Military Review

The negative consequences of the NATO campaign in Libya, which could not be

28
Under the guise of humanitarian slogans, the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) overthrew the legitimate government of Libya with brutal air strikes and brutally massacred its leader, M. Gaddafi. The negative consequences of NATO's interference in the internal affairs of Libya have once again convincingly proved the need to introduce common international legal approaches to the security problem both in Europe and in the world.


The 2013 year in Africa began as a continuation of the 2011-2012 situation created by the NATO military operation in Libya. As a result of this operation, launched under the pretext of "protecting civilians and in support of the new Libyan revolutionaries," the legal government of the country was overthrown, and its leader, M. Gaddafi, was brutally murdered.

The consequences of the NATO campaign in Libya are disastrous. The result of NATO air strikes was the actual collapse of the country as a single state. The real power in the country belongs to a multitude of armed groups created according to the territorial-tribal principle and not subordinate to the government in Tripoli. At the same time, the armed groups that actually govern the country are controlled by Al-Qaeda and the Justice and Construction Party (Muslim Brotherhood Branch).

Great damage has been done to the country's economy. Libya’s budgetary losses alone amounted to about 14 billion US dollars. By August, 2011 had all the refineries. By the fall of 2011, GDP losses were 7,7 billion US dollars. Immediate destruction from the NATO bombings is estimated at 14 billion US dollars, which is 7 times the damage to the country from the German bombings during the Second World War in comparable prices.

Having received “free democracy” from NATO, the Libyans lost a number of social guarantees that they had under the authority of Gaddafi: free electricity, education, medical care, obtaining agricultural land if they wanted to farm, free education in foreign universities, interest-free loans, subsidies for buying a new car 50% of its cost, low cost of gasoline (0,14 dollars), preferential prices for a number of food products (for example, you could buy 0,14 dollars for 40 dollars ok bread) and others.

Today, political prisoners have 8,5 thousand people in prisons, while under Gaddafi the number of political prisoners did not exceed 6 thousand people. Under the new regime of power, a sharp increase in crime occurred. So, in 2012, compared to 2011 in the year, the increase in murders occurred by 503%, the number of thefts - by 448% and so on.

The number of refugees reached 180 thousands of people. As a result of the use of bombs with depleted uranium by NATO members in the north of the country, territories have arisen in which the radiation background is several times higher than the allowable values.

The flames that NATO has ignited in Libya today have spread to West Africa, in particular, to Mali. The Tuaregs who fought on the side of Gaddafi raised a rebellion in the northern part of the country and took it under control. When the situation became critical for the Mali government, France decided to defend its former colony, based on the need, above all, to defend its own interests in Africa. Thus, another “hot spot” has formed in Africa. And given the fact that Mali is an Islamic state (80% of its population is Muslim), then we can expect the opening of a new front of opposition between the West and the Islamists, whose ranks are replenished by militants from other African countries. One of the groups operating in Mali, the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa, is already threatening Paris with terrorist attacks in France itself.

After the end of the conflict in Libya, terrorist organizations became more active, with which a number of armed attacks on Western diplomats were connected. During one of them, the American embassy in Benghazi was attacked and several diplomats were killed, including the US ambassador to Libya. Consuls of Great Britain, Italy and some others were also subjected to armed attacks.

The fall of the Gaddafi regime under the NATO bombs contributed not only to the rapid arming of extremist groups of all stripes on the African continent, but also to the intensified Islamization of certain territories. The short-sighted policy of the West towards the Libyan regime led to the elimination of an important outpost, which had sufficient authority and, most importantly, resources and instruments of influence (in the form of numerous banks and funds) in order to keep the policies of the leaders of many African states under control.

The fall of the Libyan regime opened the way for the African continent to the Arabian monarchies and, above all, to the main Libyan opponent, Qatar.

NATO's intervention in the internal affairs of Libya had certain political implications for the alliance itself. Thus, the United States abandoned its traditional leadership role in conducting the operation, along with the refusal of Germany to participate in it. Under these conditions, for the first time since the end of the Cold War, France and Great Britain took over the leadership and the main role in the operation. The participation of Western countries in the war in Libya caused protest sentiments in Germany and Spain.

All these and other negative consequences of NATO interference in the internal affairs of Libya could not be if the West supported the initiative put forward by Russia in 2008 in the development and conclusion of a new treaty on European security, which would act on the basis of generally accepted principles and norms of international law and would be uniform and mandatory for all countries of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

What is characteristic is that the United States and Great Britain, which in Libya were one of the main pioneers of the events that led this country to the catastrophe, and its population to poverty, have shown particular rejection of Russia's proposal to sign a new treaty.

