Saturday, March 19, 2011
Ruminations on the Libya complexities
One thing about today’s military business in Libya – at least the UK government does not include anyone who, in office, inflicted on us such a shameful farrago of lies during the march to war in Iraq in 2003.
We can perhaps hope that the intelligence advice now being given to the government has drawn on the lessons of that time. And the various intelligence services have the confidence to give our current government accurate and sober advice, not fitting the evidence to the political requirements of the moment.
But are we repeating some more general mistakes?
Too many people seem to think that deploying air power settles matters in the streets. They point to the example of the Kosovo operation and the military actions against Serbia. But it was not the bombing of various bits of Serbia that stopped the genocide of the Kosovars and compelled Milosevic to step down. It was the fact that Hungary joined NATO and made it plain that it would allow NATO tank forces to enter Serbia from Hungary and fight on the ground.
At the moment there are plenty of real military targets in Libya that can be hit from the air. Without going near civilian areas. These attacks can be justified as degrading air defence capabilities. But in a few days there will be no targets left.
In Serbia the NATO forces continued the bombing campaign for weeks, and ended up hitting all sorts of useless ‘targets’ such as bridges, ‘command centres’, power stations, and low-grade military installations simple because there was nothing else left to hit and air power was all they had.
And like in Serbia the real capability for oppression in Libya will be largely untouched by air operations – the capability of armed men to enter peoples houses on foot and shoot whoever they want.
I hope there is some understanding of the deep limitations on what we are undertaking.
I hope that civilians will actually be protected.
I hope we know how we are going to get out of this place.
It is possible that some ‘rebel areas’ can be protected because this is a war in a desert, and history buffs will remember how air attacks on hostile logistics chains were crucial to the north Africa campaigns of 1940-1943 That however means more than a no-fly zone it means active search and destroy of moving vehicles and killing people moving in the open.
That leaves Tripoli and the west under government control, and the Saddam regime survived for years under a no-fly regime. If they dig in, do we acquesc to partition, or what?
I hope that our Government (including those of our LibDem ministers in the decision loop) are not in the same situation as the commanders of the Spanish Armada in 1588 who admitted that the sailed in the confident expectations of a miracle.
In short something else than air power will be needed. We need to think very hard on this.
We can perhaps hope that the intelligence advice now being given to the government has drawn on the lessons of that time. And the various intelligence services have the confidence to give our current government accurate and sober advice, not fitting the evidence to the political requirements of the moment.
But are we repeating some more general mistakes?
Too many people seem to think that deploying air power settles matters in the streets. They point to the example of the Kosovo operation and the military actions against Serbia. But it was not the bombing of various bits of Serbia that stopped the genocide of the Kosovars and compelled Milosevic to step down. It was the fact that Hungary joined NATO and made it plain that it would allow NATO tank forces to enter Serbia from Hungary and fight on the ground.
At the moment there are plenty of real military targets in Libya that can be hit from the air. Without going near civilian areas. These attacks can be justified as degrading air defence capabilities. But in a few days there will be no targets left.
In Serbia the NATO forces continued the bombing campaign for weeks, and ended up hitting all sorts of useless ‘targets’ such as bridges, ‘command centres’, power stations, and low-grade military installations simple because there was nothing else left to hit and air power was all they had.
And like in Serbia the real capability for oppression in Libya will be largely untouched by air operations – the capability of armed men to enter peoples houses on foot and shoot whoever they want.
I hope there is some understanding of the deep limitations on what we are undertaking.
I hope that civilians will actually be protected.
I hope we know how we are going to get out of this place.
It is possible that some ‘rebel areas’ can be protected because this is a war in a desert, and history buffs will remember how air attacks on hostile logistics chains were crucial to the north Africa campaigns of 1940-1943 That however means more than a no-fly zone it means active search and destroy of moving vehicles and killing people moving in the open.
That leaves Tripoli and the west under government control, and the Saddam regime survived for years under a no-fly regime. If they dig in, do we acquesc to partition, or what?
