dealing with things,” said Marina Ottoway, director of the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

She believes that Riyadh is fully behind the reconciliation talks because they are designed by the government and cannot be seen as turning into “negotiations between the monarchy and the people.”

Saudi King Abdullah deployed about 1,000 troops to Bahrain, per Manama’s request, during the uprising earlier this year to help quell protests.

For the powerful Saudi royal family and its Gulf partners, any setbacks by Bahrain’s 200-year-old ruling Al Khalifa dynasty is considered a threat to all monarchs and sheiks in the Gulf.

“Bahrain is crucial to Saudi national interest and Riyadh will provide it with all they have to show they are committed to preserving the rule of the Khalifas,” said Ayham Kamel, a Middle East analyst at the Eurasia Group in Washington.

To reign in protesters, Bahrain’s government also arrested hundreds of people and temporarily instated an emergency law. At least 32 people were killed in the unrest, according to international rights groups.

Many of Bahrain’s Shiites claim they are the target of systematic discrimination, including being blocked from top military and political posts.

Gulf leaders have accused Iran of influencing the Shiite-led uprising in Bahrain.

Regional governments were concerned that similar revolts may be copied elsewhere in the region and that Bahrain’s Shiite-led uprising could serve as a possible opening for Iran to make headway among pro-Western Gulf states anchored by Saudi Arabia.

Bahrain’s opposition leaders repeatedly shot down claims that Iran had any role in the protests.

The Saudi king sent millions of dollars to pull the tiny neighbour’s royals from the brink of bankruptcy. One of the king’s sons also married a daughter of Bahrain’s monarch.

“It’s a powerful act, the royal wedding,” said Rima Sabban, a Dubai-based sociologist. “It has nothing to do with love or passion. A marriage like that is strictly political.”

For its part, Iran has relentlessly assailed Bahrain’s rulers for crackdowns against the country’s Shiite majority and called the Saudi-led Gulf troop presence an “occupation” army.

One of the opposition’s demands was that the Saudi-led force leave the kingdom before any talks with the Sunni monarchy begins.

However, foreign troops remain deployed and talks have begun.

“The presence of foreign troops is part of Bahrain’s problem, not the solution,” said Ali Salman, the leader of Bahrain’s largest Shiite opposition party, Al Wefaq, which reluctantly joined the government-designed reconciliation talks.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the start of the national dialogue, noting the government’s establishment of an investigation commission, the transfer of some trials to civilian courts, and the release of some detainees and encouraging Bahraini authorities to take further steps to comply with their international human rights obligations, U.N. spokesman Martin Nesirky said yesterday.

Hundreds of protesters, however, remain imprisoned awaiting trial on charges ranging from trying to topple the government to participating in illegal protests.

Eight prominent activists are serving life sentences after being convicted of trying to overthrow the state.

Ahead of the reconciliation talks, which opened with a ceremonial session on Saturday, the government made some token concessions, including sanctioning an international investigation that will include probes into the conduct of security forces during the revolt. Authorities halted trials of opposition supporters in a military-linked tribunal and moved them to civilian courts.

“It’s more to defuse criticism of the West than to make concessions to the opposition parties, like Al Wefaq, they already feel they have defeated,” said Ottway of the Carnegie Endowment.

The opposition is demanding that all detainees arrested in relation to the revolt be freed, their charges dropped, and for convictions to be reversed.

For now, Shiite leaders taking part in the reconciliation talks appear willing to give Bahrain’s rulers a chance.

“Our demands are clear,” said Salman, Al Wefaq’s leader. “For any talks to be successful, people who ask for democracy, should be released from prison and people who ask to be free should get a chance to elect their government.”

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook


Libya, the UN and the R2P debate | Ian Williams

Yes, the US should step aside soon from a leading military role, but the UN is justly discharging its ‘responsibility to protect’

It is doubtless of some comfort to the citizenry of Benghazi or Misurata that if Gaddafi “exterminated” them without hindrance, it would advance the cause of national sovereignty and that their sacrifice would somehow constitute a blow against western imperialism. But generally, they wisely seem to prefer to stay alive, despite the Manichean principles of some protesters.

The American left and right are united in isolation. On the right, there is un-Samaritan disdain for the fate of a crowd of Arabs in a faraway country. On the left, some have espoused a concern for national sovereignty that owes more to the Treaty of Westphalia than the slogan “Workers of the World Unite”, which motivated the Abraham Lincoln Brigade in the Spanish civil war.

