Revolutie in Libië #62 Demo's in Tripoli?

Met video.

Exclusive: Christiane Amanpour Interviews Saif Gadhafi

The United States and its allies appear poised to take military action on the heels of a U.N. resolution earlier this evening imposing a no-fly zone over Libya and authorizing "all necessary measures" to protect civilians.

Only hours earlier, Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi vowed to show no mercy to protesters, saying he would crush the rebellion with a final assault.

Late Thursday, after the U.N. resolution, ABC News' Christiane Amanpour spoke to Gadhafi's son Saif, who was in Tripoli. What follows is a transcript of their conversation.

Christiane Amanpour: Gadhafi Saif is joining me from Tripoli. Can you tell me where you are?

Said Gadhafi: I'm in Tripoli right now.

CA: Are you hiding? Are you worried?

SG: Hiding from whom?

CA: Well, as you know, the U.N. has taken a resolution that would potentially involve air strikes against your father's air defenses and various military emplacements.

SG: I think we are in our country and with our people. As I said before, we live here so we are in our country with our people. And we are not afraid.

CA: What is your father's reaction, your reaction to this resolution that's just been taken?

SG: First of all, it was unfair because, as you know, as you know, from the beginning we told to everybody there were no air strikes against civilians, no bombing of civilian districts or demonstrations. And thousands of those reports showed they were false. And this is No. 1. No. 2, even if you see last week what happened. The army and Libyan volunteers did fight the armored militia and liberated five Libyan cities from them. Have we seen a single civilian casualty? Even the terrorists or the armed people, they just surrender. So there was no bloodshed in Libya. _{Ok, nu stop ik met de smiley, hij is teveel te gebruiken.}

CA: Let me ask you this. What are you going to do with Benghazi? People in Benghazi are cheering this U.N. resolution because they're afraid of your father's forces.

SG: Listen, this is a big mistake. In Benghazi, we have 1.5 million people. If you are listening to 1,000 or 2,000, that's a different story. But believe me, the people there are living in misery and it is a big mess. You know, the armored militia yesterday, they killed four young boys in Benghazi. Why? Because they were against them. Everybody is terrified because of the armed militia. They live in terror. Nightmare. Armed people are everywhere. They have their own courts. They execute the people who are against them. No school. No hospital. No money. No banks. Do you think the people are happy? Of course not. We are receiving every day on TV, every day, hundreds of calls from Benghazi. Every day people are crying saying, "Please come and liberate us from this nightmare." Those terrorists. The people are not happy there. Are you happy if you're in a city which is controlled by gangsters and armed people and armed militia?

CA: Let me ask you this. It's the Arab League who is really asking for intervention. And it's very unusual. They don't think that the people of Libya are alright. They believe that they are being slaughtered.

SG: First of all, Libya is not Bahrain, where like 78 percent of the population are against the royal family and the other countries are sending tools to oppress them. In Libya, it's the other way around. And the Arabs want to settle accounts with Libya. We know that. And by the way, there's a funny story here in Libya. Everyone is happy with America because people hear that the United States is against airstrikes against Libya and is not supporting British and French, Britain and France. So people here, they are angry with the Europeans. And for the first time in modern history, they like the Americans and are happy with America. And that's why, like today, people said when the army captured the New York Times correspondent in the city of [unintelligible] because she entered the city illegally, but when they found out she was American they said it's OK. You're good people. We'll free you. Even here in Libya. Because people think that Arabs and Europeans betrayed the Libyan people. And they have their own agenda. And they think the Americans have a different position. And they have, like you say, different position toward Libya. So the Arabs, as usual they are hypocrites. In Bahrain, they have proven to oppress the Bahraini people. And in Libya, no demonstration that we are Libyan fighting the armored militia and terrorists. And they are against us.

CA: Saif, let me ask you something: The four New York Times journalists -- are they going to be freed? Where are they right now?

SG: You know, they entered country illegally and when the army, when they liberated the city of Ajdabiyah from the terrorists and they found her there and they arrest her because you know foreigners in this place. But then they were happy because they found out she is American, not European. And thanks to that she will be free tomorrow. But I told you that here the people are welcoming the American position and not the Europeans and the Arabs. We are very angry at the Europeans and the Arabs because they are happy with you if you are strong -- they have contracts, they have deals and oil. If you are weak, everybody is against you. This time, the Americans are different.

CA: But this time, Americans have voted for this resolution. You know, your father told us that the whole country loves him, that his people love [him], and clearly that is not the case because in so many parts of the country they were rising up against him. Do you think your father deserves now to remain head of Libya after all these killings, after all this fighting?

SG: We said this many times in the past -- that we are going to have new competition and a new system, and you will see the birth of a new Libya soon. This is settled, and once and for all. But please, I want to tell everybody, like two days ago, when the armed militia in the city of [unintelligible] surrendered to the army. They surrendered to the army because they are cowards and they escaped. Half a million people living there, they are happy and went to rallies and everybody was happy. Why? Because they were controlled by the militia for two weeks. The same in Al Zawiha, the same thing In El Salta woof, in all the cities. Have you seen single civilian casualty? And everybody was happy, everybody was happy to show me. If you want to support the terrorists and the armed militia, OK, so go and support bin Laden and al Qaeda and the mafia in Sicily or in Boston and New York. They want safety and they want peace and order, law and order. We want to live in peace, so we want even Americans to help us get rid of the remnants of those people and to have a peaceful country, more democratic. If you want to help us, help us to, you know, to be democracy, more freedom, peaceful, not to threaten us with air strikes. We will not be afraid. Come on! We will not be afraid. I mean, you are not helping to the people if you are going to bomb Libya, to kill Libyans. You destroy our country. Nobody is happy with that. If you want to help us help us against terrorists, help us to build the new Libya with more democracy, more freedom, new constitution, local governments, et cetera. But if you want to help Libyans, you send airplanes to bomb my country? Of course not.

CA: Saif, you said tonight that military operations are over, the U.N. resolution is too late. What do you mean by that?

SG: Why? Because even-- Listen, I'll give you a small example. Now, we did liberate most of the country, even the city of [unintelligible] is next to the Egyptian border. There is the green flag and we get rid of the [unintelligible] and it's a very safe and peaceful city. The people themselves in the city of [unintelligible] did liberate. In the city of [Benjawi?], the people did fight for their city and liberated their city from the [capital?], even without the help of the Libyan army. Just give you two examples: [unintelligible] the same thing in Benghazi. Now even in Benghazi, they fled city. They escaped. And my father said tonight, "You boys, you lay down your arms and we pardon you." And this will happen. They laid down arms, so most of them have been neutralized. Except maybe a few of them are still there. Who knows?

CA: Tell me what is going to happen. Are you going to free, release the four New York Times journalists?

SG: As I said, believe me, this is not my decision, but the people here now, the news here in Libya, I don't know why they are annoyed with Americans. ... People are very angry with Arabs and Europeans, and I heard this is not because of that. They will release her although she entered country illegally.

CA: Thank you very much, indeed.

SG: You're welcome.

Ze zullen waarschijnlijk wel in de nacht starten met aanvallen, ben benieuwd of er komende nacht wat gaat gebeuren

Zowel door zijn naam als door zijn uiterlijk en optreden moet ik bij elk bericht denken over hem denken aan 'lulletje rozenwater'.

Nederland wil meedoen aan operatie Libië

AMSTERDAM - Nederland is bereid mee te doen aan een militaire actie tegen Libië.

Wat de bijdrage precies zou moeten inhouden hangt af van de aard van het verzoek door de internationale gemeenschap, zei minister Rosenthal tegen de NOS op Radio 1. Een woordvoerder van Rosenthal zei dat er nog geen verzoek aan Nederland is gedaan voor een bijdrage aan een eventueel militair ingrijpen in Libië. "Als je A zegt, moet je ook B zeggen. Een verzoek kan volgens hem sterk variëren, van het leveren van militair materieel tot het leveren van knowhow.

