Libya

Wednesday

Ronald Payne

Lunching with Gaddafi

I counted Gaddafi in on a journey to Tripoli to interview him early in his reign and now I am counting him out. At the time the young Libyan was still a mysterious newcomer to the international scene. For years it had been foretold that one day some unknown colonel would appear Nasser-like to overthrow the monarchy and drag Libya kicking and screaming into the brutal world of Arab socialism. Now the prophesy was fulfilled by the arrival of the man of destiny, a Bedouin, a lieutenant-colonel who modestly promoted himself only one grade. After many requests and endless oriental coffees consumed, I finally received the summons to Revolutionary HQ

Mats Persson

The EU should impose sanctions on Gaddafi’s Libya

The EU spends €460 million a year in operational costs alone on its new foreign policy department, the External Action Service, headed up by Catherine Ashton. This body – created by the Lisbon Treaty – was Europe’s ‘great white hope’ for the global stage, finally allowing it to speak with one voice and therefore giving it leverage where it previously had none.   It hasn’t quite worked out that way. Caught between Cairo and Tripoli, the EU has received yet another reminder that its bureaucracies and institutions cannot magically replace 27 individual foreign policies, as EU leaders continue their bickering over what to do.   The EU’s response to the

David Blackburn

The emergence of a Cameron doctrine

Daniel Finkelstein makes a simple but important point in the Times today (£): a Prime Minister’s foreign policy is determined by events more than by instincts. The revolts in the Middle East are defining David Cameron’s diplomacy. The emerging policy is a realistic expression of Britain’s current domestic and international capabilities. Cameron’s speech to the Kuwaiti parliament did not match Harold Macmillan’s ‘winds of change’ speech because Britain no longer disposes of continents. Likewise, Tony Blair’s messianic tendencies belong to a past era. Colonel Gaddafi’s murderous stream of conscious could have given cause to evoke the moral certainty of an ‘ethical foreign policy’. Cameron still empathises with Blair’s cause in

Tuesday

James Forsyth

Libya on the brink

Tonight, Libya appears to be on the verge of a full on civil-war. The interior minister has defected to the opposition and urged the army to do likewise. The interior minister has also warned that there are half a million mercenaries in Libya under Gaddafi’s orders. This seems further grim confirmation of just how far Gaddafi is prepared to go to hang onto power. If Gaddafii does step up his campaign of violence against his own people it raises the question of what the international community can—and should—do. There’ll be some who say that this is no one but Libya’s business. But this argument is flawed strategically as well as

Peter Hoskin

Gaddafi’s lethal sort of madness

If Muammar al-Gaddafi weren’t still in charge of a country, then his speech for Libyan State TV would have been straight-up hilarious. There he was, all spittle-flecked bombast, rattling on and on about the “bunch of rats and cats” who are trying to depose him, and blaming their actions on, erm, hallucinogenic drugs. “We Libyans have resisted the US and Britain in the past,” he said, “and will not surrender.” He also, predictably, mentioned Israel. It was like some living caricature of a mad dictator. As it is, though, we ought to dwell on some of the more ominous aspects of Gaddafi’s address. He is not standing down, he said

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Cameron’s fine, liberal speech

David Cameron’s speech in Kuwait today did not take on his hosts in the way that Harold Macmillan’s ‘winds of change’ speech did. But it was a still fine, liberal speech. The key argument of the speech was that: ”As recent events have confirmed, denying people their basic rights does not preserve stability, rather the reverse. Our interests lie in upholding our values – in insisting on the right to peaceful protest, in freedom of speech and the internet, in freedom of assembly and the rule of law. But these are not just our values, but the entitlement of people everywhere; of people in Tahrir Square as much as Trafalgar

Monday

Peter Hoskin

Libya catch-up: Gaddafi on the precipice

Aside from official – and provocative – proclamations from Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the news from Libya is still arriving piecemeal. The latest reports are that the protestors have prevailed in Zawia, in the west of the country, to add to their “liberation” of Benghazi last night. And there is some speculation that Gaddafi Senior has fled the country, which would certainly reinforce the sense that his power is being whittled down, potentially to naught. As for Britain, the questions about our prior relationship with Libya still hover awkwardly over proceedings, and over the heads of the last government in particular. There was the al-Megrahi deal, of course, as well as

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Endgame in Libya?

Who the hell knows and who can tell what might follow if the Gaddafi regime really does collapse? On Sunday night there were all manner of rumours swirling through cyberspace. Some said the Mad Colonel was fleeing to Venezuela. So far that does not seem to be the case. Nor does the speech given by Gaddafi’s son Saif last night offer much encouragement. We are in front of two choices, we can reform now, this is an historic moment, without it there will be nothing for decades. You will see worse than Yugoslavia if we don’t choose the first option. Gaddafi is not Mubarak or Ben Ali, a classical ruler,

Sunday

James Forsyth

Is the Libyan military about to dump Gaddafi?

There’s an intriguing Sky News report this evening which suggests that the Libyan Army might be about to turn away from Gaddafi. The channel is reporting that soldiers in the second city of Benghazi have turned from the regime and have told locals that they have ‘liberated’ the city. If the bulk of the military abandon him, then Gaddafi is done for. This combined with the news that the demonstrations have spread to Tripoli and that several of the tribes are joining the cause suggests that the revolution is Libya is gaining momentum. Certainly, the live resignation of the Libyan Ambassador to China live on air indicates that the governing

Daniel Korski

The Bahraini challenge

The debacle in Bahrain cuts close to the British bone. The Ministry of Defence has helped train at least 100 Bahraini officers and supplied a range of equipment to the Gulf state. Egypt was important because of its regional role and ties to the United States. But there was no link to London, anymore than there was one to Paris or Berlin. Bahrain is different. Only a few months ago, British officials were applauding the Khalifa dynasty for taking steps towards democracy. But the fact is simple: the steps were insufficient – not by British standards, but by Bahraini ones. It should serve as a wake-up call to the Foreign

Saturday

David Blackburn

Uproar on Arab Street

Deaths continue to mark the protests in Bahrain and Libya. Reports are inaccurate because communications have been broken, especially in Libya. YouTube is, again, invaluable.