It is true that the UN security council could and should be involved in Bahrain, Yemen and, indeed, Palestine. But that is no excuse for inaction when there is an actual opportunity to save lives in Libya. Those who, with some justice, accused Blair and Bush of war crimes for attacking Iraq without a UN mandate, disregard as a mere technicality the security council resolution 1973 (SCR 1973) that authorised – in fact, called for – this operation.

While Moscow and Beijing might now be trying to cover their tracks, just in case Gaddafi survives, they could have vetoed or amended SCR 1973; but they did not. The other abstainers had a more principled position – although one could think for some time about India’s entirely justifiable intervention in Pakistan, which gave birth to Bangladesh, and wonder how it squares with such rigid principles.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov still smarts from his time at the UN during the first Iraq war when the US and UK stretched the resolutions far beyond the intent or tolerance of the other members of the council. Moscow could have, and should have, put a time limit on the operation, and insisted on a share in command and control – maybe even reviving the UN’s long-moribund military staff joint committee. They accepted the “responsibility to protect” (R2P) in principle, but have consistently fought it in practice.

David Hillstrom points out the flaws in the procedures for R2P, but the international commission that framed the proposal for the “responsibility to protect” was well aware of the dangers that surrounded it. Indeed, the very title was intended to avoid the use of “humanitarian intervention”, which had been so blighted by Tony Blair’s abuse of it in Iraq. When the French reinvented humanitarian intervention in response to Saddam’s massacres of the Kurds, the UN legal department confessed with some embarrassment that the only precedent they could find was Hitler’s invocation of it to “protect” the Sudeten Germans by annexing Czechoslovakia.

Aware of the pitfalls, the commission very firmly stated: “Military intervention for human protection purposes must be regarded as an exceptional and extraordinary measure,” only justified to halt or avert “large-scale loss of life, actual or apprehended, with genocidal intent or not, which is the product either of deliberate state action, or state neglect or inability to act.”

It established precautionary principles: “The primary purpose of the intervention must be to halt or avert human suffering,” preferably with “collective or multilateral operations”, “clearly supported by regional opinion and the victims concerned”. It added: “Every non-military option for the prevention or peaceful resolution of the crisis [must be] explored; and further: “The scale, duration and intensity of the planned military intervention should be the minimum necessary to secure the humanitarian objective,” and “There must be a reasonable chance of success in halting or averting the suffering which has justified the intervention.” It concluded: “There is no better or more appropriate body than the United Nations security council to authorise military intervention for human protection purposes.”

Under those principles, as Brian Whitaker demonstrates, the Libyan operation emerges with great credibility. Gaddafi had been repeatedly warned to stop killing his own people, but carried on using heavier and heavier weapons to cover his lack of committed forces. Regional opinion, in the form of the Arab League, supported intervention (as did the Tunisian trade unions!) and so did the population in the cities most directly threatened, not to mention the numerous defectors from the Libyan government itself.

The immediate effect of the French interdiction of Libyan military columns was, indeed, to save Benghazi from the dire fate that Gaddafi had threatened. The other operations should now be making such forces as have remained loyal to Gaddafi pause to think whether they might not want to reconsider their commitment.

One can understand caution about the Pentagon’s involvement. There is, of course, a history. It is always worrying when the US is involved in any operation. Equally, US force protection doctrine probably mandated far more bombs and bangs than necessary to disarm Libya’s rudimentary defences. But surely one can be circumspect about reports of civilian casualties from a regime that has punctuated successive ceasefire declarations with artillery assaults on rebel-held cities.

With justifiable worries about Washington’s methods and motivations, it is in everybody’s interest to get the US out of involvement as soon as possible. But that would be better served if others with less of a history stepped up to the plate for what is necessary.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


The difference with Libya | Brian Whitaker

Unlike Bahrain or Yemen, the scale and nature of the Gaddafi regime’s actions have impelled the UN’s ‘responsibility to protect’

Why not bomb Bahrain? Why not declare a no-fly zone over Yemen? Such questions are aired increasingly on the internet – implying that in the light of all the popular uprisings in the Middle East and the authorities’ attempts to suppress them, military intervention in Libya is a case of double standards.

It’s true, of course, that Bahrain and Yemen are regarded as western allies while Muammar Gaddafi has been an international pariah for most of his 43 years in power and few will be sorry to see him go. But that is not the only reason for treating Libya differently.

In principle, the question of who governs each country is a matter for its own citizens to sort out, and as far as possible they should be left to do so. This is especially important in the Arab countries that have a long history of political manipulation from outside: Arabs alternate between complaining about western intervention and demanding that the west steps in to solve their problems for them.

The result has been a long-standing dependency culture which – thankfully – Tunisians and Egyptians began to shake off when they overthrew their presidents. They accomplished their revolutions without significant foreign help and, in the long run, they will be all the better for that.