Ik geloof niet dat de Britten en de Fransen, die het voortouw gaan nemen in deze operatie, het beste voor hebben met de Arabieren.

Vergeef me mijn cynisme maar de geschiedenis geeft mij gelijk.

* theNull gaat alvast popcorn en bier inslaan

In mijn ogen is de steun voor (militair) ingrijpen eigenlijk helemaal niet zo groot als de media op dit moment doen voorkomen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:27 schreef Citizen.Erased het volgende:
In mijn ogen is de steun voor (militair) ingrijpen eigenlijk helemaal niet zo groot als de media op dit moment doen voorkomen.

Hoezo niet? Enige wat ik apart vind zijn dat de Fransen zo ontzettend staan te popelen om te gaan. Maar dit heeft misschien met de tegenvallende verkoopresultaten van de Rafaele. Beetje goeie PR boven Libië en misschien gaat Brazilië alsnog overstag.

Resolutie is prut, Libië doet het zelf wel:

quote:

Update 9:31 Libië heeft het luchtruim voor al het luchtverkeer gesloten. Eurocontrol, de Europese luchtvaartcontroleur, zegt dat Malta een bericht vanuit Tripoli ontving dat het land geen enkel vliegtuig meer in het Libische luchtruim accepteert. (Reuters)

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:34 schreef theNull het volgende:
Resolutie is prut, Libië doet het zelf wel:

[..]

Dat gaat over commercieel vliegverkeer.

Er wordt binnen enkele uren militair ingegrepen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:34 schreef Bolter het volgende:

[..]

Hoezo niet? Enige wat ik apart vind zijn dat de Fransen zo ontzettend staan te popelen om te gaan. Maar dit heeft misschien met de tegenvallende verkoopresultaten van de Rafaele. Beetje goeie PR boven Libië en misschien gaat Brazilië alsnog overstag.

Bepaalde landen (Duitsland, Rusland, China) spreken zich nog niet echt uit als voorstander van allerlei acties. Zeker voor Europese steun is een land als Duitsland wel essentieel.

quote:

Interventie Libië 'binnen enkele uren'

PARIJS - ''Binnen enkele uren'' zal in Libië militair worden ingegrepen door het instellen van een vliegverbod. Volgens een woordvoerder van de Franse overheid zal deze interventie snel van start

De woordvoerder zei dat Frankrijk zal deelnemen aan de aanvallen die nodig zijn om een vliegverbod in te stellen. ''De Fransen, die de oproep voor deze maatregel hebben geleid, zullen natuurlijk consistent zijn en militair interveniëren'', aldus de zegsman.

Kort daarvoor liet ook Noorwegen weten de militaire actie tegen de troepen van de Libische dictator Muammar Kaddafi te steunen. ''We zullen deelnemen aan de operatie'', aldus de Noorse minister van Defensie. ''Maar het is te vroeg om precies te zeggen hoe. Het sturen van vliegtuigen lijkt voor de hand liggend.''

Militaire steun

Denemarken heeft aangegeven geen militaire steun te geven zolang er geen parlementair akkoord is. Als het Deense parlement instemt met een missie, zal het Scandinavische land waarschijnlijk gevechtsvliegtuigen sturen. Polen wil de missie logistiek ondersteunen, maar sluit een militaire rol uit.

Datzelfde geldt voor Duitsland, dat zich onthield van stemming in de VN-Veiligheidsraad. Hoewel Berlijn het geweld van de Libische dictator Muammar Kaddafi een halt wil toeroepen, is het land niet bereid om troepen te sturen.

Bijdrage Nederland

Of Nederland ook een bijdrage zal leveren is vooralsnog niet bekend. Een woordvoerder van minister Rosenthal zei dat er nog geen verzoek aan Nederland is gedaan voor een bijdrage aan een eventueel militair ingrijpen in Libië.

Rosenthal zelf stelde vrijdag bij de NOS op Radio 1: ''Als je A zegt, moet je ook B zeggen''. Een verzoek kan volgens hem sterk variëren, van het leveren van militair materieel tot het leveren van knowhow.

