Monday, August 22, 2011

Fall of Tripoli; NATO does it again….

Whether the Battle of Tripoli has been lost to rebels or not, the Libyan turmoil seems to have entered a new phase. There are conflicting reports of fall of Tripoli but it seems that the fall is imminent if not already taken place. It may be too early to analyze the factors leading to rebels’ apparent success against Libya’s strongman and the atrocities perpetrated by him and his family members. Does the apparent fall of the Qaddafi regime vindicate President Barack Obama's "lead from behind" strategy? It will also be too early to give the credits at this stage.

The key question is whether the rebels could achieve what they did without global intervention (read: USA and NATO’s aerial strikes against the Libyan population)? According to some analysts, NATO’s strikes were the key to success of rebels in Tripoli. This means that the rebellion was not a populist movement and was successful because Libya was facing a collective fury of the mightiest of the global powers.

The major reason of the fall of Tripoli is NATO’s stepped up military operations, especially American military operations, as critics had been calling for. The real test of Obama's Libya operation will be how events play out after Qaddafi is gone and if Libya quickly transitions to a stable, representative political order, then the messiness of the last five months will be forgiven and forgotten. Ask George W. Bush administration which knows, as hard as it is to topple a dictator, the really hard part is what comes after.

NPR Blog has compiled from the international press, some very interesting factors of rebel’s success in Tripoli which are listed as under:

— "Surveillance And Coordination With NATO Aided Rebels": "American and NATO officials cited an intensification of American aerial surveillance in and around the capital city as a major factor in helping to tilt the balance after months of steady erosion of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi's military. The officials also said that coordination between NATO and the rebels, and among the loosely organized rebel groups themselves, had become more sophisticated and lethal in recent weeks." (The New York Times)

As Bombing Weakened Qaddafi's Forces, Opposition Organized: "It took five months after the NATO air strikes began before rebel forces entered Tripoli. Col Gaddafi's forces were a real army with heavy weapons, while the rebels were a bunch of civilians who had managed to get hold of some light arms such as AK-47s. It took a while for the bombing campaign to significantly reduce the government's military advantage and for the rebels to be organized into a proper fighting force. In the end, they advanced on Tripoli from three fronts, surrounding the coastal city, where they were met by jubilant crowds. Many were surprised at how little resistance they met outside the capital." (BBC News)

NATO Attacks Intensified; Deadline Loomed: "NATO warplanes have flown nearly 20,000 sorties in the past five months, including about 7,500 strike attacks against Qaddafi's forces. The jets have hit at least 40 targets in and around Tripoli in the past two days. This was the highest number on a single geographic location since the bombing started more than five months ago, officials said. ...
"NATO officials deny there has been a fundamental shift in tactics in recent days to provide close air support to the advancing rebels. ... But they acknowledge that in response to new developments, alliance bombers have been pummeling Qaddafi's troops holding defensive positions even when they were only trying to stem the progress of the rebels.
"Alliance's military planners have [also] been racing against a deadline next month, when member states must vote on a second three-month extension of the mission. The bombing campaign has been criticized as detracting resources from NATO's main mission, the 10-year war in Afghanistan." (The Associated Press)

A "Secret Allegiance?" "One reason for the rebels' startlingly rapid entrance into Tripoli – which had long seemed impregnable – was reported to be the secret allegiance of the commander of the special battalion guarding the capital. Senior rebel official Fathi al-Baja told the Associated Press that the commander's brother had been killed by the regime years ago, and that he had been loyal to the rebels. When opposition forces reached the gates of Tripoli, the battalion promptly surrendered. (The Guardian)

"Libya's Gritty Mountain Rebels May Have Turned Tide In Tripoli": "The push by guerrilla fighters from Libya's isolated Berber highlands, the rugged Nafusa Mountains near the Tunisian border, was one front too many for Qaddafi's depleted and sometimes demoralized forces." (Los Angeles Times)

As events unfold, it's important to remember that while the U.S., it's NATO allies and opposition leaders believe it's only a matter of time before Qaddafi is captured, as NPR's Lourdes Garcia-Navarro reported from Tripoli earlier today on Morning Edition, everything is a "bit messy" at this point and exactly how things will play out isn't known.

Post-Qaddafi Libya will be as hard to govern as Iraq. Both have many commonalities. Both are oil rich, both were ruled by autocrats to the disgust of common man. Both were attacked by Western imperialists. "Leading from behind" strategy is just a farce. It was a brazen attack on Libya. The instability now looming large in the entire region will be a nightmare for the African countries. However, Libyan oil will be in easy access and the dream of oil dinar will die its own death.

Please also read:

The gold dinar, dollar and Libya intervention.....

US interest in Libya is all about oil and China's growing economy....


  1. first thing i dont understand why america is always ready to attack on muslim countries. Weather it was a bush or Obama the always play with muslim countries, this is called hypcrism. All the time america talks abt humanity terrirsom, What is america doing...I think libya has its own problem and NATO and america has no rite to enter. If we see history america's stradety is divide and rule. NATO and america wants excuss for attack in muslim countries. Same is the case in libya. Which country wants that america or other countries miliitary attack their country and stay in their country forever. No one wants this...

  2. we r all slaves of USa my dear reader.i dont knw where u r from but if ur country is running on USA AID thn USA has every right to interfer.So its better we stand on our own feet if we want to get rid of this nagging Boss aka USA.produce ur own goods,from a diaper to a car.u r bound to get it from be competent enuf.arabs r filthy rich ppl on this earth.why cant they use their money on researches or any productuve things instead of buying Audis.
    my point is Be competant so other forces dont treat u like a salve..