The problem, though, is that dictators don’t give up power readily and in the process of getting rid of them people are liable to be killed. It happened in Tunisia and Egypt, and it’s happening in Bahrain, Yemen and – to a much greater degree – in Libya.

So, while it’s important to let people determine their own future, there’s a conflicting pressure to get involved when lives and human rights are at stake.

In an effort to clarify the position, the UN’s 2005 world summit established an international norm known as “responsiblity to protect” (set out here in paragraphs 138 and 139):

“Each individual State has the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This responsibility entails the prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through appropriate and necessary means.”

It goes on to say that the international community, through the UN, has a responsibility “to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means … to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity”. It also permits military action through the UN “should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities manifestly fail to protect their population”.

The concept of R2P (as it’s sometimes known) began to emerge after the international community’s failure to prevent the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Canada was one of the countries pressing for it and the African Union also played an important part. In addition, it is supported by various human rights organisations and NGOs.

“Responsibility to protect” was specifically cited in the two recent security council resolutions (1970 and 1973) relating to Libya. Under the rules of R2P, military intervention is a last resort – and the way that is interpreted will always be coloured to some extent by the political interests of security council members. Even so, there is a reasonable argument that the scale and nature of the Libyan regime’s action justified intervention in a way that the actions of other Arab regimes (so far) have not.

There is a further argument that Libya was a test case: if R2P was ignored on this occasion the whole principle of protecting civilian populations would have been seriously weakened, if not rendered totally worthless.

This is not to suggest that intervening in Libya was necessarily a good idea militarily or politically. As Jonathan Freedland says, the trouble with it is not “the abstract principle but the concrete practice”. There will always be debates about the implementation and questions about whether the number of deaths would have been higher or lower if Libyans had been left to their own devices. Either way, though, it deserves to be recognised as an intervention based on principle and not as the “petro-imperialist” plot that Gaddafi claims it to be.

If anyone is to be accused of double standards, it should be the Arab League, which initially supported the no-fly zone, wavered when the bombing started, and now seems to have swung back in support of it.

At the same time, though, the league is supporting another kind of “responsibility to protect” – the protection of repressive regimes in the Gulf. Yesterday, while rejecting “any foreign interference”, it endorsed the sending of Saudi troops to prop up Bahrain’s beleaguered king.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Arab revolution is an unstoppable force now | Editorial

While the world’s attention is focussed on Libya, people across the Middle East are rising up against dictators

Just six weeks after Bashar al-Assad declared that Syria was stable (“Why? Because you have to be very closely linked to the beliefs of the people. This is the core issue,” he told the Wall Street Journal), it emerges that it is anything but. When police fired on protesters in a provincial town and killed three of them, 20,000 turned out angrily for the burial of the victims. Yemen’s dictator, Ali Abdullah Saleh, is probably on his way out, after senior generals, ambassadors and some tribes deserted him in the wake of the massacre that took place on Friday. Egypt voted overwhelmingly for constitutional amendments which pave the way for early parliamentary elections. While the world’s attention is focused on Libya, the Arab revolution is continuing, its momentum unstoppable.

Its consequences will be neither uniform nor predictable. It affects both the pro-western dictators and an autocracy like Syria, which backs movements such as Hezbollah and Hamas. It could lead to the breakup of nations but may also produce new alliances. It is ironic that a fate worse than death is being predicted for Yemen, where the west conscripted Saleh in its fight against al-Qaida, and which could divide three ways, but not for Libya, where it is backing the insurgents with air strikes, hoping against hope that the country will remain whole. Nor will independence from America and its dwindling collection of client regimes buy Assad insurance against some of the issues his people have with him and his family: political repression and crony capitalism.

In this revolutionary chaos, it is easy to miss the more significant events, some of which are purely political. Egypt is continuing to be guided by popular will, even though divisions are emerging among those who brought Mubarak’s regime down about what that will lead to. Campaigning for last Saturday’s referendum on constitutional reform produced some unlikely alliances: the Muslim Brotherhood, Salafists and the remnants of Mubarak’s NDP all pushed for a yes vote, arguing that the military should be out of politics, and parliamentary elections held as soon as possible. If not, they argued, 2011 could yet prove to be a rerun of 1952, when the army seized power and kept it.

Youth coalitions and presidential candidates like Mohamed ElBaradei and Amr Moussa campaigned against, saying they needed more time to form proper parties. Their fear is that even though the Muslim Brotherhood has said it would contest just over a third of the seats, an anti-democratic majority would be entrenched in the new parliament. In the end 77% voted in favour on a turnout of 40%. Democracy in action for the first time in a long time.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds