Today (30/6/12) Mohamed Morsi was formally sworn in as Egypt's first popularly elected President. I suppose I should start for apologise for crashing the ceremony this morning. I should also point out that I've not being ignoring the event - I'm just trying to be deliberately vague. That's because while I would have prefered a secular candidate to win I don't have any real problem with President Morsi.
However it is worth pointing out that with only 50.15% of voters taking part in the Presidential run-off Morsi's victory with 51.75% means that he only actually recieved 25.9% of the popular vote. That is significantly less then all secular candidates excluding Ahmed Shafik recieved in the first round. So it is fair to say that the Egyptian people most certainly have not given President Morsi a mandate to pursue an Islamist agenda. That is something he will be well served to remember.
Saturday, 30 June 2012
Thursday, 21 June 2012
The Egyptian Presidental Run-Off Results.
The results of Egypt's Presidential run-off vote that was held across Saturday June 16th (16/6/12) and Sunday June 17th (17/6/12) were supposed to be released today (21/6/12). However they have been delayed indefinitely.
The main reason for this delay is that between them the two candidates, Mohamed Morsi and Ahmed Shafik have made some 400 complaints of irregularities to the electoral commission. These range from the frankly stupid such as a woman who was arrested for attempting the smuggle a blank ballot paper out of a polling station to complaints that are significant but could have been caused by simple human error such as a books of ballot papers going missing and dead people showing up electoral registers. There are also much more serious complaints such a ballot papers arriving at polling stations with one candidate already selected and the use of violence and the threat of violence against both supporters of Mohamed Morsi and Ahmed Shafik. The accusation of violent intimidation of Shaifk supporters has been corroborated by election observers working for the Carter Foundation.
To give you an idea of how long it will take the electoral commission to investigate all these claims it took me the best part part of two hours today to simply read through the list of half of the complaints made by the Morsi campaign. However the rumour is that the electoral commission should be able to complete it's investigations and make the results available in the next few days.
The result itself will be quite hard to predict with the Morsi campaign claiming that their candidate won with 52% of the vote while the Shafik campaign claims that their candidate won with 51% of the vote. The figure I'm interested in though is the voter turnout because this will help explain whether the result reflects the will of the majority of the Egyptian people or simply the will of a small minority who were motivated to vote.
The main reason for this delay is that between them the two candidates, Mohamed Morsi and Ahmed Shafik have made some 400 complaints of irregularities to the electoral commission. These range from the frankly stupid such as a woman who was arrested for attempting the smuggle a blank ballot paper out of a polling station to complaints that are significant but could have been caused by simple human error such as a books of ballot papers going missing and dead people showing up electoral registers. There are also much more serious complaints such a ballot papers arriving at polling stations with one candidate already selected and the use of violence and the threat of violence against both supporters of Mohamed Morsi and Ahmed Shafik. The accusation of violent intimidation of Shaifk supporters has been corroborated by election observers working for the Carter Foundation.
To give you an idea of how long it will take the electoral commission to investigate all these claims it took me the best part part of two hours today to simply read through the list of half of the complaints made by the Morsi campaign. However the rumour is that the electoral commission should be able to complete it's investigations and make the results available in the next few days.
The result itself will be quite hard to predict with the Morsi campaign claiming that their candidate won with 52% of the vote while the Shafik campaign claims that their candidate won with 51% of the vote. The figure I'm interested in though is the voter turnout because this will help explain whether the result reflects the will of the majority of the Egyptian people or simply the will of a small minority who were motivated to vote.
Wednesday, 20 June 2012
Egypt's June 17th Constitutional Declaration
At around 20:15 on 20/6/12 I have now read, compared, contrasted and considered the Constitutional Declaration of June 17th 2011 (17/6/12) which can be read in Arabic here; http://www.ahram.org.eg/-/News/155958.aspx with the original Constitutional Declaration of March 30th 2011 (30/3/12) which can be read in Arabic here; http://www.almasryalyoum.com/node/380474
However I used the English translations that can be read here; http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/45350/Egypt/Politics-/URGENT-English-text-of-SCAF-amended-Constitutional.aspx and here;
http://www.cabinet.gov.eg/AboutEgypt/ConstitutionalDeclaration_e.pdf
The first change is Article 30 which simply adds the phrase; "In situation that Parliament is dissolved the President will be sworn into office in front of the High Constitutional Court's General Assembly." This has simply been done to allow the newly-elected President to be sworn in despite the fact that the Peoples Assembly has been dissolved.
Article 38 has been completely re-written replacing the wording: "The law shall govern candidacy for the Peoples Assembly and the Shoura Council according to the determined electoral system including at a minimum the participation of women in both assemblies." with the wording; "The Parliamentary elections will be conducted in accordance with the law." This new wording has been designed to make it more difficult for the Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) to overturn future election results by removing the provision that allows for candidate to be banned and use of quotas. It does though give the SCC the power to regulate future elections in accordance with a law that has yet to be written.
Articles 53, 53/1, 53/2 simply seek to clarify the vague wording in the original declaration which declare the Armed Forces to be "the property of the people." It clearly defines that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and the Office of the President as a separate entities. Both of these bodies will have to agree for Egypt to declare war or for the military to intervene in internal unrest. It also prevents the President from putting pressure on the armed forces to agree on these issues by removing the President's right to appoint or dismiss military leaders. This is a perfectly normal safeguard for a democratic country to have in order to prevent it being turned into a dictatorship. For example in the USA the military swear an oath to uphold the constitution so if a President gives an unconstitutional order the military can simply refuse to carry it out. Also the new wording removes the ban on paramilitary groups which the Muslim Brotherhood originally objected to so violently and mandatory conscription into the military. However I think these two things are as a result of the amendment being written in a hurry rather then something more intentional.
Article 56B merely gives the SCAF the powers listed in Article 56 until the election of a new Peoples Assembly. This is simply to allow someone to run the country until a government is elected. It also isn't strictly speaking necessary because the March 30th declaration actually gives SCAF those powers whether a government is in place or not. So the addition of the amendment actually reduces the SCAF's power by insisting that it must make way for a properly elected government.
Article 60B simply adds a provision allowing the SCAF to appoint a committee to write the new constitution if the Peoples Assembly and the Shoura Council fail to do so within the six months mentioned in the original document. As the Peoples Assembly and Shoura Council have failed to appoint this committee within the six month time limit someone has to do it because Egypt can't carry on in this transition phase indefinitely. The article still gives the people the right to reject the constitution written by the SCAF appointed committee at referendum if they do not approve of it.
Article 60B1 adds the opportunity for the President, the Prime Minister, the SCAF, the Judiciary or 1/5th of the committee to object to any constitutional clause they believe to conflict with the values of the revolution or long held pre-Mubarak Egyptian values. This is important because at a referendum people will only be able to vote yes or no to the entire constitution which can lead to an otherwise perfectly good constitution being rejected due to just one or two bad clauses or one or two bad clauses being included because voters don't want to reject all the other clauses. The article includes a provision for any disputes to be ruled on by the Higher Constitutional Court which allows for the oversight needed to prevent the objection process being abused.
So in conclusion I do not see the June 17th constitutional declaration to be any sort of power grab by SCAF. Instead it's a necessary adjustment to allow the military to pick up the slack caused by the failure of Egypt's inexperienced politicians.
However I used the English translations that can be read here; http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/45350/Egypt/Politics-/URGENT-English-text-of-SCAF-amended-Constitutional.aspx and here;
http://www.cabinet.gov.eg/AboutEgypt/ConstitutionalDeclaration_e.pdf
The first change is Article 30 which simply adds the phrase; "In situation that Parliament is dissolved the President will be sworn into office in front of the High Constitutional Court's General Assembly." This has simply been done to allow the newly-elected President to be sworn in despite the fact that the Peoples Assembly has been dissolved.
Article 38 has been completely re-written replacing the wording: "The law shall govern candidacy for the Peoples Assembly and the Shoura Council according to the determined electoral system including at a minimum the participation of women in both assemblies." with the wording; "The Parliamentary elections will be conducted in accordance with the law." This new wording has been designed to make it more difficult for the Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) to overturn future election results by removing the provision that allows for candidate to be banned and use of quotas. It does though give the SCC the power to regulate future elections in accordance with a law that has yet to be written.
Articles 53, 53/1, 53/2 simply seek to clarify the vague wording in the original declaration which declare the Armed Forces to be "the property of the people." It clearly defines that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and the Office of the President as a separate entities. Both of these bodies will have to agree for Egypt to declare war or for the military to intervene in internal unrest. It also prevents the President from putting pressure on the armed forces to agree on these issues by removing the President's right to appoint or dismiss military leaders. This is a perfectly normal safeguard for a democratic country to have in order to prevent it being turned into a dictatorship. For example in the USA the military swear an oath to uphold the constitution so if a President gives an unconstitutional order the military can simply refuse to carry it out. Also the new wording removes the ban on paramilitary groups which the Muslim Brotherhood originally objected to so violently and mandatory conscription into the military. However I think these two things are as a result of the amendment being written in a hurry rather then something more intentional.
Article 56B merely gives the SCAF the powers listed in Article 56 until the election of a new Peoples Assembly. This is simply to allow someone to run the country until a government is elected. It also isn't strictly speaking necessary because the March 30th declaration actually gives SCAF those powers whether a government is in place or not. So the addition of the amendment actually reduces the SCAF's power by insisting that it must make way for a properly elected government.
Article 60B simply adds a provision allowing the SCAF to appoint a committee to write the new constitution if the Peoples Assembly and the Shoura Council fail to do so within the six months mentioned in the original document. As the Peoples Assembly and Shoura Council have failed to appoint this committee within the six month time limit someone has to do it because Egypt can't carry on in this transition phase indefinitely. The article still gives the people the right to reject the constitution written by the SCAF appointed committee at referendum if they do not approve of it.
Article 60B1 adds the opportunity for the President, the Prime Minister, the SCAF, the Judiciary or 1/5th of the committee to object to any constitutional clause they believe to conflict with the values of the revolution or long held pre-Mubarak Egyptian values. This is important because at a referendum people will only be able to vote yes or no to the entire constitution which can lead to an otherwise perfectly good constitution being rejected due to just one or two bad clauses or one or two bad clauses being included because voters don't want to reject all the other clauses. The article includes a provision for any disputes to be ruled on by the Higher Constitutional Court which allows for the oversight needed to prevent the objection process being abused.
So in conclusion I do not see the June 17th constitutional declaration to be any sort of power grab by SCAF. Instead it's a necessary adjustment to allow the military to pick up the slack caused by the failure of Egypt's inexperienced politicians.
Hosni Mubarak's Health.
Or lack thereof.
At around 21:00GMT last night (19/6/12) rumours started to circulate that former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak had suffered a heart attack and died. These were immediately followed by other rumours that he's actually suffered a stroke and died or that he'd suffered a stroke an survived. There were also rumours that Egypt's interim military rulers were making the whole thing up either to distract from the controversy surrounding the dissolution of Parliament and the issuing of Sunday's (17/6/12) constitutional decree or to put pressure on the G20 Summit. Today (20/6/12) Mubarak does seem to technically still be alive and had has been moved from prison to a military hospital in Cairo where he is said to be on life support. There has not been an official press conference on the technical aspects of his condition and I have not visited him in hospital nor spoken to his doctors so I am not 100% sure what to believe.
One thing I am certain of though is that Egypt is a very tense place at the moment what with the dissolution of Parliament, the constitutional decree and the Presidential run-off. This tension is present throughout the region - which is what I think did for the Saudi Arabian Interior Minister - and has been magnified by the G20 Summit which has been billed by the USA in particular as a show down with Russia over Syria. So what I think happened is that Hosni Mubarak suffered a stroke for whatever the natural reasons are that some people suffer strokes while others don't. The medical team at the prison then resuscitated him and got him on life support as they are trained to do.
This then caused a spilt within Egypt's interim military rulers with some people thinking that it's not really the government's place to decide who lives or dies provided a court hasn't sentenced them to death. There were also people who think that he could pull through and recover. There were also people who think that Egypt could use the confusion over Mubarak's health to it's advantage - Israel did something similar with Ariel Sharon. Also the right to life/right to die issue is a highly inflammatory issue within US politics with the religious right very opposed to doctors intervening to end pregnancies (abortion) because it goes against God's will but equally opposed to doctors withdrawing treatment to people who would otherwise die without life support. Therefore it is something Egypt could possibly use to exert influence over the US. Finally there were people who thought that the divisive nature of the issue could expose the different factions of Egyptian political society to the outside world - something that would put Egypt at a disadvantage.
Sadly I simply do not have enough information to tell you what is the right answer. Ideally I would have liked to have avoided commenting on the issue as far as possible instead leaving it all a bit vague. However coming in the closing stages of the G20 Summit I felt that wasn't really an option.
At around 21:00GMT last night (19/6/12) rumours started to circulate that former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak had suffered a heart attack and died. These were immediately followed by other rumours that he's actually suffered a stroke and died or that he'd suffered a stroke an survived. There were also rumours that Egypt's interim military rulers were making the whole thing up either to distract from the controversy surrounding the dissolution of Parliament and the issuing of Sunday's (17/6/12) constitutional decree or to put pressure on the G20 Summit. Today (20/6/12) Mubarak does seem to technically still be alive and had has been moved from prison to a military hospital in Cairo where he is said to be on life support. There has not been an official press conference on the technical aspects of his condition and I have not visited him in hospital nor spoken to his doctors so I am not 100% sure what to believe.
One thing I am certain of though is that Egypt is a very tense place at the moment what with the dissolution of Parliament, the constitutional decree and the Presidential run-off. This tension is present throughout the region - which is what I think did for the Saudi Arabian Interior Minister - and has been magnified by the G20 Summit which has been billed by the USA in particular as a show down with Russia over Syria. So what I think happened is that Hosni Mubarak suffered a stroke for whatever the natural reasons are that some people suffer strokes while others don't. The medical team at the prison then resuscitated him and got him on life support as they are trained to do.
This then caused a spilt within Egypt's interim military rulers with some people thinking that it's not really the government's place to decide who lives or dies provided a court hasn't sentenced them to death. There were also people who think that he could pull through and recover. There were also people who think that Egypt could use the confusion over Mubarak's health to it's advantage - Israel did something similar with Ariel Sharon. Also the right to life/right to die issue is a highly inflammatory issue within US politics with the religious right very opposed to doctors intervening to end pregnancies (abortion) because it goes against God's will but equally opposed to doctors withdrawing treatment to people who would otherwise die without life support. Therefore it is something Egypt could possibly use to exert influence over the US. Finally there were people who thought that the divisive nature of the issue could expose the different factions of Egyptian political society to the outside world - something that would put Egypt at a disadvantage.
Sadly I simply do not have enough information to tell you what is the right answer. Ideally I would have liked to have avoided commenting on the issue as far as possible instead leaving it all a bit vague. However coming in the closing stages of the G20 Summit I felt that wasn't really an option.
Saturday, 16 June 2012
Operation Oil Theft: Month 17, Week 2, Day 1.
On Sunday June 3rd (3/6/12) the al-Awfea militia seized control of Tripoli International Airport demanding the release of one of their members who had been arrested by the National Transitional Council (NTC). They seemed to be trying to copy the example set by the Zintan Brigade militia who used control of the airport as a bargaining chip to force the NTC to try Saif al-Islam Qaddafi in Libya rather then hand him over to the International Criminal Court (ICC). On this occasion though the NTC were having none of it and quickly used force to successfully regain control of the airport. To my mind that was the correct course of action to take because Libya has no chance of becoming the stable and prosperous nation it should be if the soon to be elected government are constantly being forced to negotiate with armed but unelected militias and warlords.
This apparent change of approach by the NTC has got the Zintan Brigade worried that now they no longer control the airport the NTC might hand Saif al-Islam over to the ICC anyway. In response on June 7th (7/6/12) the Zintan Brigade arrested Melinda Taylor, a lawyer who'd been appointed by the ICC to represent Saif al-Islam, on a trumped up charge of passing him a letter from a friend. As Ms Taylor's detention has continued the Zintan Brigade have gone on to claim that the letter contained GPS co-ordinates for the location of Mohamed Ismail and they will release Ms Taylor as soon as she gives them Mr Ismail's location. I simply do not believe this because as a prisoner of the Zintan Brigade Saif al-Islam would have no need to know Mr Ismail's location and if, as the Zintan Brigade claim, the letter contains the co-ordinates of Mr Ismail's location they do not need Ms Taylor to tell them that location. Instead I think the Zintan Brigade are simply making the whole thing up and effectively holding Ms Taylor as a hostage in order to force the ICC to give up it's right to try Saif al-Islam.
Also the fact that the Zintan Brigade seem to think that the passing of a letter is a legitimate reason to arrest a lawyer is deeply worrying. In order to mount the defence needed for a fair trial the accused has the right to speak to their lawyer in private safe in the knowledge that the content of those conversations will not be passed onto their prosecutors/jailers. This is known as attorney-client privilege. Prisoners whether convicted or not also have the right to send and receive letters to people in the outside world. The fact that the Zintan Brigade are not aware of things like this only leaves me more convinced that Saif al-Islam will not receive anything even vaguely resembling a fair trial in Libya.
On June 4th (4/6/12) the Libyan born Al-Qaeda second in command Abu Yahya Al-Libi was apparently killed in a US drone strike in northern Pakistan. On June 6th (6/6/12) an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) exploded outside US diplomatic offices in Benghazi. A Jihadist group calling themselves the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades immediately claimed responsibility for the attack as revenge for the killing of Al-Libi. The US immediately denied this claiming that there was no evidence linking the attack to the group and the Jihadists were only claiming responsibility in order too boost their profile. Now this could be the case or it could be the US trying to cover up the fact that by intervening in Libya they succeeded in turning the south-west of the country into a hot-bed for Al-Qaeda activity and given the group effective control over a country in the size of France in Azawad/northern-Mali. Since the US denial there has been a wave of similar attacks including an IED blast at offices of International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Misrata on 12/6/12 and a Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) attack on a convoy carrying the British Ambassador Sir Dominic Asquith in Benghazi on 11/6/12. These attacks seem to be linked to the multitude of foreign intelligence agencies that still operate freely throughout Libya and are trying to put pressure on the US to clarify their position on the June 6th attack.
Against this chaotic background the NTC have postponed the election for the National Congress (Parliament) that had been scheduled for June 19th (19/6/12) due to what I think are legitimate logistical and security problems. The election will now be held on July 7th (7/7/12). My understanding is that voter registration for this election has now closed so any Libyan who has not yet registered will not be allowed to vote. However I wouldn't get too worried about this because I suspect there will be another election in about a year as Libyans gain experience in government and democracy.
A good example of the progress they are making was the Supreme Court's decision on June 14th (14/6/12) to strike down Law 137. The so-called "anti-glorification law" Law 137 made it illegal for anyone to praise Muammer Qaddafi, his sons, his ideas or his regime. Although I'm not particularly bothered whether anyone praises Qaddafi or not in terms freedom passing a law banning people from praising Qaddafi is no different from passing a law saying people must praise him. The fact that the Libyan courts are beginning to think in these terms shows that they are moving away from the attitudes of the war years and towards the values of democracy and freedom.
This apparent change of approach by the NTC has got the Zintan Brigade worried that now they no longer control the airport the NTC might hand Saif al-Islam over to the ICC anyway. In response on June 7th (7/6/12) the Zintan Brigade arrested Melinda Taylor, a lawyer who'd been appointed by the ICC to represent Saif al-Islam, on a trumped up charge of passing him a letter from a friend. As Ms Taylor's detention has continued the Zintan Brigade have gone on to claim that the letter contained GPS co-ordinates for the location of Mohamed Ismail and they will release Ms Taylor as soon as she gives them Mr Ismail's location. I simply do not believe this because as a prisoner of the Zintan Brigade Saif al-Islam would have no need to know Mr Ismail's location and if, as the Zintan Brigade claim, the letter contains the co-ordinates of Mr Ismail's location they do not need Ms Taylor to tell them that location. Instead I think the Zintan Brigade are simply making the whole thing up and effectively holding Ms Taylor as a hostage in order to force the ICC to give up it's right to try Saif al-Islam.
Also the fact that the Zintan Brigade seem to think that the passing of a letter is a legitimate reason to arrest a lawyer is deeply worrying. In order to mount the defence needed for a fair trial the accused has the right to speak to their lawyer in private safe in the knowledge that the content of those conversations will not be passed onto their prosecutors/jailers. This is known as attorney-client privilege. Prisoners whether convicted or not also have the right to send and receive letters to people in the outside world. The fact that the Zintan Brigade are not aware of things like this only leaves me more convinced that Saif al-Islam will not receive anything even vaguely resembling a fair trial in Libya.
On June 4th (4/6/12) the Libyan born Al-Qaeda second in command Abu Yahya Al-Libi was apparently killed in a US drone strike in northern Pakistan. On June 6th (6/6/12) an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) exploded outside US diplomatic offices in Benghazi. A Jihadist group calling themselves the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades immediately claimed responsibility for the attack as revenge for the killing of Al-Libi. The US immediately denied this claiming that there was no evidence linking the attack to the group and the Jihadists were only claiming responsibility in order too boost their profile. Now this could be the case or it could be the US trying to cover up the fact that by intervening in Libya they succeeded in turning the south-west of the country into a hot-bed for Al-Qaeda activity and given the group effective control over a country in the size of France in Azawad/northern-Mali. Since the US denial there has been a wave of similar attacks including an IED blast at offices of International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Misrata on 12/6/12 and a Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) attack on a convoy carrying the British Ambassador Sir Dominic Asquith in Benghazi on 11/6/12. These attacks seem to be linked to the multitude of foreign intelligence agencies that still operate freely throughout Libya and are trying to put pressure on the US to clarify their position on the June 6th attack.
Against this chaotic background the NTC have postponed the election for the National Congress (Parliament) that had been scheduled for June 19th (19/6/12) due to what I think are legitimate logistical and security problems. The election will now be held on July 7th (7/7/12). My understanding is that voter registration for this election has now closed so any Libyan who has not yet registered will not be allowed to vote. However I wouldn't get too worried about this because I suspect there will be another election in about a year as Libyans gain experience in government and democracy.
A good example of the progress they are making was the Supreme Court's decision on June 14th (14/6/12) to strike down Law 137. The so-called "anti-glorification law" Law 137 made it illegal for anyone to praise Muammer Qaddafi, his sons, his ideas or his regime. Although I'm not particularly bothered whether anyone praises Qaddafi or not in terms freedom passing a law banning people from praising Qaddafi is no different from passing a law saying people must praise him. The fact that the Libyan courts are beginning to think in these terms shows that they are moving away from the attitudes of the war years and towards the values of democracy and freedom.
Friday, 15 June 2012
The Ruling on Egypt's Parliament.
As previously mentioned yesterday (14/6/12) Egypt's Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) ruled that parts of the election for Egypt's lower house of Parliament (Peoples Assembly) were inconsistent with Egypt's 1971 constitution and gave the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces the authority to dissolve the Parliament if they so wish.
I have to start by saying that I've had a lot of difficulty finding out exactly what the SCC's ruling was because they do not seem to have published a copy of their ruling in either Arabic or English. In a democratic country this is simply not acceptable. If a Court is going to over-rule the will of the people it must immediately publish a judgement explaining it's decision, the exact law under which it was being asked to make it's decision and the detailed reasoning behind it's decision.
However from what I have been able to piece together the part of the electoral process that the SCC had a problem with were rules that reserved one third of seats in the Peoples Assembly for independent rather party candidates. Although under Hosni Mubarak the Muslim Brotherhood gained a lot of experience in disguising party candidates as independents this rule seems to have been specifically designed to limit the number of seats that the Brotherhood's Freedom & Justice Party could contest and therefore win. As a result the SCC's decision to overturn this rule is likely to help the Muslim Brotherhood more then any other group. Also giving Egypt's interim military rulers the authority to dissolve Parliament does leave it open to accusations of mounting anti-democratic coup. Therefore I'm now convinced my earlier assessment was correct and the Muslim Brotherhood have managed to unduly influence the SCC's decision in order to increase their chances of winning this weekend's Presidential run-off vote.
The reason that the Brotherhood have resorted to these extreme and undemocratic tactics is that pressure has steadily been mounting on the Islamist dominated Peoples Assembly over the appointment of a panel to write Egypt's new constitution. This has really been the one and only job of Parliament since it's election in January 2012. However over the following six months the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafist al-Nour Party have more or less blocked appointments to this panel in order to ensure that it is dominated by Islamists and Egypt gets a Sharia rather then democratic constitution. The Military set a deadline of June 7th (7/6/12) for Parliament to start work on final preparations for that panel. That deadline was met but still little progress has been made leading many in Egypt to suggest that the military needs to dissolve Parliament and allow the people to elect a new one in order to break the deadlock. The Brotherhood seem to be trying to force this decision in order to make the military look undemocratic.
As for the issue of the military dissolving Parliament I don't think Egypt's quite at the point that has become necessary just yet. However I do not have a problem with it in theory provided that on the same day the military announce that Parliament is to be dissolved they also announce the date (normally within around 6 weeks) that an election will be held to elect a new Parliament.
After all the entire point of democracy is that if the politicians are not doing what the people want the people can quite easily get rid of them. The recent recall election of Governor Scott Walker in the US state of Wisconsin is a timely example of how this can happen without the involvement of a military council.
I have to start by saying that I've had a lot of difficulty finding out exactly what the SCC's ruling was because they do not seem to have published a copy of their ruling in either Arabic or English. In a democratic country this is simply not acceptable. If a Court is going to over-rule the will of the people it must immediately publish a judgement explaining it's decision, the exact law under which it was being asked to make it's decision and the detailed reasoning behind it's decision.
However from what I have been able to piece together the part of the electoral process that the SCC had a problem with were rules that reserved one third of seats in the Peoples Assembly for independent rather party candidates. Although under Hosni Mubarak the Muslim Brotherhood gained a lot of experience in disguising party candidates as independents this rule seems to have been specifically designed to limit the number of seats that the Brotherhood's Freedom & Justice Party could contest and therefore win. As a result the SCC's decision to overturn this rule is likely to help the Muslim Brotherhood more then any other group. Also giving Egypt's interim military rulers the authority to dissolve Parliament does leave it open to accusations of mounting anti-democratic coup. Therefore I'm now convinced my earlier assessment was correct and the Muslim Brotherhood have managed to unduly influence the SCC's decision in order to increase their chances of winning this weekend's Presidential run-off vote.
The reason that the Brotherhood have resorted to these extreme and undemocratic tactics is that pressure has steadily been mounting on the Islamist dominated Peoples Assembly over the appointment of a panel to write Egypt's new constitution. This has really been the one and only job of Parliament since it's election in January 2012. However over the following six months the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafist al-Nour Party have more or less blocked appointments to this panel in order to ensure that it is dominated by Islamists and Egypt gets a Sharia rather then democratic constitution. The Military set a deadline of June 7th (7/6/12) for Parliament to start work on final preparations for that panel. That deadline was met but still little progress has been made leading many in Egypt to suggest that the military needs to dissolve Parliament and allow the people to elect a new one in order to break the deadlock. The Brotherhood seem to be trying to force this decision in order to make the military look undemocratic.
As for the issue of the military dissolving Parliament I don't think Egypt's quite at the point that has become necessary just yet. However I do not have a problem with it in theory provided that on the same day the military announce that Parliament is to be dissolved they also announce the date (normally within around 6 weeks) that an election will be held to elect a new Parliament.
After all the entire point of democracy is that if the politicians are not doing what the people want the people can quite easily get rid of them. The recent recall election of Governor Scott Walker in the US state of Wisconsin is a timely example of how this can happen without the involvement of a military council.
Tuesday, 12 June 2012
Hosni Mubarak is Such an A**hole.
I know that hardly counts as news. However almost 18 months after he was deposed by the Egyptian revolution ex-President Hosni Mubarak still seems to be harbouring a deep hatred for both Egypt and it's people.
On June 2nd 2012 (2/6/12) Mubarak and his Interior Minister Habib al-Aldi was found guilty of the murder of 846 protesters who were killed during the revolution. As Egypt has yet to write the constitution needed to reform it's legal system this trial was at it's best an example of how the old regime used to do things and at it's worst utterly shambolic. Although Mubarak and al-Aldi were convicted of murder they and two of Mubarak's sons were acquitted of corruption charges while other defendants including senior officers in the feared CSF riot squad were acquitted of all charges. The acquittal of the police officers in particular was apparently due to the Mubarak-era prosecutor's failure to force the police to release files that many believe would have proved the police officer's guilt. This coupled with the fact that Mubarak was only sentenced to life in prison rather then death which for a President who liberally used capital punishment during his reign seems lenient has led to many Egyptians to accuse the country's interim military rulers of trying to roll back the revolution by protecting Mubarak's old guard.
Ahead of Saturday and Sunday's (16-17/6/12) Presidential run-off vote between the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohamed Morsy and Mubarak's former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik the Brotherhood have leapt on the trial issue and are trying to use it portray themselves as the guardians of the revolution. I think this is nothing more then the worst sort of political opportunism. Although the Brotherhood did play a crucial role in the revolution and are only Islamic extremists so far as the US Republican Party are Christian extremists the Saudi fuelled Sunni V Shia sectarianism that the conflict in Syria has caused across the region has pushed the Brotherhood so far towards the Salafists that they now pose a very serious threat to democracy in Egypt. Besides during the revolution I seem to remember that there was another highly organised group protecting the protesters in Tahrir Square from Mubarak's thugs with their tanks.
For his part Hosni Mubarak is now claiming to be suffering from a very conveniently timed bout of ill health and is trying to use this to serve his sentence in a comfortable private hospital rather then a Mubarak-era prison. If this does happen it will only strengthen the main thrust of the Muslim Brotherhood's campaign claim that nothing has changed and Egypt's old guard - which they claim Shafik is part of part of - are still just looking out for themselves. So apart from getting away with his crimes Mubarak also seems to be actively campaigning for the Muslim Brotherhood. The idea seems to be that he can spite all the people - both inside and outside of Egypt - who called for him to step down by helping elect a President who will be much worse then him.
This is exactly the sort of politicisation of the judicial process that means I'm still convinced that Saif al-Islam Qaddafi should be tried by the International Criminal Court (ICC) rather then in the new Libya. As for Mubarak I can't help but think it would just have been easier to honour the promise that he's allowed a comfortable retirement provided he stepped down.
On June 2nd 2012 (2/6/12) Mubarak and his Interior Minister Habib al-Aldi was found guilty of the murder of 846 protesters who were killed during the revolution. As Egypt has yet to write the constitution needed to reform it's legal system this trial was at it's best an example of how the old regime used to do things and at it's worst utterly shambolic. Although Mubarak and al-Aldi were convicted of murder they and two of Mubarak's sons were acquitted of corruption charges while other defendants including senior officers in the feared CSF riot squad were acquitted of all charges. The acquittal of the police officers in particular was apparently due to the Mubarak-era prosecutor's failure to force the police to release files that many believe would have proved the police officer's guilt. This coupled with the fact that Mubarak was only sentenced to life in prison rather then death which for a President who liberally used capital punishment during his reign seems lenient has led to many Egyptians to accuse the country's interim military rulers of trying to roll back the revolution by protecting Mubarak's old guard.
Ahead of Saturday and Sunday's (16-17/6/12) Presidential run-off vote between the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohamed Morsy and Mubarak's former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik the Brotherhood have leapt on the trial issue and are trying to use it portray themselves as the guardians of the revolution. I think this is nothing more then the worst sort of political opportunism. Although the Brotherhood did play a crucial role in the revolution and are only Islamic extremists so far as the US Republican Party are Christian extremists the Saudi fuelled Sunni V Shia sectarianism that the conflict in Syria has caused across the region has pushed the Brotherhood so far towards the Salafists that they now pose a very serious threat to democracy in Egypt. Besides during the revolution I seem to remember that there was another highly organised group protecting the protesters in Tahrir Square from Mubarak's thugs with their tanks.
For his part Hosni Mubarak is now claiming to be suffering from a very conveniently timed bout of ill health and is trying to use this to serve his sentence in a comfortable private hospital rather then a Mubarak-era prison. If this does happen it will only strengthen the main thrust of the Muslim Brotherhood's campaign claim that nothing has changed and Egypt's old guard - which they claim Shafik is part of part of - are still just looking out for themselves. So apart from getting away with his crimes Mubarak also seems to be actively campaigning for the Muslim Brotherhood. The idea seems to be that he can spite all the people - both inside and outside of Egypt - who called for him to step down by helping elect a President who will be much worse then him.
This is exactly the sort of politicisation of the judicial process that means I'm still convinced that Saif al-Islam Qaddafi should be tried by the International Criminal Court (ICC) rather then in the new Libya. As for Mubarak I can't help but think it would just have been easier to honour the promise that he's allowed a comfortable retirement provided he stepped down.
Sunday, 10 June 2012
The Greek Election: Second Time Lucky?
On May 6th 2012 Greece held a General Election. However due to the dire economic situation the vote was divided between so many small fringe parties that the country was unable to form a government. So on June 17th 2012 the Greeks will try again and go to the polls in a second General Election.
Ideally what the Greeks want to do is appoint as Prime Minister an industry insider who has an in depth knowledge of economics and the inner workings of European Union's (EU) internal politics along with an extensive network of friends and contacts in both worlds. In short the Greeks want Lucas Papademos. That Prime Minister could then appoint a cabinet of national unity made up of representatives of all of Greece's political parties including the undesirable ones like the fascist Golden Dawn Party. This combination of a technocrat and unelected political representatives would allow Greece to make the economic reforms it so desperately needs while ensuring that the genuine needs of it's people are protected without politicians being too scared to make unpopular decisions or being tempted to hand out costly bribes to ensure that their re-election.
Unfortunately the Greek people have already rejected that idea and seem intent on committing economic suicide by electing Alexis Tsipras' SYRIZA coalition. This is a man and party whose only suggestion of how to solve Greece's economic problems seems to be to use the threat of Greece leaving the Eurozone to intimidate the EU/IMF into relaxing the terms of the bailout deal so Greece can carry on with the fatally flawed economy that got them into this situation in the first place. This approach is deeply flawed for two main reasons;
Firstly while Syriza were busy boosting their popularity by childishly comparing the EU bailout to the Nazi occupation during the second world war more serious politicians in both Greece and the EU were working to identify and solve Greece's problems. This work came to fruition with the agreement of October 27th 2011. Prior to this the focus on the recovery plan for Greece was to raise government tax revenues and cut government spending in order to pay off the country' spiralling national debt. The hope was that this would convince the global debt markets that Greece could repay it's debts so they would allow the Greek government back to the market to borrow more money by 2013.
The conclusion of the October 27th meeting was that this simply would not work because no matter how much taxes increased and spending was cut Greece would never be able to pay the interest on their loans let alone re-pay the loans themselves. So instead the EU decided that it would have to negotiate with the private banks holding Greek debt on Greeks behalf to allow the country to default on 75% of it's national debt worth around Euro190bn/USD144bn. In return Greece would then make much needed structural reforms to it's economy in order to prevent a repeat of the crisis. After several months of hard negotiations the EU was finally able to get this deal done in March 2012 and Greece was allowed to walk out on the majority of it's debt.
What Alexis Tsipras and Syriza don't seem to understand is that in economics there is often a large time lag between cause and effect. For example the credit crunch occurred in late-2008 but the rise in unemployment it caused didn't start to take effect until mid-2012. So all but the most outlandish things that Syriza is demanding from the EU have already been done. It's just it's going to be 18 months to 2 years before everyday Greeks will notice the improvement. Right now though the main thing that is slowing these improvements down is Syriza.
The second problem is that Mr Tsipras' threat to take Greece out of the Eurozone and default on it's debts is nowhere near as threatening as he thinks it is. The October 27th agreement saw 75% of Greek debt written off so the vast majority of Greece's creditors along with the industry regulator the International Derivatives and Swaps Association (ISDA) already consider Greece to be in default. As it was the EU's job to negotiate this debt write off the majority of the 75% of creditors who took part were banks in Eurozone countries like France, Germany and Spain while the majority of the 25% who held onto Greek debt were institutions outside of the Eurozone who did so for political rather then economic reasons. Therefore while the "firewall" is not fully in place a further Greek default will no longer cause a domino effect of bank collapses across the Eurozone. This is why the private banks who Mr Tsipras really works for (whether he realises it or not) have been forced to apply pressure to Spain rather then Greece in order to intimidate the European Central Bank (ECB) into letting the stimulus cash flow. Today's (10/6/12) bailout for Spain showed that the Eurozone is strong enough to absorb both a Greek exit and a Spanish banking collapse. In fact a Greek exit would make the EU's job easier by freeing up the cash they were going to give to Greece and using it to further shore up Spanish and Italian banks instead.
Therefore if Greek voters are foolish enough to vote for Syriza the best case scenario they can hope for is that Mr Tsipras fails to keep a single one of his campaign promises leaving Greece meekly following the EU reform program only with a third rate Prime Minister in charge. The worst case scenario is that Mr Tsipras actually follows through on his threat and Greece defaults on it's remaining debt and then either leaves or more likely is kicked out of the Euro. The first thing that will happen then is all privately held Greek assets will lose around 2/3rds of their value. So if someone in Greece has USD30,000 in the bank overnight their savings will become worth only USD10,000. Equally a Greek mortgage holder will overnight discover that while they still owe USD300,000 their home will only be worth USD100,000. Then Greece will have to recall all the Euro banknotes and coins in circulation and replace them with new Drachmas. Conservative estimates put the cost of this process at around USD250million and I seriously doubt that Greece can afford to do this. After all they certainly don't have the cash reserves and the reason why they need EU bailout money is because private lenders have long since refused to lend the country anymore money.
So if I could vote in Greece's election no matter how tempting SYRIZA's easy promises sound I would vote for either PASOK or New Democracy.
Ideally what the Greeks want to do is appoint as Prime Minister an industry insider who has an in depth knowledge of economics and the inner workings of European Union's (EU) internal politics along with an extensive network of friends and contacts in both worlds. In short the Greeks want Lucas Papademos. That Prime Minister could then appoint a cabinet of national unity made up of representatives of all of Greece's political parties including the undesirable ones like the fascist Golden Dawn Party. This combination of a technocrat and unelected political representatives would allow Greece to make the economic reforms it so desperately needs while ensuring that the genuine needs of it's people are protected without politicians being too scared to make unpopular decisions or being tempted to hand out costly bribes to ensure that their re-election.
Unfortunately the Greek people have already rejected that idea and seem intent on committing economic suicide by electing Alexis Tsipras' SYRIZA coalition. This is a man and party whose only suggestion of how to solve Greece's economic problems seems to be to use the threat of Greece leaving the Eurozone to intimidate the EU/IMF into relaxing the terms of the bailout deal so Greece can carry on with the fatally flawed economy that got them into this situation in the first place. This approach is deeply flawed for two main reasons;
Firstly while Syriza were busy boosting their popularity by childishly comparing the EU bailout to the Nazi occupation during the second world war more serious politicians in both Greece and the EU were working to identify and solve Greece's problems. This work came to fruition with the agreement of October 27th 2011. Prior to this the focus on the recovery plan for Greece was to raise government tax revenues and cut government spending in order to pay off the country' spiralling national debt. The hope was that this would convince the global debt markets that Greece could repay it's debts so they would allow the Greek government back to the market to borrow more money by 2013.
The conclusion of the October 27th meeting was that this simply would not work because no matter how much taxes increased and spending was cut Greece would never be able to pay the interest on their loans let alone re-pay the loans themselves. So instead the EU decided that it would have to negotiate with the private banks holding Greek debt on Greeks behalf to allow the country to default on 75% of it's national debt worth around Euro190bn/USD144bn. In return Greece would then make much needed structural reforms to it's economy in order to prevent a repeat of the crisis. After several months of hard negotiations the EU was finally able to get this deal done in March 2012 and Greece was allowed to walk out on the majority of it's debt.
What Alexis Tsipras and Syriza don't seem to understand is that in economics there is often a large time lag between cause and effect. For example the credit crunch occurred in late-2008 but the rise in unemployment it caused didn't start to take effect until mid-2012. So all but the most outlandish things that Syriza is demanding from the EU have already been done. It's just it's going to be 18 months to 2 years before everyday Greeks will notice the improvement. Right now though the main thing that is slowing these improvements down is Syriza.
The second problem is that Mr Tsipras' threat to take Greece out of the Eurozone and default on it's debts is nowhere near as threatening as he thinks it is. The October 27th agreement saw 75% of Greek debt written off so the vast majority of Greece's creditors along with the industry regulator the International Derivatives and Swaps Association (ISDA) already consider Greece to be in default. As it was the EU's job to negotiate this debt write off the majority of the 75% of creditors who took part were banks in Eurozone countries like France, Germany and Spain while the majority of the 25% who held onto Greek debt were institutions outside of the Eurozone who did so for political rather then economic reasons. Therefore while the "firewall" is not fully in place a further Greek default will no longer cause a domino effect of bank collapses across the Eurozone. This is why the private banks who Mr Tsipras really works for (whether he realises it or not) have been forced to apply pressure to Spain rather then Greece in order to intimidate the European Central Bank (ECB) into letting the stimulus cash flow. Today's (10/6/12) bailout for Spain showed that the Eurozone is strong enough to absorb both a Greek exit and a Spanish banking collapse. In fact a Greek exit would make the EU's job easier by freeing up the cash they were going to give to Greece and using it to further shore up Spanish and Italian banks instead.
Therefore if Greek voters are foolish enough to vote for Syriza the best case scenario they can hope for is that Mr Tsipras fails to keep a single one of his campaign promises leaving Greece meekly following the EU reform program only with a third rate Prime Minister in charge. The worst case scenario is that Mr Tsipras actually follows through on his threat and Greece defaults on it's remaining debt and then either leaves or more likely is kicked out of the Euro. The first thing that will happen then is all privately held Greek assets will lose around 2/3rds of their value. So if someone in Greece has USD30,000 in the bank overnight their savings will become worth only USD10,000. Equally a Greek mortgage holder will overnight discover that while they still owe USD300,000 their home will only be worth USD100,000. Then Greece will have to recall all the Euro banknotes and coins in circulation and replace them with new Drachmas. Conservative estimates put the cost of this process at around USD250million and I seriously doubt that Greece can afford to do this. After all they certainly don't have the cash reserves and the reason why they need EU bailout money is because private lenders have long since refused to lend the country anymore money.
So if I could vote in Greece's election no matter how tempting SYRIZA's easy promises sound I would vote for either PASOK or New Democracy.
Friday, 8 June 2012
Egypt's Presidential Election: Round 2.
On May 23rd 2012 Egypt held it's first proper Presidential election
since the fall of Hosni Mubarak. As I reported at the time this was a
free and fair election. However as no one candidate received more the
50% of the vote the top two candidates - Mohammed Morsy of the Freedom
& Justice Party who received 24.78% of the vote and Ahmed Shafik and
independent who received 26.33% of the vote will face-off against each
other in a run-off vote that will be held on June 16th and 17th.
In the first round of the vote there was a very low voter turn out of 46.42% with only 23,672,236 of 50,996,746 registered voters taking part. This could be viewed as the Egyptian public losing faith in the democratic process but it is more likely to be due to confusion over the President's role. Under Mubarak the use of emergency law 162 meant that the President's power was absolute completely overriding the power of Parliament. The use of those emergency laws have now been revoked but the Egyptian constitution still needs to be re-written to define the President's power. It could become a very powerful position like the President of the United States of America who can veto decisions made by the houses of Congress or it could end up being a largely ceremonial role like the President of the Republic of Ireland or Israel. Egypt could even end up with the division of power that they have in France where the President deals with international issues like democracy and defence while the Prime Minister deals with internal issues such as policing and employment. However at the moment no-one knows what the Egyptian President's role will be making it very hard to decide which candidate has the qualities that best fit the job. So rather then losing faith with democracy most Egyptians simply chose not to vote because they didn't know what they were being asked to vote for.
The other surprise of the first round was the failure of any of the secular, revolutionary candidates to get into the run-off. This has fuelled fears that Egypt is about to launch into the sort of Sunni Muslim extremism they practise in places like Saudi Arabia. Again though I don't think this tells the full story because with 8 of the 13 those standing the overwhelming majority of candidates in the Presidential race represented secular or revolutionary values. Together they gained 32% of the vote meaning that if the secular vote had been united behind a single candidate that candidate would easily have beaten Mohammed Morsy into second place by some 2 million votes. If that candidate had also been able to pick up the votes cast for Ahmed Shafik who is technically a secularist they would have won outright with 55% of the vote. Therefore I think the real story of the first round of the Presidential vote was the deep and widespread support amongst Egyptian voters for secular candidates and secular values. They just need to gain the experience in democracy needed to allow them to translate that support into results.
As the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom & Justice Party have almost 80 years experience in contesting elections they were able to use that experience to unite their support behind a single candidate - Mohammed Morsy. Despite claims to the contrary before the election the Muslim Brotherhood also seem to have enjoyed the organised support of the even more extreme Sunni Islamist Salafists including the al-Nour Party who saw their share of the vote collapse from 27.8% in the Parliamentary vote to just 0.05% in the Presidential vote. This overt and clandestine co-operation between the Freedom & Justice and al-Nour Parties which includes attempts to form a formal, ruling coalition in Parliament has led to many observers, both in Egypt and internationally, to conclude that the Islamists intend to use the Presidential election to seize absolute power and make the Presidential run-off Egypt's last election.
This fear of an Islamist take-over coupled with pressure from the secular revolutionaries on the the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) to step aside sooner rather then later has caused many Egyptians along with members of the police, rank and file members of the military and in a country with conscription many ex-members of the military to look on Ahmed Shafik as a safe pair of hands. The thinking being that Shafik's experience in high office along with his strong links to the military will allow Egypt's interim military rulers to step aside while still having the ear of the President who will counter-balance the power of the Islamist Parliament. Ideally I would have liked to have seen a revolutionary secularist President but the fact they were unable to win a place in the run-off indicates that Egypt's secular revolutionaries are not yet ready for power. Therefore the idea of uniting behind Shafik is a very sensible one and I think that every Egyptian should vote for him on June 16/17th. After all he is either Mubarak's last Prime Minister or the Prime Minister who finally convinced Mubarak to step down.
Whomever becomes President though I am still very opposed to the idea of Egypt's interim military rulers stepping aside so soon. This is because until Egypt's constitution is written and adopted the country will need an independent referee to settle disputes. For example if the Freedom & Justice and al-Nour Parties get together in Parliament to pass a law requiring all women to wear a burka in public but the President says no without a constitution there is no way of telling who gets the final say. Also due to their long relationship training with and visiting the USA the officer class of Egypt's military have a very deep understanding of what is required of public institutions such as the office of the President, Parliament and the Judiciary/Courts in order to build a free and democratic society. While communication is clearly not their strong point Egypt's military have also displayed a deep knowledge of the type of reforms that are needed to get the nations economy back to stability and prosperity. Therefore it would be simply stupid for Egypt to throw out all this knowledge simply because the people delivering it wear military uniforms.
As an alternative while Egypt's revolution continues I would like to see Egypt operate a three tier power structure. That is to say that they have Parliament which comes up with it's own ideas and the office of the President that has to sign-off on Parliament's ideas and come up with ideas of it's own. Then above them in the background you have the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces which offers advice to both Parliament and the President and rules on disputes between the two. Then once the constitution is written and adopted by a referendum Egypt should hold another General Election for both Parliament and President. This is likely to produce a very different result as Egyptians become more experienced in democracy. At this point the military will be able to step aside because the constitution will provide the Judiciary with the legal framework needed to rule on disputes between Parliament and the President. Also having a clearly defined legal framework should help many of these disputes arising in the first place.
So in summary I think Ahmed Shafik is the right choice for Egypt's next President.
In the first round of the vote there was a very low voter turn out of 46.42% with only 23,672,236 of 50,996,746 registered voters taking part. This could be viewed as the Egyptian public losing faith in the democratic process but it is more likely to be due to confusion over the President's role. Under Mubarak the use of emergency law 162 meant that the President's power was absolute completely overriding the power of Parliament. The use of those emergency laws have now been revoked but the Egyptian constitution still needs to be re-written to define the President's power. It could become a very powerful position like the President of the United States of America who can veto decisions made by the houses of Congress or it could end up being a largely ceremonial role like the President of the Republic of Ireland or Israel. Egypt could even end up with the division of power that they have in France where the President deals with international issues like democracy and defence while the Prime Minister deals with internal issues such as policing and employment. However at the moment no-one knows what the Egyptian President's role will be making it very hard to decide which candidate has the qualities that best fit the job. So rather then losing faith with democracy most Egyptians simply chose not to vote because they didn't know what they were being asked to vote for.
The other surprise of the first round was the failure of any of the secular, revolutionary candidates to get into the run-off. This has fuelled fears that Egypt is about to launch into the sort of Sunni Muslim extremism they practise in places like Saudi Arabia. Again though I don't think this tells the full story because with 8 of the 13 those standing the overwhelming majority of candidates in the Presidential race represented secular or revolutionary values. Together they gained 32% of the vote meaning that if the secular vote had been united behind a single candidate that candidate would easily have beaten Mohammed Morsy into second place by some 2 million votes. If that candidate had also been able to pick up the votes cast for Ahmed Shafik who is technically a secularist they would have won outright with 55% of the vote. Therefore I think the real story of the first round of the Presidential vote was the deep and widespread support amongst Egyptian voters for secular candidates and secular values. They just need to gain the experience in democracy needed to allow them to translate that support into results.
As the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom & Justice Party have almost 80 years experience in contesting elections they were able to use that experience to unite their support behind a single candidate - Mohammed Morsy. Despite claims to the contrary before the election the Muslim Brotherhood also seem to have enjoyed the organised support of the even more extreme Sunni Islamist Salafists including the al-Nour Party who saw their share of the vote collapse from 27.8% in the Parliamentary vote to just 0.05% in the Presidential vote. This overt and clandestine co-operation between the Freedom & Justice and al-Nour Parties which includes attempts to form a formal, ruling coalition in Parliament has led to many observers, both in Egypt and internationally, to conclude that the Islamists intend to use the Presidential election to seize absolute power and make the Presidential run-off Egypt's last election.
This fear of an Islamist take-over coupled with pressure from the secular revolutionaries on the the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) to step aside sooner rather then later has caused many Egyptians along with members of the police, rank and file members of the military and in a country with conscription many ex-members of the military to look on Ahmed Shafik as a safe pair of hands. The thinking being that Shafik's experience in high office along with his strong links to the military will allow Egypt's interim military rulers to step aside while still having the ear of the President who will counter-balance the power of the Islamist Parliament. Ideally I would have liked to have seen a revolutionary secularist President but the fact they were unable to win a place in the run-off indicates that Egypt's secular revolutionaries are not yet ready for power. Therefore the idea of uniting behind Shafik is a very sensible one and I think that every Egyptian should vote for him on June 16/17th. After all he is either Mubarak's last Prime Minister or the Prime Minister who finally convinced Mubarak to step down.
Whomever becomes President though I am still very opposed to the idea of Egypt's interim military rulers stepping aside so soon. This is because until Egypt's constitution is written and adopted the country will need an independent referee to settle disputes. For example if the Freedom & Justice and al-Nour Parties get together in Parliament to pass a law requiring all women to wear a burka in public but the President says no without a constitution there is no way of telling who gets the final say. Also due to their long relationship training with and visiting the USA the officer class of Egypt's military have a very deep understanding of what is required of public institutions such as the office of the President, Parliament and the Judiciary/Courts in order to build a free and democratic society. While communication is clearly not their strong point Egypt's military have also displayed a deep knowledge of the type of reforms that are needed to get the nations economy back to stability and prosperity. Therefore it would be simply stupid for Egypt to throw out all this knowledge simply because the people delivering it wear military uniforms.
As an alternative while Egypt's revolution continues I would like to see Egypt operate a three tier power structure. That is to say that they have Parliament which comes up with it's own ideas and the office of the President that has to sign-off on Parliament's ideas and come up with ideas of it's own. Then above them in the background you have the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces which offers advice to both Parliament and the President and rules on disputes between the two. Then once the constitution is written and adopted by a referendum Egypt should hold another General Election for both Parliament and President. This is likely to produce a very different result as Egyptians become more experienced in democracy. At this point the military will be able to step aside because the constitution will provide the Judiciary with the legal framework needed to rule on disputes between Parliament and the President. Also having a clearly defined legal framework should help many of these disputes arising in the first place.
So in summary I think Ahmed Shafik is the right choice for Egypt's next President.
Tuesday, 5 June 2012
Operation Oil Theft: Month 15, Week 3, Day 3.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 15, Week 3, Day 3." on 26/4/12.
Since my last post on the subject there has thankfully been very little violence in Libya. On April 10th (10/4/12) a home made bomb was thrown at a convoy of United Nations Support Mission In Libya (UNSMIL) vehicles but no injuries were reported. Kidnappings continue in the east of the country close the border with Tunisia. These include two Tunisians who were kidnapped inside Tunisia on April 8th (8/4/12) and the kidnapping of the head of the Darj town council on April 21st (21/4/12). That kidnapping is believed to have been carried out by the Zintan Brigade militia in retaliation for Darj's desire to be included in the Ghadames electoral district rather then the Zintan electoral district.
The Zintan Brigade's unconventional approach to political debate aside the rest of Libya has been preparing for June's election. On April 24th (24/4/12) the National Transitional Council (NTC) announced that it's meetings will be open to to the press and public bringing it in line with Parliaments and Senates in democratic, first world nations. The Higher National Electoral Commission (HNEC) is in the process of drawing up a national register of voters. Due to differences in methodologies the HNEC will disregarded local lists and start again from scratch meaning that everyone will have to re-register to vote using only the family book as proof of identity. Also the HNEC will not be allowing Libyans living abroad to take part in the June 19th (19/6/12) vote. This is simply because it will take far too long to register all the Libyan exiles and their children and provide them with ballot papers and polling stations in their country of residence. The HNEC has also announced that political parties who receive foreign funding or represent a regional, tribal or religious ideology will be banned from taking part. Although the bar on foreign funding is perfectly reasonable and in line with most democratic nations the ban on regional, tribal or religious ideology is likely to be controversial. It could prevent the Muslim Brotherhood linked Justice and Construction Party from taking part and will definitely prevent the National Federal Bloc (NFB) who want autonomy for the Cyrenaica region. Depending on how much support the NFB have this could lead to a boycott of the election fuelling accusations that the elected government does not represent the east of the country increasing calls for regional autonomy.
Apart from election preparations the other big aspect of Libyan life is post-war reconstruction. Between April 17th (17/4/12) and April 19th (19/4/12) British Lord Trefgarne led a trade delegation of British construction, engineering and telecommunications companies under the banner of the Libyan British Business Council (LBBC) and on May 20th (20/5/12) Tripoli will host the Libya Building and Construction Conference which is expected to host trade delegations from across the globe. This level of international involvement has led to various Libyan groups including the Architectural Company for Aluminium And Glass Works (ACAGW) complaining that all the business is going to foreign companies which operate illegally and pay bribes and this is causing unemployment. Normally I'm opposed to this sort of protectionism especially when it's practised by developed nations. However due to the war and the transition towards democracy it is clear that Libya is an exceptional case. Therefore they should avoid - as far as possible - awarding any long term contracts until they've elected a transparent and accountable government to award those contracts fairly. They should also introduce a "Buy Libyan" policy that - provided they're up to the job - would see priority given to Libyan companies over foreign competitors.
The issue of what happens to Libya's most famous prisoner - Saif al-Islam Qaddafi - is still outstanding. On April 10th (10/4/12) the NTC unveiled the court in a former military academy in Tripoli in which they intend to try Saif al-Islam once the Zintan Brigade militia surrender him to the NTC's custody. That the trial is to be held in Libya appears to be a condition of the Zintan Brigade handing control of Tripoli's international airport to the NTC. That handover was completed on April 20th (20/4/12) but Saif al-Islam remains a prisoner of the Zintan Brigade. On April 18th the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Luis Moreno-Ocampo visited Libya to discuss the case. He said that the ICC has requested written submissions from the NTC and will consider them before deciding whether or not to give Libya permission to try Saif al-Islam. Two things that are not helping Libya's claim that they are in a position to give Saif al-Islam a fair trial is that the judicial authority (the NTC) have yet to take custody of the prisoner some five months after his arrest. Also the NTC say they expect to reach a final verdict in the case before the June 19th (19/6/12) election which is some seven weeks away. To put that in perspective the much simpler trial of Anders Behring Breivik in Norway is expected to last for ten weeks. The fact the NTC seem to think they can reach a verdict in such a short time suggests that they've already decided what that verdict is going to be meaning that it most certainly won't be a fair trial.
Since my last post on the subject there has thankfully been very little violence in Libya. On April 10th (10/4/12) a home made bomb was thrown at a convoy of United Nations Support Mission In Libya (UNSMIL) vehicles but no injuries were reported. Kidnappings continue in the east of the country close the border with Tunisia. These include two Tunisians who were kidnapped inside Tunisia on April 8th (8/4/12) and the kidnapping of the head of the Darj town council on April 21st (21/4/12). That kidnapping is believed to have been carried out by the Zintan Brigade militia in retaliation for Darj's desire to be included in the Ghadames electoral district rather then the Zintan electoral district.
The Zintan Brigade's unconventional approach to political debate aside the rest of Libya has been preparing for June's election. On April 24th (24/4/12) the National Transitional Council (NTC) announced that it's meetings will be open to to the press and public bringing it in line with Parliaments and Senates in democratic, first world nations. The Higher National Electoral Commission (HNEC) is in the process of drawing up a national register of voters. Due to differences in methodologies the HNEC will disregarded local lists and start again from scratch meaning that everyone will have to re-register to vote using only the family book as proof of identity. Also the HNEC will not be allowing Libyans living abroad to take part in the June 19th (19/6/12) vote. This is simply because it will take far too long to register all the Libyan exiles and their children and provide them with ballot papers and polling stations in their country of residence. The HNEC has also announced that political parties who receive foreign funding or represent a regional, tribal or religious ideology will be banned from taking part. Although the bar on foreign funding is perfectly reasonable and in line with most democratic nations the ban on regional, tribal or religious ideology is likely to be controversial. It could prevent the Muslim Brotherhood linked Justice and Construction Party from taking part and will definitely prevent the National Federal Bloc (NFB) who want autonomy for the Cyrenaica region. Depending on how much support the NFB have this could lead to a boycott of the election fuelling accusations that the elected government does not represent the east of the country increasing calls for regional autonomy.
Apart from election preparations the other big aspect of Libyan life is post-war reconstruction. Between April 17th (17/4/12) and April 19th (19/4/12) British Lord Trefgarne led a trade delegation of British construction, engineering and telecommunications companies under the banner of the Libyan British Business Council (LBBC) and on May 20th (20/5/12) Tripoli will host the Libya Building and Construction Conference which is expected to host trade delegations from across the globe. This level of international involvement has led to various Libyan groups including the Architectural Company for Aluminium And Glass Works (ACAGW) complaining that all the business is going to foreign companies which operate illegally and pay bribes and this is causing unemployment. Normally I'm opposed to this sort of protectionism especially when it's practised by developed nations. However due to the war and the transition towards democracy it is clear that Libya is an exceptional case. Therefore they should avoid - as far as possible - awarding any long term contracts until they've elected a transparent and accountable government to award those contracts fairly. They should also introduce a "Buy Libyan" policy that - provided they're up to the job - would see priority given to Libyan companies over foreign competitors.
The issue of what happens to Libya's most famous prisoner - Saif al-Islam Qaddafi - is still outstanding. On April 10th (10/4/12) the NTC unveiled the court in a former military academy in Tripoli in which they intend to try Saif al-Islam once the Zintan Brigade militia surrender him to the NTC's custody. That the trial is to be held in Libya appears to be a condition of the Zintan Brigade handing control of Tripoli's international airport to the NTC. That handover was completed on April 20th (20/4/12) but Saif al-Islam remains a prisoner of the Zintan Brigade. On April 18th the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Luis Moreno-Ocampo visited Libya to discuss the case. He said that the ICC has requested written submissions from the NTC and will consider them before deciding whether or not to give Libya permission to try Saif al-Islam. Two things that are not helping Libya's claim that they are in a position to give Saif al-Islam a fair trial is that the judicial authority (the NTC) have yet to take custody of the prisoner some five months after his arrest. Also the NTC say they expect to reach a final verdict in the case before the June 19th (19/6/12) election which is some seven weeks away. To put that in perspective the much simpler trial of Anders Behring Breivik in Norway is expected to last for ten weeks. The fact the NTC seem to think they can reach a verdict in such a short time suggests that they've already decided what that verdict is going to be meaning that it most certainly won't be a fair trial.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 14, Week 4, Day 4.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 13, Week3, Day 2." on 4/4/12.
The good news is that I'm developing new sources of information about what's happening in Libya. So Internet connection permitting I should soon be getting back to my usual level of coverage. This can't happen a moment too soon because it has been a particularly bloody period in the country.
The worst of the recent violence has occurred around the town of Sebha in the south-west of the country. You may remember that along with Bani Walid and Sirte Sebha was one of the areas where pro-Qaddafi forces held out long after the fall of Tripoli. Then in September 2011 the National Transitional Council (NTC) delivered a large amount of cash to the town and the elders of the Awlad Abu Seif tribe who make up the majority of Sebha's population decided to switch sides.
Last Sunday (25/3/12) a member of the Abu Seif tribe tried selling a car to a member of the Toubou tribe which fought against Qaddafi because he treated them particularly badly. Then according to who you talk to either the buyer tried stealing the car or the seller tried stealing the money. Either way the Toubou buyer ended up shooting and killing the Abu Seif seller. This simple murder fed into the growing tensions between the two tribes and acted as a flash-point for fierce inter-tribal fighting. With heavy weapons like mortars and Grad rockets involved at the end of the first day 20 people lay dead with 30 more wounded. The fighting continued until Wednesday (28/3/12) when with 50 people killed and 60 wounded NTC forces turned up to contain the violence and negotiate a ceasefire. During these negotiations Abu Seif accused the Toubou of blowing up Libyan air-force jets while on the ground and the Toubou threatened to follow the Cyrenacia region's example and declare autonomy for the Fezzan region. A ceasefire was negotiated though and lasted for a full five minutes before the fighting re-started and continued until Saturday (31/3/12) when a new ceasefire came into force. With some 147 people killed and a further 395 wounded that ceasefire appears to be holding for now.
There have also been reports of heavy inter-tribal fighting in the Zuwarah area. However I am not in a position to speculate what is causing that fighting or how many people have been wounded or killed.
Over the past week there has also been an incident in Britain which possibly reflects what's been going on Libya and has certainly been discussed in that country. Last Thursday (29/3/12) infamous British politician George Galloway was returned to the House of Commons after winning a shock victory in a by-election in Bradford-west, an area with a high Muslim population. Personally I think that George Galloway is the worst sort of self-serving political opportunist. However since Britain's first war against Iraq in 1990 he has carved out an identity for himself as a leading anti-war spokesman and opponent of western imperialism in the middle-east. Following Britain's second war with Iraq in 2003 Galloway was kicked out of the Labour Party for calling on British troops to desert rather then fight. He went on to form his own Respect Party and two of his four wives have been Muslims from Palestine and Lebanon respectively which has further ingratiated him with Muslim voters.
Obviously it's not my place to tell the 32,000 people of Bradford-west why they voted the way they did. Nor can you extrapolate their views to the 2.1 billion Muslims worldwide. However there is a feeling in Britain that Galloway's re-election indicates that there is not as much support on the so-called "Arab Street" for the interventions in Libya and Syria as there is in western Parliaments and Saudi Palaces.
The good news is that I'm developing new sources of information about what's happening in Libya. So Internet connection permitting I should soon be getting back to my usual level of coverage. This can't happen a moment too soon because it has been a particularly bloody period in the country.
The worst of the recent violence has occurred around the town of Sebha in the south-west of the country. You may remember that along with Bani Walid and Sirte Sebha was one of the areas where pro-Qaddafi forces held out long after the fall of Tripoli. Then in September 2011 the National Transitional Council (NTC) delivered a large amount of cash to the town and the elders of the Awlad Abu Seif tribe who make up the majority of Sebha's population decided to switch sides.
Last Sunday (25/3/12) a member of the Abu Seif tribe tried selling a car to a member of the Toubou tribe which fought against Qaddafi because he treated them particularly badly. Then according to who you talk to either the buyer tried stealing the car or the seller tried stealing the money. Either way the Toubou buyer ended up shooting and killing the Abu Seif seller. This simple murder fed into the growing tensions between the two tribes and acted as a flash-point for fierce inter-tribal fighting. With heavy weapons like mortars and Grad rockets involved at the end of the first day 20 people lay dead with 30 more wounded. The fighting continued until Wednesday (28/3/12) when with 50 people killed and 60 wounded NTC forces turned up to contain the violence and negotiate a ceasefire. During these negotiations Abu Seif accused the Toubou of blowing up Libyan air-force jets while on the ground and the Toubou threatened to follow the Cyrenacia region's example and declare autonomy for the Fezzan region. A ceasefire was negotiated though and lasted for a full five minutes before the fighting re-started and continued until Saturday (31/3/12) when a new ceasefire came into force. With some 147 people killed and a further 395 wounded that ceasefire appears to be holding for now.
There have also been reports of heavy inter-tribal fighting in the Zuwarah area. However I am not in a position to speculate what is causing that fighting or how many people have been wounded or killed.
Over the past week there has also been an incident in Britain which possibly reflects what's been going on Libya and has certainly been discussed in that country. Last Thursday (29/3/12) infamous British politician George Galloway was returned to the House of Commons after winning a shock victory in a by-election in Bradford-west, an area with a high Muslim population. Personally I think that George Galloway is the worst sort of self-serving political opportunist. However since Britain's first war against Iraq in 1990 he has carved out an identity for himself as a leading anti-war spokesman and opponent of western imperialism in the middle-east. Following Britain's second war with Iraq in 2003 Galloway was kicked out of the Labour Party for calling on British troops to desert rather then fight. He went on to form his own Respect Party and two of his four wives have been Muslims from Palestine and Lebanon respectively which has further ingratiated him with Muslim voters.
Obviously it's not my place to tell the 32,000 people of Bradford-west why they voted the way they did. Nor can you extrapolate their views to the 2.1 billion Muslims worldwide. However there is a feeling in Britain that Galloway's re-election indicates that there is not as much support on the so-called "Arab Street" for the interventions in Libya and Syria as there is in western Parliaments and Saudi Palaces.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 14, Week 3, Day 3.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 13, Week 2, Day 1." on 27/3/12.
Due to repeated Internet outages I have absolutely no idea what's been happening in Libya recently. Not even about how Britain has been putting pressure on the National Transitional Council (NTC) over two British journalists who were arrested by a militia for spying while working for Iranian broadcaster PressTV. Considering that Britain and PressTV despise each other that must have been a very complicated negotiation.
So instead I'm going to talk about recent events in Mali that are undoubtedly a consequence of the foreign intervention in Libya. Throughout his rule Muammer Qaddafi supported liberation movements across Africa paying special attention to the Tuareg cause. The Tuaregs are a nomadic tribe that have inhabited parts of Libya, Algeria, Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso since long before those countries were countries. Since the 1960's the Tuaregs have been fighting for an autonomous homeland mainly in northern Mali and Niger. Qaddafi supported them with money and political assistance as well as granting many Tuareg refugees Libyan citizenship allowing the to live semi-autonomously in southern Libya. When the Libyan uprising began many Tuaregs returned the favour by fighting for Qaddafi. Following the fall of Tripoli the Tuaregs - even the Libyan born ones - became the target of the militia's ethnic purges forcing many of them to flee to Mali with many of them taking Libyan money and weapons with them.
Since January 2012 this influx of battle hardened combat veterans and weapons has fuelled a Tuareg insurgency that has killed hundreds and internally displaced over 200,000 people. The Malian army has not been coping with this insurgency with many of the rank and file blaming the government of President Amadou Toumani Toure for not giving them the resources they need to fight the Tuaregs. So on the night of last Wednesday, March 21st 2012 (21/3/12) a group of soldiers led by Amadou Konare and calling themselves the National Committee for the Establishment of Democracy stormed the Presidential Palace and TV station in the capital Bamako before suspending the constitution, sealing the nations borders and declaring a Coup. Since then chaos has reigned with different army units seemingly doing what they like and widespread rioting and looting amid the power vacuum. The African Union (AU), the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and the United States (US) have all condemned the Coup calling on all troops to return to their barracks and immediately restore both constitutional rule and the democratic government of President Toure. The US has also suspended all military aid to Mali and is reviewing it's supply of humanitarian aid.
In another story that relates to Libya Britain is currently in the grips of what is being called the "Dinner for Donors" scandal. Broken by the Sunday Times newspaper on Sunday (25/3/12) it revealed that people who made large donations to the governing Conservative Party were rewarded with invitations to discuss government policy with the Prime Minister David Cameron and his wife Samantha at their private residence. One of these donors was revealed to be Ian Taylor the boss and major shareholder of a oil brokerage firm called Vitol who donated around USD800,000. Shortly after Mr Taylor's cosy dinner with the Prime Minister Vitol was granted a special licence to break the UN imposed oil embargo and sell Libyan oil on behalf of the rebels during the conflict. That earned Vitol around USD1billion in profit and helped them win the distribution contract for Libyan oil in 2012 which is worth a lot more to the company.
Due to repeated Internet outages I have absolutely no idea what's been happening in Libya recently. Not even about how Britain has been putting pressure on the National Transitional Council (NTC) over two British journalists who were arrested by a militia for spying while working for Iranian broadcaster PressTV. Considering that Britain and PressTV despise each other that must have been a very complicated negotiation.
So instead I'm going to talk about recent events in Mali that are undoubtedly a consequence of the foreign intervention in Libya. Throughout his rule Muammer Qaddafi supported liberation movements across Africa paying special attention to the Tuareg cause. The Tuaregs are a nomadic tribe that have inhabited parts of Libya, Algeria, Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso since long before those countries were countries. Since the 1960's the Tuaregs have been fighting for an autonomous homeland mainly in northern Mali and Niger. Qaddafi supported them with money and political assistance as well as granting many Tuareg refugees Libyan citizenship allowing the to live semi-autonomously in southern Libya. When the Libyan uprising began many Tuaregs returned the favour by fighting for Qaddafi. Following the fall of Tripoli the Tuaregs - even the Libyan born ones - became the target of the militia's ethnic purges forcing many of them to flee to Mali with many of them taking Libyan money and weapons with them.
Since January 2012 this influx of battle hardened combat veterans and weapons has fuelled a Tuareg insurgency that has killed hundreds and internally displaced over 200,000 people. The Malian army has not been coping with this insurgency with many of the rank and file blaming the government of President Amadou Toumani Toure for not giving them the resources they need to fight the Tuaregs. So on the night of last Wednesday, March 21st 2012 (21/3/12) a group of soldiers led by Amadou Konare and calling themselves the National Committee for the Establishment of Democracy stormed the Presidential Palace and TV station in the capital Bamako before suspending the constitution, sealing the nations borders and declaring a Coup. Since then chaos has reigned with different army units seemingly doing what they like and widespread rioting and looting amid the power vacuum. The African Union (AU), the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and the United States (US) have all condemned the Coup calling on all troops to return to their barracks and immediately restore both constitutional rule and the democratic government of President Toure. The US has also suspended all military aid to Mali and is reviewing it's supply of humanitarian aid.
In another story that relates to Libya Britain is currently in the grips of what is being called the "Dinner for Donors" scandal. Broken by the Sunday Times newspaper on Sunday (25/3/12) it revealed that people who made large donations to the governing Conservative Party were rewarded with invitations to discuss government policy with the Prime Minister David Cameron and his wife Samantha at their private residence. One of these donors was revealed to be Ian Taylor the boss and major shareholder of a oil brokerage firm called Vitol who donated around USD800,000. Shortly after Mr Taylor's cosy dinner with the Prime Minister Vitol was granted a special licence to break the UN imposed oil embargo and sell Libyan oil on behalf of the rebels during the conflict. That earned Vitol around USD1billion in profit and helped them win the distribution contract for Libyan oil in 2012 which is worth a lot more to the company.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 14, Week 1, Day 1.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 12, Week 4, Day 1." on 11/3/12.
I have to start by saying that I am still having real trouble getting quality information about the situation in Libya. However it is obvious that the British agents who are still operating in the east of the country are having some success. Apart from putting pressure on the National Transitional Council (NTC) by desecrating British war graves they have also played a significant role in organising the anti-NTC protests that have been taking place in Benghazi pretty much since the fall of the Qaddafi government.
Despite those protests boiling over into violence in late January matters really came to a head last Tuesday (6/3/12) when around 5000 tribal and militia leaders came together in Benghazi, declared themselves to be the Cyrenaican Regional Congress (CRC) and elected the 79 year old Ahmed Zubair al-Sennussi as their leader. As is often the case in Libyan politics what the CRC wants isn't exactly clear and doesn't seem particularly well thought through. However they claim they want to set up some sort of federal form of government that would see the NTC is overall control but Libya's three main regions; Cyrenaica in the east, Fezzan in the south west and Tripolitania in the north west acting as largely independent states. Of course Cyrenaica has lots of oil, Fezzan has some oil and Tripolitania has none at all.
The main problem with the CRC's unilateral action is that Libya is just three months away from it's first elections since well possibly ever. Planning for these elections and the laws that govern them haven't considered a federal model at all and the CRC don't seem to have an concrete suggestions as to how the technical aspects of federalism would work in practice. Therefore I could go so far to suggest that rather then setting up a federal system of government the CRC want to use the issue as a way to promote a boycott of the upcoming elections. They will then set up something closer to the Saudi model which will see the nation divided into private fiefdoms run for the benefit of a variety of Princes. Highlighting his complete lack of understanding of what federalism actually involves al-Senussi is totally wrong in his assertion that the USA and Germany were able to achieve federalism without any problems. The federalisation of Germany following world war two led to the country being divided into East and West Germany for the best part of fifty years and America's attempts at federalism led to the American civil war.
The fact that the CRC's first act was to set up it's own army and the NTC has said that if need be it will use it's army to resist the plan suggests that Libya could be looking at a situation similar to the collapse of Yugoslavia in the 1990's. After almost a decade of war this saw Yugoslavia split into Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo and Macedonia.
Fortunately at least 9000 Libyans are already aware of this staging protests in both Tripoli (5000) and Benghazi (4000) on Friday (9/3/12)
I have to start by saying that I am still having real trouble getting quality information about the situation in Libya. However it is obvious that the British agents who are still operating in the east of the country are having some success. Apart from putting pressure on the National Transitional Council (NTC) by desecrating British war graves they have also played a significant role in organising the anti-NTC protests that have been taking place in Benghazi pretty much since the fall of the Qaddafi government.
Despite those protests boiling over into violence in late January matters really came to a head last Tuesday (6/3/12) when around 5000 tribal and militia leaders came together in Benghazi, declared themselves to be the Cyrenaican Regional Congress (CRC) and elected the 79 year old Ahmed Zubair al-Sennussi as their leader. As is often the case in Libyan politics what the CRC wants isn't exactly clear and doesn't seem particularly well thought through. However they claim they want to set up some sort of federal form of government that would see the NTC is overall control but Libya's three main regions; Cyrenaica in the east, Fezzan in the south west and Tripolitania in the north west acting as largely independent states. Of course Cyrenaica has lots of oil, Fezzan has some oil and Tripolitania has none at all.
The main problem with the CRC's unilateral action is that Libya is just three months away from it's first elections since well possibly ever. Planning for these elections and the laws that govern them haven't considered a federal model at all and the CRC don't seem to have an concrete suggestions as to how the technical aspects of federalism would work in practice. Therefore I could go so far to suggest that rather then setting up a federal system of government the CRC want to use the issue as a way to promote a boycott of the upcoming elections. They will then set up something closer to the Saudi model which will see the nation divided into private fiefdoms run for the benefit of a variety of Princes. Highlighting his complete lack of understanding of what federalism actually involves al-Senussi is totally wrong in his assertion that the USA and Germany were able to achieve federalism without any problems. The federalisation of Germany following world war two led to the country being divided into East and West Germany for the best part of fifty years and America's attempts at federalism led to the American civil war.
The fact that the CRC's first act was to set up it's own army and the NTC has said that if need be it will use it's army to resist the plan suggests that Libya could be looking at a situation similar to the collapse of Yugoslavia in the 1990's. After almost a decade of war this saw Yugoslavia split into Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo and Macedonia.
Fortunately at least 9000 Libyans are already aware of this staging protests in both Tripoli (5000) and Benghazi (4000) on Friday (9/3/12)
Operation Oil Theft: Month 13, Week 4, Day 3.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 12, Week 3, Day 1." on 4/3/12.
With my Internet connection not working last week and my brain not really working this week I have little idea what's been happening in Libya. So instead I'm going to take the opportunity to talk about Syria instead.
Yesterday (3/3/12) the Syrian foreign ministry sent letters to the United Nations Secretary General and the Chair of the United Nations Security Council accusing foreign powers of arming the insurgents and accusing the insurgents of using those weapons to kill civilians in order to make it look as though the Syrian government are carrying out massacres. These accusations are not without basis.
On Friday (2/3/12) Syrian insurgents claimed that the Syrian army attacked a peaceful protest with mortars killing 13 in the Al-Rastan district of Homs. They released this video to support their claims; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bIzvPddKL4&feature=related It shows a protest in a barn/industrial building when suddenly an airborne object with an exhaust trail enters the building in the top left of the screen. People then rush out of the building and the camera pans towards the back of the building where presumably the camera operator saw the object land. You can seen one or possibly two building lying on the ground presumably injured.
Now I'm not a weapons expert but I'm assuming the type of mortar that's alleged to be being used is closer to a M1937 82mm type mortar rather then a much larger M43 160mm mortar. You can see a similar US 81mm being used in Iraq in this video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TS09c0HGYg As you can see when the mortar bomb hits it's target it does so without an exhaust trail and falls almost vertically as nothing but gravity pulls it to the the target. The mortar bomb also generates a lot of smoke and flame as it explodes. By contrast the object in the Syrian video is moving more horizontally with an exhaust trail and doesn't seem to produce any explosion. Therefore the only thing I can think it is is a RPG-7 which can be seen here; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2ZS2PFQ6p4 which fails to detonate either because it's faulty or because the firer failed to pull the priming pin.
The only problem is that the RPG-7 only has an effective range of around 300m and there weren't any Syrian soldiers that close to Al-Rastan at the time of the incident. So either the other residents of Al-Rastan had decided they'd had enough of the insurgents and opened fire on them or the insurgents opened fire on their own protest in order to create an atrocity.
Oh and the one thing I do know about Libya is that today (5/3/12) video has emerged showing British world war two war graves in Benghazi being desecrated. I know this because the story is on the front page of almost every British newspaper. What's happened is quite obvious - British agents in Benghazi have desecrated some war graves in order to pressurises Libya's NTC into dialogue. Since the fall of Qaddafi the NTC have upset the British by trying to run the new Libya for the benefit of the Libyans rather then British oil companies which was not the original plan so they need a jolly good talking too.
With my Internet connection not working last week and my brain not really working this week I have little idea what's been happening in Libya. So instead I'm going to take the opportunity to talk about Syria instead.
Yesterday (3/3/12) the Syrian foreign ministry sent letters to the United Nations Secretary General and the Chair of the United Nations Security Council accusing foreign powers of arming the insurgents and accusing the insurgents of using those weapons to kill civilians in order to make it look as though the Syrian government are carrying out massacres. These accusations are not without basis.
On Friday (2/3/12) Syrian insurgents claimed that the Syrian army attacked a peaceful protest with mortars killing 13 in the Al-Rastan district of Homs. They released this video to support their claims; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bIzvPddKL4&feature=related It shows a protest in a barn/industrial building when suddenly an airborne object with an exhaust trail enters the building in the top left of the screen. People then rush out of the building and the camera pans towards the back of the building where presumably the camera operator saw the object land. You can seen one or possibly two building lying on the ground presumably injured.