It is also obvious that the resolutions of the UN Security Council on Libya and Mali, which sanctioned the "peacekeeping actions" of the United States, Great Britain, France and other NATO members here, with a new force raise the question of the UN’s role in the modern system of international relations, leave open the question of the limits of international interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states, on the protection of human rights during armed conflicts, on the activities of the Security Council in resolving conflict situations, on the mechanisms for implementing resolutions.

Why does the Libyan rebels take the UN under its protection, and in Mali authorizes the cleansing of the north from the Tuareg? How are Syrian terrorists receiving support from France and weapon to fight the legitimate government, better Malian, which fights the same France? These are questions that are not answered in the UN.
Author:
Originator:
http://peacekeeper.ru
28 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. evgenii67
    evgenii67 26 March 2013 16: 21 New
    +3
    "These are the questions that the UN has no answers to." the UN has no answers to many questions or is unable to answer or condemn the actions of the United States and the KO, sometimes I think why this organization is needed at all, when it expresses its opinion, it is still not authoritative for NATO countries
    1. saw486
      saw486 26 March 2013 18: 23 New
      +5
      The answer is simple. The strong one rules the world and imposes his own rules on everyone. It has always been this way, with a primitive communal system.
    2. APASUS
      APASUS 26 March 2013 20: 57 New
      +2
      Quote: evgenii67
      at the UN, there are no answers to many questions or are not able to answer or condemn the actions of the USA and KO

      The UN has long served the interests of the United States and the United States.
      This is an instrument for the legitimacy of decisions, if they wanted a demon zone - please, the UN decision !! And the fact that they started bombing bridges, factories, factories is trifles !!!
      1. elmi
        elmi 26 March 2013 21: 45 New
        +3
        Amer can ignore the UN decisions, there have already been precedents. Previously, the USSR was the counterweight to America, and we reduced the ardor of amers. Now the hands of the west are free, so they do what they want
      2. self-propelled
        self-propelled 26 March 2013 21: 54 New
        +2
        The topic "NATO and local conflicts" has been raised more than once on this resource. I would not want to repeat it, but nevertheless, military conflicts initiated by the armies of the NATO member countries (in particular the USA) occur in regions rich in hydrocarbons (for the most part). and this has long been no secret. they only know how to fight (and this is a moot point) only with an obviously weak enemy and with complete superiority in strength. not capable of more. the policy of double standards at the UN is already fed up with the order. maybe it is worth disagreeing with this state of affairs to unite and create your own alliance? how then the distributors will sing democracy?
        1. DimychDV
          DimychDV 27 March 2013 08: 15 New
          0
          Who saw the film "Ninth District"? About the impoverished insectoid aliens who settled on the edge of Johannesburg. There, the Nigerian Mafia is shown by very ugly types - which controlled all the nutrition issues on the reservation. The average moviegoer is not aware that there is half a continent from Nigeria to Johannesburg. The sediment will remain! And in Nigeria - the sixth in the world oil reserves, it seems. Some time ago this "secret bookmark" will fire at not the poorest Nigeria, in which someone supports (or in neighboring countries) oppositional "people's revolutionary" troops. Paid for international petrodollars ...
        2. Oshin
          Oshin 27 March 2013 11: 28 New
          0
          Such an alliance, as opposed to NATO was already. The Warsaw Pact Alliance, but only it, together with the collapse of the USSR, also collapsed .. Although Russia has a chance to revive it. The more countries will be aggressed by NATO, the more chances there are to create a counterweight and lead it with us ...
    3. wax
      wax 26 March 2013 22: 01 New
      +3
      The UN Security Council has the veto right of Russia, and the country does not need responsibility for its decisions to camouflage under the responsibility of others. And without a veto, everything will be legal, American.
  2. svp67
    svp67 26 March 2013 16: 24 New
    +5
    Which is to be expected. Toli will still be under the "star-striped shadow" ...
    1. aksakal
      aksakal 26 March 2013 16: 38 New
      +4
      Quote: svp67
      Which is to be expected. Toli will still be under the "star-striped shadow" ...

      - not this way. Thomson will now jump out and start: “How? Thanks to the Amers for saving the Libyan women who were endlessly raped by Mukhomor personally! Glory to the Amers for bringing such a coveted democracy to the suffering Libya! Eternal gratitude to the Amers for saving the Libyans from headaches terrible associated with the production and sale of Libyan oil - Amers freed them from these terrible headaches! Babies, doomed to personally eat Amanita, will never forget their miraculous deliverance from this fate thanks to amer! "
      Thomson, ah !!!! start your nonsense! laughing laughing laughing laughing Let neighing, where else will you see Kashchenko’s clients live, except if not live on this site laughing
  3. not good
    not good 26 March 2013 16: 29 New
    +1
    Western democracy on the march ... While Gaddafi was in Libya, there was order for the Libyans, and the political independence of Libya was a bone in the throat for the west, now for the order for sshapov
    1. Ruslan67
      Ruslan67 26 March 2013 16: 37 New
      +5
      Quote: Negoro
      for now order for sshapov

