The so-called humanitarian intervention in Libya sanctioned by the Security Council created an opportunity to save civilian lives. Unfortunately, U.S., UK and France had their own agenda consisting primarily of removing Gadhafi from power. In the process, NATO has killed civilians and bombed infrastructure thereby exceeding the UN Resolution 1973 and therefore the leaders of these countries are guilty of war crimes.

::::::::

April spring in Libya has resulted in the summer of their discontent.   An ostensible mission to protect civilians with the authorization of the Security Council has been bastardized into a mission to dethrone Colonel Gadhafi who is not sufficiently malleable and cooperative to sacrifice his country's needs in order to serve the interests of the United States.

There is a sharp distinction between the Arab Spring occurring in a number of North African and Middle Eastern countries and the rebellion in Libya.   Rampant popular discontent over unemployment, poverty and harsh rule had been smoldering beneath the surface in Egypt, Tunisia and a number of other countries in the region before it erupted into virtually spontaneous combustion.

On the other hand economic and social conditions were different in Libya and the rebellion there was orchestrated by many groups who had a long-standing hatred of Gadhafi and were supported by the U.S., France and Britain.

Economic and social conditions have been different in Libya due to the state-sponsored social safety net programs implemented by Gadhafi to protect Libyans from economic hardship.   Gadhafi has heavily subsidized education and health care benefits which are free to every citizen.   Libya ranks 53rd in the United Nations Human Development Index overall at .755 but its index is the highest compared to all other African counties where the average is .599.

A U.S. embassy cable to the State Department, sent on August 29, 2008, explains Gadhafi's delicate balancing act by describing the tacit pact between him and his people as an: "oil-revenue-financed, cradle-to-grave subsidies in exchange for political quiescence -- that has underpinned his regime for decades."

On the other hand, popular protests in Libya were largely motivated by the fierce animus to the brutal methods employed by Gadhafi to suppress any opposition to his dictatorship.   When non-violent protests broke out, Gadhafi violently crushed them and marched to the gates of Benghazi, the rebel's stronghold.

Groups who had been organizing against Gadhafi for years are at least partly responsible for provoking the protests.   The composition of forces opposing Gadhafi consists of a wide range of groups of people each with their own agenda but whose common purpose is his overthrow.   Some of these groups formed the National Transitional Council (TNC) in Benghazi on February 27, 2011 to act as the political face of the revolution.   Politicians, former military officers, tribal leaders, academics and businessmen from Eastern Libya created the Council to serve as a transitional government and to wrap the opposition in an aura of respectability.

Some of the groups opposing Gadhafi have been created and/or supported by either the CIA or one of the three principle countries acting on resolution 1973, namely France Britain and the U.S.

The National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL) established on October 7, 1981, was trained and supported by the CIA and was involved in an unsuccessful assassination attempt on Gadhafi on May 8, 1984.

The Libyan National Army (LNA), military wing of the NFSL, was founded on June 21, 1988 by Khalifa Hafter who, according to a Washington-based think tank, the Jamestown Foundation, had: "strong backing from the Central Intelligence agency".   The think tank also reports that the CIA arranged the entry of LNA officers into the United States where they established a training camp.   Hafter arrived in Benghazi in March 2011 to join the forces attempting to overthrow Gadhafi.

Another major organization engaged in overthrowing Gadhafi is the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) who have close ties to al Qaida and has been designated as a terrorist group by the State department.

The LIFG was established in 1995 to oppose Gadhafi's secular state by Libyans who had fought in Afghanistan.    They have been committed to supporting jihadi groups everywhere and contributed a significant number of people to fight the U.S. in Iraq.

Not only did the U.S. support groups who were committed to removing Gadhafi from power but engaged in its own operation against Libya in 1986 when 30 U.S. Air Force and Navy bombers struck Tripoli and Benghazi in a raid code-named El Dorado Canyon.   The real purpose of the mission was to kill Gadhafi given that nine of the 18 F-111 bombers targeted Gadhafi's home killing one of his daughters and injuring his eight other children and wife.   The attack, lacking Security Council authorization, constituted a war of aggression and bombing Gadhafi's residence violated the Geneva Conventions.

The most probable motivation for the U.S. participation in the Libyan campaign pertains to the refusal of Gadhafi to support American plans for the region and his attempts to create an independent Africa free of American influence.   He has challenged the institutions of global capital such as the World Bank, IMF, and WTO and has refused to join U.S. military alliances.

Gadhafi worked assiduously to create an African monetary fund, an African central bank and an African investment bank.

An African monetary fund, replacing the IMF, was created in 2011 largely through the efforts of Gadhafi with a start-up capital of $42 billion.

Gadhafi refused to join the U.S. African Command or AFRICOM which was created in 2007 to serve as a central base of operations for all military operations in Africa.   AFRICOM describes its objectives as: "Our approach is based upon supporting U.S. national security interests in Africa as articulated by the President and Secretaries of State and Defense in the National Security Strategy and the National Military Strategy."

Although the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973 authorizing the use of force in a humanitarian mission to save the lives of civilians, the operation has exceeded the terms of the resolution and now constitutes a war of aggression violating the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions.