I hope that our Government (including those of our LibDem ministers in the decision loop) are not in the same situation as the commanders of the Spanish Armada in 1588 who admitted that the sailed in the confident expectations of a miracle.
In short something else than air power will be needed. We need to think very hard on this.
Labels: air power, Iraq, Libya, Serbia, war
Comments:
Post a Comment
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Ordering the courts not to interfere in a matter that is in the competence of the courts
On the face of it this is a disgraceful action by the law officers of this coalition government tamely continuing a degrading New Labour procedure..
I trust that Liberal ministers will not be inhibited from reporting back what can be reported on this and that our backbenchers are not inhibited from telling the Liberal front bench in particular and the government in general front bench exactly what a crock of shit this approach is.
In fact I hope there is a massive row behind the scenes in government and that Immigration minster Damian Green is suitably chastised.
As the Guardian reports:
The one good thing is that previously secret (or at least vigorously obscured) government instructions for similar actions have now been made public.
I trust that Liberal ministers will not be inhibited from reporting back what can be reported on this and that our backbenchers are not inhibited from telling the Liberal front bench in particular and the government in general front bench exactly what a crock of shit this approach is.
In fact I hope there is a massive row behind the scenes in government and that Immigration minster Damian Green is suitably chastised.
As the Guardian reports:
And since this was actually the implementation of a policy put into place by Labour, don’t let them of the hook either. Labour should be trusted on NOTHING relating to their floundering after teh mess they helped cause in Iraq.Government lawyers have warned high court judges that last-minute legal challenges should not be allowed to "disrupt or delay" a deportation flight to Baghdad due to leave Britain early tomorrow. (That is today, Wednesday 9th)
This is the first time the detailed operations of the "special arrangements" surrounding such deportation flights have become public. But the immigration minister, Damian Green, said they were standard procedure and had been used in 16 previous flights to northern Iraq.He said: "In line with published policy, the UK Border Agency has written to the high court in advance of every charter flight since 2005 setting out why they are taking place and explaining why judicial reviews will not necessarily stop an individual being
returned or the flight continuing. This is not unusual and is accepted practice by the courts. It remains open for an individual to apply for a high court injunction preventing removal
The one good thing is that previously secret (or at least vigorously obscured) government instructions for similar actions have now been made public.
Labels: coalition government, Deportations, Iraq, Labour
Comments:
Really great thanks to author to post this very good blog about "Ordering the courts not to interfere in a matter that is in the competence of the courts".
Thanks for the information in this blog.
Keep it up.
credit
Thanks for the information in this blog.
Keep it up.
credit
# posted by 
: 6:05 am, July 25, 2010
: 6:05 am, July 25, 2010
Great blog! I actually love how it is quick on my eyes as well as the information is well written. I am wondering how I may be notified whenever a new post has been made.
cars
Post a Comment
cars
# posted by : 8:22 am, August 18, 2010
: 8:22 am, August 18, 2010Friday, January 29, 2010
Is the Second Iraq War Resolution question really so relevant?
Yes it is important that we get answers from Blair and others on the ‘Second UN Resolution’ fiasco. Even with a second resolution however backing the Iraq war was still wrong – in the famous phrase ‘worse than a crime, a blunder’.
In a sense we in this party have been let off the war hook because we could oppose the attack on legal grounds and gain essential party unity on that basis for our public advice. Would we have been so firm if we had had to oppose on the grounds that it was a stupid and wrong thing to do even if ‘legalised’?
By relying on the (lack of) UN votes to delegitimise the attack we are relying on the better political judgement of other countries representatives who prevented such a vote. It would have been more honourable to campaign against the taking of the vote and advising for a NO vote if it was eventually presented.
For my part I would have opposed the Iraq war whatever position the party took. But then I opposed the 2001 Afghan attack also.
In a sense we in this party have been let off the war hook because we could oppose the attack on legal grounds and gain essential party unity on that basis for our public advice. Would we have been so firm if we had had to oppose on the grounds that it was a stupid and wrong thing to do even if ‘legalised’?