      Well, they have a big State Department - there will be enough ambassadors for everyone bully
      1. not good
        not good 26 March 2013 21: 16 New
        0
        Then it would be better for them not to bother with Syria, there are more people and no ambassadors.
    2. Oshin
      Oshin 27 March 2013 11: 36 New
      0
      Gaddafi made a mistake, decide to abandon the green papers when paying for oil, and they kicked him when they realized that they could finally lose control of Libyan oil.
      we, too, with China, decided not to pay in international transactions with bucks (as I heard on the news), but we and China are still afraid of kicking. Although the opposition also raised its head, puffed, tryndela, called people to rallies, trying to cause a boil, but failed. Although I do not approve of much in the current domestic policy of our state (to take at least an education), I will never take up arms and will not support any revolution! For you are boiling in the country into the hands of only the USA and the like!
  4. Stiletto
    Stiletto 26 March 2013 16: 36 New
    +4
    Well, then, advocates of Libyan democracy can now fully appreciate all its charms.
    For, no matter how mean the West was in its machinations, the Libyans themselves mocked the corpse of the defeated lion. Wanted freedom and democracy? Eat, take it as much as you take.
  5. Petergut
    Petergut 26 March 2013 16: 45 New
    +7
    And that's it.

    Under the "tyranny" of M. Gaddafi in Libya it was like this:
    GDP per capita - 14 192 $.
    For each member of the family, the state pays 1 000 $ a year in subsidies.
    Unemployment benefit - 730 $.
    Nurse salary - 1 000 $.
    For each newborn, 7 000 $ is paid.
    The newlyweds are given 64 000 $ for the purchase of an apartment.
    At the opening of a personal business one-time financial assistance - 20 000 $.
    Large taxes and fees are prohibited.
    Education and medicine are free.
    Education and training abroad - at the expense of the state.
    A network of shops for large families with symbolic prices for staple foods.
    For the sale of products with an expired date - heavy fines and detention by special police units.
    Part of the pharmacies - with the free release of drugs.
    For counterfeit drugs - the death penalty.
    The rent is absent.
    There is no payment for electricity for the population.
    Sale and use of alcohol is prohibited - "dry law".
    Credits to buy a car and an apartment are interest free.
    Realtor services are prohibited.
    Buying a car up to 50% is paid for by the state, for the militia fighters - 65%.
    Gasoline is cheaper than water. 1 liter of gasoline - 0,14 $.
    1. Guun
      Guun 26 March 2013 16: 50 New
      +2
      Eh, when it will be so with us ... Let those dumbheads who overthrow Gaddafi be satisfied with what they sowed. By the way, Jimahiriya dosihpor is fighting against those who have overthrown their rightful ruler, Gaddafi, the war is blazing but nothing is being transmitted on the news about it.
    2. DERWISH
      DERWISH 26 March 2013 17: 36 New
      +1
      here is an ungrateful dirty trick !!! they had to stand behind Gaddafi with a human shield !!!
      1. aksakal
        aksakal 26 March 2013 20: 55 New
        +1
        Quote: DERWISH
        here is an ungrateful dirty trick !!! they had to stand behind Gaddafi with a human shield !!!