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:38 schreef summer2bird het volgende:
Er wordt binnen enkele uren militair ingegrepen.

Die heb ik vaker gehoord

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:40 schreef Flepke het volgende:

[..]

Die heb ik vaker gehoord

zie mijn bovenstaande post kan de bron ff niet kopieren.

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:39 schreef Citizen.Erased het volgende:

[..]

Bepaalde landen (Duitsland, Rusland, China) spreken zich nog niet echt uit als voorstander van allerlei acties. Zeker voor Europese steun is een land als Duitsland wel essentieel.

Ik heb het idee dat mevrouw Merkel met de huidige politieke verliezen zich teveel door emotie laat leiden zo vlak voor de verkiezingen, zie besluit rondom Zu Guttenberg, kerncentrales..

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:41 schreef summer2bird het volgende:

[..]

zie mijn bovenstaande post kan de bron ff niet kopieren.

De Telegraaf is verre van een hoog betrouwbare bron. Ze schrijven in dit geval ook maar wat er al gisteravond laat gezegd is door de fransen.

onder tussen gaat de strijd wel verder:

quote:

Update 9:39 Saif al-Islam verklaart dat anti-terreurtroepen zullen worden ingezet in Benghazi om de rebellen te ontwapenen. (Al Jazeera)

Update 9:37 Saif al-Islam Gaddafi (zoon van kolonel Gaddafi) zegt dat Libië troepen rond Benghazi zal inzetten, maar de stad niet binnen zal gaan. (Al Jazeera)

Update 9:36 Gaddafi bombardeert Misrata met zwaar geschut. (Reuters)

quote:

Met video.

Libya: UK forces prepare after UN no-fly zone vote

UK forces are preparing to help enforce a no-fly zone over Libya after the UN backed "all necessary measures", short of an invasion, to protect civilians.

Downing Street has cautioned against earlier suggestions that British planes could be in action "within hours" and declined to put a timetable on it.

The UN resolution rules out a foreign occupation force in any part of Libya.

The cabinet will meet later and Prime Minister David Cameron will make a statement to the Commons, No 10 said.

The resolution imposes a "ban on all flights in Libyan airspace", with aid flights the only exception.

It authorises member states to "take all necessary measures" to "protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack", including in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.

It also calls for an immediate ceasefire, an end to the violence, measures to make it more difficult for foreign mercenaries to get into Libya and a tightening of sanctions.

UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said it was a "positive response to the call by the Arab League" for measures to protect Libyan civilians and was the culmination of "a great deal of hard work in the last few days" by France, the UK, Lebanon and the US.

"It is necessary to take these measures to avoid greater bloodshed," Mr Hague said.

"This places a responsibility on members of the United Nations and that is a responsibility to which the United Kingdom will now respond."

Ten UN Security Council members backed the resolution while five abstained - nine votes were needed for it to pass.

France, the UK, Lebanon, the US, South Africa, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Colombia, Portugal, Nigeria and Gabon all voted in favour, while China, Russia, Brazil, India and Germany abstained.

Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi's forces have recently retaken several towns seized by rebels in an uprising.

Rebel forces in Benghazi reacted with joy to the passing of the resolution but a Libyan government spokesman condemned UN "aggression".

Loyalist forces are bearing down on Benghazi, home to a million people. Forces loyal to Col Gaddafi have reportedly launched their first air attacks on the town, targeting the airport at Benina.

Col Gaddafi had earlier warned the rebels there that his troops were coming and to expect "no mercy".

Senior UN sources had said British and French warplanes could be in the air within hours of the UN vote to carry out initial air raids on Libyan positions, possibly with logistical support from Arab allies.

But No 10 sources have declined to put any timetable on possible British military engagement - or whether action could begin this weekend.

They said there was still lots of talking to be done, according to BBC political correspondent Norman Smith.

A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said the UK was "developing a number of contingency plans" and continued to do so.

British ambassador to the UN, Sir Mark Lyall Grant, said the UK welcomed the fact that the UN had acted "swiftly and comprehensively in response to the appalling situation in Libya".