By relying on the (lack of) UN votes to delegitimise the attack we are relying on the better political judgement of other countries representatives who prevented such a vote. It would have been more honourable to campaign against the taking of the vote and advising for a NO vote if it was eventually presented.
For my part I would have opposed the Iraq war whatever position the party took. But then I opposed the 2001 Afghan attack also.
Labels: Iraq, tony blair
Comments:
This is my first time i visit here. I found so many entertaining stuff in your blog Keep up the excellent work.
SEO COMPANY
SEO COMPANY
This is my first time i visit here. I found so many entertaining stuff in your blog Keep up the excellent work.
SEO COMPANY
SEO COMPANY
Hi, interesting post. I have been wondering about this topic, so thanks for posting. I’ll definitely be subscribing to your site. Keep up the good posts
Virtual Assistant Services
Virtual Assistant Services
This Blog is going places, the people, the layout, amazing to see such dedication and focus.
Fort Lauderdale criminal lawyer
Fort Lauderdale criminal lawyer
Terrific work! This is the type of information that are meant to be shared around the web. Disgrace on the seek for not positioning this post higher! Come on over and discuss with my web site . Thank you
Panny acution
Panny acution
This Blog is going places, the people, the layout, amazing to see such dedication and focus.
Jennifer Aniston workout
Jennifer Aniston workout
Thanks you. Very good post.Unless they can offer a really compelling reason for users to come back, it will be the next Bebo, MySpace.
Jennifer Aniston workout
Post a Comment
Jennifer Aniston workout
Thursday, July 30, 2009
It is up to us to bear the pains of the truth of War
They say that when your parents die, you realise with shocking clarity that the roof is finally off the house of your life and it is up to you provide all the security for what you love.
The funeral today of Henry Allingham, and the upcoming funeral of Harry Patch, mark the point where we have no more witnesses to the obscene slaughters of the first part of the Great European Civil War of 1914-1990
That was my grandparents generation. My dad (already dead) a veteran of the 1939-1945 period of hot combat, could at the end of his life still be aroused to blind fury by accounts of what happened to his parents generation. I recall him talking about Passchendale and declaring ‘we should have shot our own generals there not the Germans’.
I doubt though whether he was aware of the line from the Internationale that the authorities would know
Now it is up to us, my generation which will soon pass as well, and those younger, to do a better and more peaceful job of dealing with the serious idiocies of war and what it does to the people who we may still send out to fight.
Starting with making sure that the Iraq war Enquiry is a servant to truth not political sensibilities, let the roof fall where it may.
And that we do not fall into the ‘they must not have died in vain’ trap in Afghanistan, pushing in more troops regardless of any realistic military or political objectives, or national interests .
And that we do not let the ramshackle instruments of co-operation that we have in the European Union get sabotaged by nostalgics for the hatreds of the great Civil War.
The funeral today of Henry Allingham, and the upcoming funeral of Harry Patch, mark the point where we have no more witnesses to the obscene slaughters of the first part of the Great European Civil War of 1914-1990
That was my grandparents generation. My dad (already dead) a veteran of the 1939-1945 period of hot combat, could at the end of his life still be aroused to blind fury by accounts of what happened to his parents generation. I recall him talking about Passchendale and declaring ‘we should have shot our own generals there not the Germans’.
I doubt though whether he was aware of the line from the Internationale that the authorities would know
bientôt que nos balles
Sont pour nos propres généraux
Now it is up to us, my generation which will soon pass as well, and those younger, to do a better and more peaceful job of dealing with the serious idiocies of war and what it does to the people who we may still send out to fight.
Starting with making sure that the Iraq war Enquiry is a servant to truth not political sensibilities, let the roof fall where it may.
And that we do not fall into the ‘they must not have died in vain’ trap in Afghanistan, pushing in more troops regardless of any realistic military or political objectives, or national interests .
And that we do not let the ramshackle instruments of co-operation that we have in the European Union get sabotaged by nostalgics for the hatreds of the great Civil War.