        - reason in an old-fashioned way -)))). This is for the elderly or relatively young, but burdened by a large family, like such distribution state systems - albeit a small, but guaranteed gain ... Let it be in the form of free training for siblings at the university, albeit in the form of free or for a small fee service in the clinic, etc. More details in the post of Petergut.
        And the young ones prefer the UNGUARANTEED, but at the same time, winnings unlimited in size. They, not burdened by families, in the very topic of risking and climbing into adventures, if only this was allowed by the state. Well, this is the psychology of youth, there's nothing to be done -))))). And now, dear Dervish, google “the demographic situation in Libya before the overthrow of M. Gaddafi,” and you will understand why the Libyans not only did not stand behind Mukhomor, but also participated in the destruction of the regime that he built.
        The fact that now the young Libyans have neither what they had before (a system of small, but guaranteed wins to all citizens), nor a new system of unwarranted, but unlimited in size wins, nothing at all - this is a separate song and a separate conversation, the shortest the meaning of which is expressed in the phrase "the young Libyans lit up as the last suckers." Who and why divorced - you probably already guessed. It is up to our youth whether they will be led to this cheap bred or not? There is no answer yet -)))). But there is hope, for our youth is still more educated than the Libyan
        1. nakaz
          nakaz 26 March 2013 22: 00 New
          +1
          That's how the USSR would have collapsed if we hadn’t had nuclear weapons.
  6. Owl
    Owl 26 March 2013 17: 01 New
    +3
    The introduction of uniform international legal approaches to the problem of security both in Europe and in the world is possible only with stability in the WORLD, such stability thirty years ago was achieved by the presence of two centers of mass, approximately the same in strength and capabilities, these were the United States with the NATO bloc and USSR with the Warsaw Treaty Organization. Now Russia, despite the efforts of GDP, even in cooperation with Belarus, with the support of China and the neutrality of Ukraine and Kazakhstan, is not able to oppose the rest of the capitalist-aggressive bloc of European, American and Far Eastern countries. The UN after the collapse of the USSR became the mouthpiece and lawyer of the United States and other countries that carry aggression and military actions to obtain economic profit from the change of legal regimes. Over the years, all these countries have been aggressors towards Russia (the USSR), and at present we (Russia) are their main adversary, which needs to be "divided", "economically stifled" and "ideologically defeated".
  7. valokordin
    valokordin 26 March 2013 17: 02 New
    +4
    The fate of Libya is a direct result of the betrayal of the Russian government, abstained in the voting at the UN Security Council. If Russia vetoed a resolution pushed by the United States, small Britain and the Froggy headed by the fraudster Sracozy, then Gaddafi would have dealt with this pack. If ours does not support Assad, not only in words but also in arms, Libya will be the same.
    1. Andrey_K
      Andrey_K 26 March 2013 18: 05 New
      +1
      Russia did everything right.
      Libya was not her allies.
      Gaddafi flirted with Europe and the United States.
      If they had not let us bomb Libya, then all the media would have shouted that the Libyans would now live in paradise, and that they would have to endure the dictator and Russia is to blame for everything.
      A good example shows that they do not live in paradise.
      This provides a moral justification for supporting Syria.
      It’s impossible to save two - “Butsifal cannot bear two” - either Syria or Libya - only one could be saved.
      "Buzifal" is Russia, it cannot be a stopper in all barrels.
      In the end, each nation makes its own destiny and no one will do it for them - the Libyans betrayed themselves (like some Syrians) - their country was bombed, the state was destroyed, and they threw bonnets into the air.
      The Libyans themselves allowed to bomb Libya, and not the UN or anyone else.
      So did Syria - no one allowed, but they destroy it.
    2. andrejwz
      andrejwz 27 March 2013 00: 13 New
      0
      Quote: valokordin
      The fate of Libya is a direct result of the betrayal of the Russian government

      Why smear it? Treason has a specific name - Dmitry Anatolyevich Iedvedev. Schaub hiccuped to him before old age!
  8. avt
    avt 26 March 2013 17: 06 New
    +1
    ,, The negative consequences of NATO intervention in Libyan internal affairs have once again convincingly proved the need for the introduction of common international legal approaches to the security problem both in Europe and in the world. "------------ request Is this generally the author whom is he actually addressing? Like, people of the world, stand up for a minute? Who, in his opinion, should develop and implement these rules? But with the creators of the Yalta Security System, everything is clear. Well, who now?
  9. Alikovo
    Alikovo 26 March 2013 17: 24 New
    0
    Libyans hurt themselves
  10. klavyr
    klavyr 26 March 2013 17: 26 New
    +1
    The UN and NATO are twin brothers, one of whom is looking for a speck in the eyes of a stranger, and the other gouges out that eye
  11. Jarserge
    Jarserge 26 March 2013 17: 51 New
    +1
    While the author enumerated the facts, everything was more or less normal, but as soon as good wishes went, the negative consequences of NATO intervention in Libyan internal affairs once again convincingly proved the need to implement uniform international legal approaches to the security problem both in Europe and in the world. " So immediately liberalism ........ Yes, these gentlemen - NATO in general, the United States, England (I do not specifically write the island’s name for the United Kingdom) Germany, etc. etc. understand only force and are considered only with force It has always been like this and it will be, and all these UNs, OSCEs bring dividends to countries with real economic, financial military strength.
  12. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 26 March 2013 18: 17 New
    +1
    According to Polivanov, North Africa as a result of climate change will become a much more comfortable living area than many territories of Western Europe and America. Anglo-Saxons stupidly clean the land for themselves. Today, February 56, this is more obvious than a few years earlier.
  13. dark_65
    dark_65 26 March 2013 19: 01 New
    +1
    Why, why, why, yes, they have their own scales of justice, as they want, and weighed. lol
  14. igorgar
    igorgar 26 March 2013 19: 19 New
    +1
    No one pays attention to the Korean from the UN, nor does this entire organization. NATO is in charge of everything and everyone, but the consequences for these "peacekeepers" will be a boomerang.
  15. Grishka100watt
    Grishka100watt 26 March 2013 21: 23 New
    0
    Well, have dominated, corrupt swamps of local bottling ???