http://www.majalla.com/en/geopolitics/article337543.ece
The speech of Muammar Qadhafi at the UN General Assembly Ali Abdussalam Treki (C), President of the United Nations General Assembly listens as Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Qadhafi speaks during the United Nations General Assembly 23 September 2009 at UN headquarters in New York. By Manuel Almeida Published: Thursday 31 March 2011 Updated: Tuesday 05 April 2011 On 23 September 2009, Muammar Qadhafi addressed the UN General Assembly. For most of his 100 minute-long speech, the Libyan leader strongly criticized Western interventionism, particularly the overthrow of Manuel Noriega of Panama and Saddam Hussein, revealing a special concern with the treatment given to both dictators after they were toppled. It seems that, at the time, Qadhafi was already predicting his own fate. Muammar Qadhafi's 100 minute-long speech at the UN General Assembly on 23 of September 2009 was no match for Fidel Castro's four and a half hour speech in 1960, and even less competition to India's Krishna Menon's all-time record eight hour speech in 1957. Yet Qadhafi did manage to go way beyond the 15 minute limit set by General Assembly rules, leading his personal translator to collapse from exhaustion just before the end of the speech. At the occasion, and wearing an outfit resembling a villain from the cult-classic film Mad Max, Qadhafi talked about various issues, including his very own one-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict-what he calls "Isratine." Nevertheless, Qadhafi spent most of the 100 minutes on the topic of armed intervention. Indeed, he told the UN General Assembly how his men had placed numerous landmines along Libya's frontiers, saying "[if] you want to invade me then you may be killed." Qadhafi was distressed about the removal of Manuel Noriega from power in Panama by the United States in 1989, and strongly criticized the invasion of Iraq, also led by the United States, to topple Saddam Hussein's regime. Qadhafi showed particular concern over the treatment that both former leaders received from their captives. It seems Qadhafi saw it coming. The uprisings in the Arab world (naturally) reached Libya, and after Qadhafi used the air-force to attack the protesters, his name quickly returned to the top of the blacklist of Western powers, who this time seem to have all the ingredients they need to get rid of him. In his 42 years in power Qadhafi has made very few friends outside Libya, and most of his Arab neighbours show little concern at the prospect of seeing him go. The contentious issue is not so much whether the Arab world in general and the Libyans in particular would be better off without Qadhafi, but the extent to which external actors playing a crucial role in the forceful removal of the Libyan president is the way to go about it. The Arab countries, through the Arab League, did warn that although they supported the no-fly zone, they did not wish to see the United States involved in an intervention in Libya. Russia's President Dmitry Medvedev accuses the United States of imperialism, while China regrets the military strikes against Libya and condemns the use of force. Several African leaders have spoken out loudly against the intervention. The African Union, formerly headed by Qadhafi, has called for an end to the military intervention, while declaring that the aspirations of the Libyan people are legitimate. Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe, who has offered asylum to Qadhafi, asserted that "we should never have given the West, knowing their bloody vampires of the past, all this room to go for our people in Africa." There should be no surprise that strong criticism about the use of military force is coming from those to whom human rights, far from being a priority, are most often seen as a liability. Yet western powers do have their dark, recent history in the Middle East. Especially after the disastrous intervention in Iraq, there is very little room for mistakes in Libya. Yet it is hard to imagine how the United States, France or Britain could simply stand and watch, while Qadhafi massacred his own people. In the words of Alain Juppé, France's foreign minister, "if we did not do what we are doing now, we would be ashamed." Add to this Qadhafi's long, troubled relationship with the West, and a wave of refugees threatening to spread chaos in the Mediterranean, and western inaction would certainly be awkward to say the least. The UN Security Council resolution 1973 that authorized the intervention allows for "all necessary measures" to protect civilians under threat. In the words of Ben Rhodes, US Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications, the goals of the military operation are to "protect Libyan civilians, stop the advances of Qadhafi's forces on cities like Benghazi, enable the establishment of a no-fly zone, and enable the provision of humanitarian assistance to the people of Libya." The "no-fly zone" seems to be a title that does not do any justice to the kind of operation the coalition is undertaking. Given that the opposition to Qadhafi's forces is largely civilian, the coalition has informally become the air force of the revolution. Once Qadhafi's air forces were destroyed, the coalition's air force moved on to target Qadhafi's regular army. In less than 10 days, the air campaign allowed the opposition forces to recover several coastal cities-Ajdabiya, Ras Lanuf, Brega, Uqalya, and Bin Jawad-finding little or no resistance after coalition raids swept through the cities beforehand. There are reports of Qadhafi forces leaving behind their weapons and uniforms. Qadhafi's air force has been virtually destroyed, and his army's capacity is now considerably more limited than it was two weeks ago. Although Qadhafi's supporters recovered a few of those cities, Qadhafi lost his momentum, and it is hard to see how he can regain the upper hand. A potential problem now is that Libya's civil war could be heading towards an impasse, whereby both sides will hold on to relatively fixed areas, without having the capacity to win the war. On the other hand, it is difficult to conceive of a scenario where Qadhafi will ultimately prevail, given the coalition's commitment to proceed with the air campaign, now led by NATO, for as long as it takes. Manuel Almeida - Contributing editor. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Post message: [email protected] Subscribe : [email protected] Unsubscribe : [email protected] List owner : [email protected] Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