UN Resolution 1973, passed March 17, 2011, stipulates in Paragraph 3 that: "Member States"take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack"while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory."   It also establishes: "A ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians."

Paragraph 9 in Resolution 1970 prohibiting: "The direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer"of arms and related materials of all types" is replaced with: "Calls on all Member States"to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo."

Violations of resolution 1973 relate to the weapons and targets selected by NATO and to the supply of arms and military personnel on the ground to rebel forces.

The essence of NATO's targeting has been to weaken Gadhafi's military capability in a conflict that is a civil war to a large extent promoted by France, Britain and the United States by arming and training rebel forces.

Questioning the motives of NATO, Karim Fahim and David Kirkpatrick of the New York Times on March 29,2011 wondered: "How the allies could justify air strikes on Colonel Quaddafi's forces around [his tribal centre] Surt, as seems to be the case, they enjoyed widespread support in the city and pose no threat to civilians."

Additionally, the killing of Gadhafi has been a priority for NATO commanders.     NATO political leaders have been outspoken about removing Gadhafi from power.   For example, Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy wrote an op-ed for the International Herald Tribune in which they announced that NATO will continue to fight until Gadhafi is gone or, in other words, not until the door is open for regime change.

On Monday April 25, NATO planes bombed Gadhafi's residence, administrative offices in the heart of Tripoli and Libyan State television.   In another attempt to kill Gadhafi, NATO bombers struck Gadhafi's Bab Ai-Aziziya compound also in Tripoli.

These acts are clearly not in compliance with Resolution 1973 even if NATO forces claimed that they were attempting to protect civilians.   Pre-emptive attacks are clearly not authorized by 1973 since the wording requires that civilians be "under threat of attack" and that can only be interpreted to mean that the threat is imminent.

In another violation of international law, NATO forces have killed a number of civilians violating the fourth Geneva Convention, Article 3, which stipulates that: "Persons taking no active part in the hostilities"[are protected from} violence to life and person."  

During one air raid, NATO has actually admitted that it resulted in civilian deaths in a residential area in Tripoli, killing nine people including two children.   According to the New York Times, on April 28, a NATO strike in Misurta killed 12 people.   Furthermore, the BBC reported on July 24 that 15 people were killed in Sorman.   As well, the World health Organization reports that the conflict has resulted in 120,000 refugees fleeing to neighbouring states.

On July 22, NATO warplanes bombed the pipe making plant in Brega killing six people.   These pipes were used to repair the man-made irrigation system in Brega that supplies water to 70% of the Libyan people and is critical to repairing and maintaining their water supply.

Targeting essential infrastructure is strictly prohibited by customary international humanitarian law even if the facility is serving as a base for attacks.   According to customary law: "Each party to the conflict must do everything feasible to assess whether the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects"which would be excessive in relation to the concrete military advantage anticipated."                                                                                                             

Material and personnel support to the rebels violate the arms embargo and Resolution 1973 because the rebels are not innocent civilians and they were not under attack at the time.

Colonel Thierrry Burkhard of the French military confirms that they have air dropped 40 tonnes of arms, anti-tank rockets, light armoured vehicles and rifles   to the Djebel Nafusa region where Berber tribes have joined the revolt against Gadhafi.

New York Times and Washington Post articles have admitted that the opposition forces have been coordinated by Special Forces in Libya belonging to the CIA and MI6.   The articles also claim that President Obama signed a finding dispatching CIA operatives to identify targets for bombing by NATO forces.

A UK paper, the Independent, on April 3, reports that: "Military and diplomatic advisors from the US and Western Europe -- usually described as experts, consultants and advisors -- turned up in the rebel capital Benghazi."

Supplying arms and military equipment along with personnel to assist the rebels is a clear violation of the arms embargo and clause that prohibits the deployment of an "occupation force of any kind" in Resolution 1973.

Clearly, NATO forces are targeting civilian objects and arming and supplying assistance to the opposition forces all of which violates international law.   In addition, one of the objectives of U.S., Britain and France is to assassinate Gadhafi in order to engender regime change, an action also in violation of international law.

NATO forces violated the mandate of 1973 by applying force that exceeded the bounds of "All measures necessary" and are therefore guilty of a war of aggression in violation of the UN and NATO charters.

Invoking the principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is not legitimate since it is not embedded in an international treaty but is instead an international norm with no legal force.   As well, it fails to meet the requirements of customary international humanitarian law.    In order for it qualify as customary law it must meet the following two criteria: it must be established as general practise in that states generally adopt the same practise uniformly when confronted with similar situations; and it must be demonstrated that they do so because they consider it an obligation.   R2P was adopted in 2005 and lacks the precedents to establish it as international customary law.

Exploring actual motivations and the operation itself reveals that the pursuit of narrow national interests was the real purpose of the Libyan campaign and is resulting in a number of war crimes.

Authors Website: http://consuming-ourselves.blogspot/

Authors Bio:
I have been a professor of political science at Seneca College in Toronto. I have published five books the last of which "Selling Out: Consuming Ourselves to Death" was released in May/08. As well, I have been featured in CounterPunch, Z Magazine,Dissenting Voice and College Quarterly. Additionally, I have delivered numerous papers at international academic conferences including Cambridge and Oxford.