Thursday

David Blackburn

The Mad Dog lies in wait

The Bahraini regime will not yield peaceably before protest, as Hosni Mubarak did. This morning, Bahraini police opened fire on demonstrators with live rounds; four people were killed. There were also reports that Saudi Arabian troops were involved, which would mark a clear change in the Arab establishment’s tactics following Mubarak’s fall. In the uncertain atmosphere, Twitter resounded to claims that Shiites were seeking reprisals and that the military was ‘taking control of parts of the capital’. The agony of choice: a military coup or a religious massacre?   This morning’s news has forced Western powers to drop their hesitant approach. The British government responded immediately: condemning the Bahraini authorities’

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

Doubts remain over al-Megrahi

The morning after the day before, it seems that some of the murk around Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s release has lifted. In particular, one thing is explicit that wasn’t before: that the policy of the Brown government was to “do all it could” to facilitate the convicted Lockerbie bomber’s transfer to Libya. We might have surmised the same from David Miliband’s statements at the time. But now, at least, we know for sure. Naturally, this is tricky news for Labour, and especially for the Ghosts of 2008 whose names are splashed across the papers today: Brown himself, Jack Straw, Des Browne, etc. And yet Gus O’Donnell’s report has also absolved them of

Tuesday

David Blackburn

When will mass protest come to Libya?

As several seemingly permanent Middle Eastern autocracies tremble, Colonel Gadaffi’s Libya rolls on. So far, there have been reports of minor protests in the localities about housing shortages, nothing more. With unemployment standing at 30 percent, the Libyan people are just as impoverished as those in neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt. Gadaffi’s dictatorship is scarcely benevolent, and, as for liberalisation, Libya remains one of the few completely dry countries on Earth. The secret of Gadaffi’s success then would appear to be expressing aggressive anti-American sentiment, whilst suppressing Islamism and democratic opposition at home. And all the while he entices rich Western powers (Britain) with the allure of Libya’s virginal natural resources.

Wednesday

Alex Massie

Oh Christ, Bloody Lockerbie Again

Whaddyaknow, Wikileaks have some Lockerbie-related cables? Unfortunately they’re only about the release of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi and so less interesting – or perhaps simply less illuminating – than Lockerbie-related cables from the investigation and trial years might be. The Guardian’s headline is typically tendentious: Lockerbie bomber freed after Gaddafi’s ‘thuggish’ threats. This is true in as much as Gaddafi threatened to cut-off British business interests in Libya and then Megrahi was released. It is not true however that, as the headline implies, Megrahi was freed because of those threats. Nor, despite everything, is there any evidence in these cables that Gaddafi’s threats  – made to a body that was not

Sunday

David Blackburn

US double talk on Megrahi

If what the Sunday Times reports is true, then Kenny McAskill deserves an apology. ‘In the letter, sent on August 12 last year to Alex Salmond, the first minister, and justice officials, Richard LeBaron (deputy ambassador in London) wrote that the United States wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned in view of the nature of the crime. The note added: “Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities come to the conclusion that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose.” LeBaron added that freeing the bomber and making him live in Scotland

Friday

Alex Massie

The Lockerbie Conspiracy

First things first: it is extremely inconvenient, even embarrassing, that Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi is still alive nearly a year after he was released from Greenock Prison on the grounds that he was believed to have not much more, and perhaps fewer, than three months to live. Nevertheless, the fact that he has lived longer than expected does not advance or give any greater credence to the notion that there was some conspiracy designed to free him come what may and regardless of any other considerations. Nor is there any evidence, despite recent press reports, that BP (everyone’s favourite whipping boy now) played any role in Kenny MacAskill’s decision to send

Monday

Alex Massie

Lockerbie & the Scotland Act

Could government ministers in London have stepped-in to prevent the release of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi? A report in Scotland on Sunday yesterday says yes they could: Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy could have overruled Scottish justice secretary Kenny MacAskill and stopped the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi if the case was deemed to have breached “international obligations”. Senior diplomats have insisted there was a “clear understanding” between the UK and the US that Megrahi would serve out his sentence in Scotland. The US Justice and State departments have also insisted they had been given assurances in the 1990s that Megrahi would remain imprisoned under Scottish jurisdiction. […]Andrew Mackinlay, a senior

Monday

James Forsyth

The dangers of the government’s “mic-strike”

Jackie Ashley complains in her column today about Labour misters going on ‘mic-strike’ saying that it will lead to Labour being beaten so badly that it might not be able to come back. Ashley is speaking for a lot of people in the Labour party, one hears frequent complaints these days about Minister who are prepared to pick up the cheque each month but not to put in the hard yards. The consequences of ‘mic-strike’ were evident this morning. William Hague was on the Today Programme talking about the latest revelations concerning the government’s relations with the Gaddafi regime but no Foreign Office minister was prepared to do a response.

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The government contradicts itself on Megrahi

David Miliband on the Today Programme on September 2nd: “We did not want him [Megrahi] to die in prison.” Ed Balls on the Today Programme on September 7th: “None of us wanted to see the release of al-Megrahi” Considering that Megrahi was sentenced to life imprison for his role in the Lockerbie bombing, I cannot see how both of these statements of the government’s view can be correct. If the government did not want him to die in prison, it wanted him to be released.