Labels: Afghanistan, European Union, history, Iraq, peacemakers, war
Comments:
Post a Comment
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Iran and USA difficult pasts
For Iran and the USA the difficult times of talking get under way. The leak of the US President’s (alleged) draft letter to the Iranian President matches to the public demand from Iran for apologies for past US actions against Iraq.
It might be easier for Obama if the key past events were all the relics of Republican administrations. However Iran is likely to be aware of this action under the Presidency of Democratic President Jimmy Carter, as reported by Robert Fisk, interviewing a notable German arms dealer in 1987:
Which in turn no doubt helped that arms trader to do business in Iraq. Iraq attacked Iran on 21 September 1980.
The 1981 onwards Reagan administration of course became extremely explicit in its support of Iraq.
Much dirty linen of all kinds lurks in the shadows of hidden washbaskets.
It might be easier for Obama if the key past events were all the relics of Republican administrations. However Iran is likely to be aware of this action under the Presidency of Democratic President Jimmy Carter, as reported by Robert Fisk, interviewing a notable German arms dealer in 1987:
So it was true, I asked him, that he had given the CIA’s intelligence on the Iranian army to the Iraqi government?
“Mr Fisk… at the very beginning of the war in September 1980 I was invited to go to the Pentagon. And there I was handed the very latest US satellite photographs of the Iranian front lines. You could see everything on the pictures … the Iranian gun emplacements … the lines of trenches on the eastern side of the Karun river, the tank emplacements … all the way up the Iranian side of the border towards Kurdistan .. and I travelled with these maps (via Germany) to Baghdad. The Iraqis were grateful.
Robert Fisk in his book “The Great War for Civilisation” page 940 in my paperback edition
Which in turn no doubt helped that arms trader to do business in Iraq. Iraq attacked Iran on 21 September 1980.
The 1981 onwards Reagan administration of course became extremely explicit in its support of Iraq.
Much dirty linen of all kinds lurks in the shadows of hidden washbaskets.
Labels: Fisk, Iran, Iraq, Obama
Comments:
Post a Comment
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
SOFA shaping to give a kick in the pants?
While we obsess over VATS VAT, over in Iraq their Parliament is shaping up to vote on the Status Of Forces Agreement. It is SOFA that gives the USA (and our own armed forces) legitimacy to operate in Iraq. The vote has now been postponed ( as at 26 Nov 2008) to Thursday 27th. And even if signed it now looks as if it is subject to confirmation by a national referendum in 2009.
According to Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki if Parliament does not ratify the agreement then there is no alternative plan on hold to permit US forces to remain – they (and we) must withdraw from Iraq immediately. Having gone down the negotiations on the SOFA route it is no longer possible for the USA to go to the Security Council for a renewed International Mandate.
This could be interesting as UK troops hold the southern areas that the US forces need to pass through to possible Gulf Coast evacuation points.
Should we be making ready for sudden military ructions?
According to Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki if Parliament does not ratify the agreement then there is no alternative plan on hold to permit US forces to remain – they (and we) must withdraw from Iraq immediately. Having gone down the negotiations on the SOFA route it is no longer possible for the USA to go to the Security Council for a renewed International Mandate.
This could be interesting as UK troops hold the southern areas that the US forces need to pass through to possible Gulf Coast evacuation points.
Should we be making ready for sudden military ructions?
Labels: Iraq, occupation
Comments:
Post a Comment
Thursday, August 16, 2007
The privatisation of warfare and the overstreach of UK forces in Iraq and Afghanistan
The question of private contractors engaging in military actions in Afghanistan and elsewhere raises a whole barrelful of issues.
The privatisation of warfare is something that needs urgent discussion. Who for example guards the guardians?
We didn’t get this debate at the time of the strange death of Colonel Westhusing, an US expert on military ethics who was deeply unhappy about the use of ‘Security Contractor’ companies in Iraq…. Of new relevance because of Westhusing’s previous work with General Petraeous, the current US Armed Forces commander in Iraq.
And the Iraq government is certainly now unhappy about the western ‘Private Military Companies’ – calling some of them ‘more dangerous than the (Iraqi faction) Militias’
Yes there is overstreach of the UK army combat units, the people who put their boots on the ground in areas they are likely to be shot at.