"We, along with partners in the Arab world and in Nato, are now ready to shoulder our responsibilities in implementing Resolution 173," he said.

The resolution would permit air strikes on Libyan ground troops or allow attacks on Libyan war ships if they were attacking civilians.

A draft UN resolution tabled by the UK, France and Lebanon on Tuesday proposed a ban on all flights in Libya, authorised member states to enforce it and called on them to participate in it.

But on Thursday the US, which had been cool on the effectiveness of a no-fly zone, said the UN should go further and a new strongly-worded draft resolution was put forward calling for "all necessary measures short of an occupation force" to protect civilians under threat of attack.

Following the UN vote Mr Cameron had a half-hour phone call with US President Barack Obama.

The unrest in Libya started after the toppling of the long-time leaders of neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt earlier this year.

Libyan protesters started to demand that Col Gaddafi step down after 42 years of autocratic rule and quickly seized much of eastern Libya.

10:33am

Sadoun, a member of the Feb 17 revolution media committee, tell Al Jazeera by phone that Gaddafi tanks and forces surrounding the city of Misurata and are trying to push their way into the center of the city.

He said city has been under fire by Gaddafi tanks for the last three hours and that the number of victims is rising. An estimated 25 tanks are thought to be taking part in the offense.

He thought the Gaddafi forces are trying hard to push their way into the center of the city today to take civilian residents as a human shield against any possible air attacks by foreign forces.

The United Nations Security Council has voted for a no-fly zone over Libya. This means if Libyan military aircraft take to the skies, the international community will take action and become involved in this conflict. But Muammer Ghaddafi, the Libyan leader, will still be in charge on the ground.

Al Jazeera's Stefanie Dekker explains how the no-fly zone could be implemented.

Poll op de AJA website, wat zal het lot zijn van Gadaffi?

Libyan leader Gaddafi will finally: Opening Date 28-02-2011 | Total Votes 1,242

Surrender
5% | 67 Votes

Be killed
42% | 524 Votes

Flee Libya
21% | 256 Votes

Win and stay in power
19% | 241 Votes

Commit suicide
12% | 154 Votes

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 09:46 schreef Bolter het volgende:

[..]

Ik heb het idee dat mevrouw Merkel met de huidige politieke verliezen zich teveel door emotie laat leiden zo vlak voor de verkiezingen, zie besluit rondom Zu Guttenberg, kerncentrales..

Je kan het niet alleen bij Merkel leggen, want de oppositie zoekt momenteel spijkers op laag water en bij alles wat ze vinden maken ze een enorm probleem (wat hun weer stemmen oplevert).

Het zou me niets verbazen dat als Duitsland hieraan had meegedaan de oppositie hun kans weer had geroken om het zoveelste "schandaal" te verzinnen.

Overigens, als ik Ghadaffi zou zijn dan zou ik proberen de weg tussen Egypte en Benghazi af te sluiten zodat er geen voorraden meer uit Egypte naar de rebellen kunnen worden geleverd. Aangezien die honderden kilometers snelweg niet door de rebellen kunnen worden verdedigd kan is het vrij gemakkelijk zonder gevechten (dus zonder de resolutie te sterk te schenden) de toevoer te onderbreken.

quote:

Op vrijdag 18 maart 2011 10:04 schreef von_Preussen het volgende:

[..]

Je kan het niet alleen bij Merkel leggen, want de oppositie zoekt momenteel spijkers op laag water en bij alles wat ze vinden maken ze een enorm probleem (wat hun weer stemmen oplevert).

Het zou me niets verbazen dat als Duitsland hieraan had meegedaan de oppositie hun kans weer had geroken om het zoveelste "schandaal" te verzinnen.

Natuurlijk, maar zo werkt de politiek nu eenmaal. Ik persoonlijk zou veel meer vertrouwen in politiek leiderschap hebben als ze duidelijke stelling innemen en zich niet door elk wissewasje van de wijs laten brengen.

De Tromp ligt nog voor de Libische kust of niet?