Of course we could go the route of a ‘mercenary army’ under Queens Regulations… raising more troops from Commonwealth countries for example. And does the claim by an unnamed Army Officer (reported in ‘The First Post’) that ‘1.5 million able bodied males in the UK refuse to work gainfully’ show a yearning for conscription?
The privatisation of warfare is something that needs urgent discussion. Who for example guards the guardians?
We didn’t get this debate at the time of the strange death of Colonel Westhusing, an US expert on military ethics who was deeply unhappy about the use of ‘Security Contractor’ companies in Iraq…. Of new relevance because of Westhusing’s previous work with General Petraeous, the current US Armed Forces commander in Iraq.
And the Iraq government is certainly now unhappy about the western ‘Private Military Companies’ – calling some of them ‘more dangerous than the (Iraqi faction) Militias’
Yes there is overstreach of the UK army combat units, the people who put their boots on the ground in areas they are likely to be shot at.
Of course we could go the route of a ‘mercenary army’ under Queens Regulations… raising more troops from Commonwealth countries for example. And does the claim by an unnamed Army Officer (reported in ‘The First Post’) that ‘1.5 million able bodied males in the UK refuse to work gainfully’ show a yearning for conscription?
Labels: Afghanistan, Army, Iraq, Mercenaries, Private Military Contractors
Comments:
Privatisation of the war machine is a serious issue. By hiding the real number of troops, they can prolong the violence.
Would you be willing to spread the word about www.draftresistance.org? It's a site dedicated to shattering the myths surrounding the selective slavery system and building mass civil disobedience to stop the draft before it starts!
Our banner on a website, printing and posting the anti-draft flyer or just telling friends would help.
Thanks!
Scott Kohlhaas
PS. When it comes to conscription, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure!
Post a Comment
Would you be willing to spread the word about www.draftresistance.org? It's a site dedicated to shattering the myths surrounding the selective slavery system and building mass civil disobedience to stop the draft before it starts!
Our banner on a website, printing and posting the anti-draft flyer or just telling friends would help.
Thanks!
Scott Kohlhaas
PS. When it comes to conscription, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure!
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Iraq - the C4 report on Saturday
Those of us who fall asleep in front of the telly having turned on to 'Big Brother' by mistake may may be waking up early in the morning to a very different Channel 4 programme. 'The Iraq Commission' is a series of hearings chaired variously by Paddy Ashdown, Baroness Jay and Tom King grilling witnesses with a wide variety of views on the appaling situation in that country.
Selections of that evidence have been broadcast recently in two-hour long C4 programms beginning at about 10 minutes after midnight.
The final programme is at a much more civilised hour on Saturday 14th July (starts 7.30 pm) and will be the report of the commission given on the basis of the evidence presented.
Ming Campbell presented evidence to the commission on 11 June (Broadcast on 5th July).
All witnesses transcripts are available online (in .pdf). Videos of presentations available, and other submissions are also on line including a written submission ( .pdf) from the Party.
Incdentially Ming referred toa third document teh LibDems were sending to the commission, but this does not seem to be up on the website. Maybe we could make it available online ourselves?
Much, much better Channel4. Pity a slot could not have been found for an earlier transmission time for the main evidence sessions.
Selections of that evidence have been broadcast recently in two-hour long C4 programms beginning at about 10 minutes after midnight.
The final programme is at a much more civilised hour on Saturday 14th July (starts 7.30 pm) and will be the report of the commission given on the basis of the evidence presented.
Ming Campbell presented evidence to the commission on 11 June (Broadcast on 5th July).
All witnesses transcripts are available online (in .pdf). Videos of presentations available, and other submissions are also on line including a written submission ( .pdf) from the Party.
Incdentially Ming referred toa third document teh LibDems were sending to the commission, but this does not seem to be up on the website. Maybe we could make it available online ourselves?
Much, much better Channel4. Pity a slot could not have been found for an earlier transmission time for the main evidence sessions.
Labels: Iraq
Comments:
Post a Comment