Now I'm not a weapons expert but I'm assuming the type of mortar that's alleged to be being used is closer to a M1937 82mm type mortar rather then a much larger M43 160mm mortar. You can see a similar US 81mm being used in Iraq in this video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TS09c0HGYg As you can see when the mortar bomb hits it's target it does so without an exhaust trail and falls almost vertically as nothing but gravity pulls it to the the target. The mortar bomb also generates a lot of smoke and flame as it explodes. By contrast the object in the Syrian video is moving more horizontally with an exhaust trail and doesn't seem to produce any explosion. Therefore the only thing I can think it is is a RPG-7 which can be seen here; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2ZS2PFQ6p4 which fails to detonate either because it's faulty or because the firer failed to pull the priming pin.
The only problem is that the RPG-7 only has an effective range of around 300m and there weren't any Syrian soldiers that close to Al-Rastan at the time of the incident. So either the other residents of Al-Rastan had decided they'd had enough of the insurgents and opened fire on them or the insurgents opened fire on their own protest in order to create an atrocity.
Oh and the one thing I do know about Libya is that today (5/3/12) video has emerged showing British world war two war graves in Benghazi being desecrated. I know this because the story is on the front page of almost every British newspaper. What's happened is quite obvious - British agents in Benghazi have desecrated some war graves in order to pressurises Libya's NTC into dialogue. Since the fall of Qaddafi the NTC have upset the British by trying to run the new Libya for the benefit of the Libyans rather then British oil companies which was not the original plan so they need a jolly good talking too.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 13, Week 2, Day 3.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 12, Week 1, Day 1." on 19/2/12.
It appears that at around 19:50 on 19/2/12 my Internet connection has been restored.
Friday February 17th (17/2/12) marked the first anniversary of the February 17th uprising that eventually led to the overthrow of the Qaddafi government and most of the past week in Libya has been spent celebrating. This anniversary was proceeded with some good news. On Monday the Libyan Higher National Electoral Commission was formally sworn in for the first time. This is the body that will organise and oversee Libya's coming election and the appointment of the body that will write Libya's new constitution. As Mahmoud Jabril pointed out the next day (14/2/12) the Electoral Commission also has a lot of work to do making the Libyan people aware of the election and educating them about how the process works. This is something that people who have grown up in democratic countries take for granted but having never really had the opportunity to vote before the Libyan people will have to learn the equivalent of an entire new political and cultural language. In other good news the National Transitional Council (NTC) appears to be making good on it's pledge to bring all of the militia prisons under the control of the Justice Ministry. Of course the true test will be how the Justice Ministry runs those prisons once they've taken control of them.
Celebrations were tempered somewhat by the Amnesty International report; "Militias Threaten Hopes For New Libya" which was published on Thursday (16/2/12). It paints a picture of hundreds of rival militias that are answerable to no-one engaging in arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and extra-judicial killings, attacks on protesters, revenge attacks on each other and racist attacks of ethnic groups forcing them to become internally and externally displaced (refugees). It went on to argue that unless the culture of impunity in which these armed gangs operate is brought to an end and the militias are integrated into a formal security force Libya faces little chance of enjoying a peaceful and prosperous future. The militias themselves have been quiet this week choosing to celebrate rather the fight each other. There was some inter-tribal violence on Sunday (12/2/12) and Monday (13/2/12) when members of the Zwai tribe clashed with members of the Tobu tribe near the town of Kufra in south east Libya. Fighting started with small arms but quickly progressed to heavy weapons such as anti-aircraft guns leaving six dead and twenty injured. The Tobu tribe claim that the Zwai tribe is being backed by the NTC but this cannot be confirmed and the NTC have not commented on the accusation.
Aisha Qaddafi has been writing letters again. On Thursday February 9th (9/2/12) she wrote to the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Libya asking it to investigate the death of her father - Muammer Qaddafi. She went onto accuse the commission of having a bias against the Qaddafi government which seems like fair comment. The UN commission has yet to respond. On Sunday (12/2/12) NTC chair Mustafa Abdul Jalil announced that Saif al-Islam Qaddafi will be transferred to an NTC prison in Tripoli and put on trial in no more then two months. He may want to re-consider his statement in light of how badly the first trial of Qaddafi supporters went when it was re-convened on February 15th (15/2/12). Having been adjourned on February 7th (7/2/12) to allow lawyers to be instructed it reconvened on the 15th to discover that lawyers had been instructed but the number of defendants had suddenly risen from 41 to 50. The trial was then immediately adjourned for a second time after the Benghazi based February 17th Martyrs Brigade simply refused to bring the prisoners to the court.
It appears that at around 19:50 on 19/2/12 my Internet connection has been restored.
Friday February 17th (17/2/12) marked the first anniversary of the February 17th uprising that eventually led to the overthrow of the Qaddafi government and most of the past week in Libya has been spent celebrating. This anniversary was proceeded with some good news. On Monday the Libyan Higher National Electoral Commission was formally sworn in for the first time. This is the body that will organise and oversee Libya's coming election and the appointment of the body that will write Libya's new constitution. As Mahmoud Jabril pointed out the next day (14/2/12) the Electoral Commission also has a lot of work to do making the Libyan people aware of the election and educating them about how the process works. This is something that people who have grown up in democratic countries take for granted but having never really had the opportunity to vote before the Libyan people will have to learn the equivalent of an entire new political and cultural language. In other good news the National Transitional Council (NTC) appears to be making good on it's pledge to bring all of the militia prisons under the control of the Justice Ministry. Of course the true test will be how the Justice Ministry runs those prisons once they've taken control of them.
Celebrations were tempered somewhat by the Amnesty International report; "Militias Threaten Hopes For New Libya" which was published on Thursday (16/2/12). It paints a picture of hundreds of rival militias that are answerable to no-one engaging in arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and extra-judicial killings, attacks on protesters, revenge attacks on each other and racist attacks of ethnic groups forcing them to become internally and externally displaced (refugees). It went on to argue that unless the culture of impunity in which these armed gangs operate is brought to an end and the militias are integrated into a formal security force Libya faces little chance of enjoying a peaceful and prosperous future. The militias themselves have been quiet this week choosing to celebrate rather the fight each other. There was some inter-tribal violence on Sunday (12/2/12) and Monday (13/2/12) when members of the Zwai tribe clashed with members of the Tobu tribe near the town of Kufra in south east Libya. Fighting started with small arms but quickly progressed to heavy weapons such as anti-aircraft guns leaving six dead and twenty injured. The Tobu tribe claim that the Zwai tribe is being backed by the NTC but this cannot be confirmed and the NTC have not commented on the accusation.
Aisha Qaddafi has been writing letters again. On Thursday February 9th (9/2/12) she wrote to the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Libya asking it to investigate the death of her father - Muammer Qaddafi. She went onto accuse the commission of having a bias against the Qaddafi government which seems like fair comment. The UN commission has yet to respond. On Sunday (12/2/12) NTC chair Mustafa Abdul Jalil announced that Saif al-Islam Qaddafi will be transferred to an NTC prison in Tripoli and put on trial in no more then two months. He may want to re-consider his statement in light of how badly the first trial of Qaddafi supporters went when it was re-convened on February 15th (15/2/12). Having been adjourned on February 7th (7/2/12) to allow lawyers to be instructed it reconvened on the 15th to discover that lawyers had been instructed but the number of defendants had suddenly risen from 41 to 50. The trial was then immediately adjourned for a second time after the Benghazi based February 17th Martyrs Brigade simply refused to bring the prisoners to the court.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 13, Week 1, Day 1.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 11, Week 4, Day." On 10/2/12.
Today's post is actually an update on the past two weeks in Libya. Apparently the people who are pushing for intervention in Syria find discussion of post-intervention Libya embarrassing.
Following January 26th's (26/1/12) criticism by the United Nations (UN), Amnesty International (AI) and Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) over the mis-treatment and torture of prisoners the National Transitional Council (NTC) has begun to make the right noises about trying to improve the situation. On January 29th (29/1/12) they announced that they are beginning the process of bringing all of the militia's prisons under the control of the Ministry of Justice. At a UN organised workshop on human rights on January 31st (31/1/12) the Deputy Prime Minister Mustafa Abu Shagur pledged to investigate allegations of torture. In an effort to hold the NTC to their word on February 2nd (2/2/12) the respected NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW) highlighted the case of Doctor Omar Brebesh - Qaddafi's former Ambassador to France. After being arrested by the Zintan Brigade militia on January 19th (19/2/12) Dr Brebesh was found dead the following day. After performing an autopsy HRW concluded that Dr Brebesh had died following torture and a severe beating. It will be interesting to see if the results of the NTC investigation into the case are the same as the results of the HRW investigation.
As for Libya's most famous prisoner - Saif al-Islam Qaddafi - on January 31st his sister Aisha Qaddafi attempted to file a representation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in which she claimed that her brother was being denied access to a lawyer or the outside world. On February 2nd (2/2/12) the ICC rejected the application on the grounds that proceedings had not yet reached the point where the accused can make representations to the court. The move though does put pressure on the ICC to speed up proceedings so they do get to that point. It's worth noting that Aisha Qaddafi is herself a lawyer. On February 5th (5/2/12) interior minister Fawzy Abdilal told CNN that Saif al-Islam's trial could begin in Libya with in weeks or months. This is only a slightly stronger statement then saying that Saif al-Islam's trial could begin in Libya at some point in the future. Mr Abdilal's comments co-incided with the start of what seems to be a test run for a possible Libyan trial of Saif al-Islam. The NTC have put 41 civilians in front of a military tribunal in Benghazi accused of fighting for Qaddafi, aiding escaped prisoners and forming criminal gangs although the exact details of the offences remain vague at best. On February 7th (7/2/12) the case was adjourned until February 15th (15/2/12) to allow some of the defendants to instruct lawyers, the lawyers that have already been appointed to study the evidence and for the tribunal to consider whether the case should be heard in front of a civilian court instead.
As of today (10/2/12) the question of who controls Bani Walid remains. The townspeople appear to be in control. While they are no longer flying the Qaddafi Green flag and accept the NTC's rule they claim to still be loyal to Qaddafi's memory. Outside of the town the May 28th Brigade militia who the townspeople forced out on January 23rd (23/2/12) are camped out and promising to re-take the town. Bizarrely the stand off is having a wider positive effect with members of Libya's myriad of militias joining together in order to re-take Bani Walid and forming one big militia they are calling the National Guard. This single militia should be easier for the NTC to work with and integrate into Libya's formal security forces. Elsewhere the militias continue to cause problems. On February 1st (1/2/12) the Zintan Brigade and the Misrata Brigade got into a seemingly pointless gun battle in Tripoli over who controls the cities Police Academy building. The several hours of fighting apparently caused no fatalities and control of the Police Academy did not change remaining under the control of the Misrata Brigade. More worryingly on February 7th (7/2/12) members of the Misrata Brigade stormed a refugee camp in the Janzour district of Tripoli that was housing Black Libyans who had fled from the town of Tawergha. The Misrata Brigade killed five in what seems to be the latest round in their never ending mission to purge Black Libyans out of the new Libya.
In response to the militia's violence the NTC Chair Mustafa Abdul Jalil has proposed a regional security conference to tackle the problem of Libya's mass of weapons. These weapons are increasingly starting to turn up in the hands of militants such as Boko Haram in Nigeria and Tuaregs in Niger and Chad. Therefore I hope that this summit goes ahead and is successful in solving this serious problem. However I know it will be an uphill struggle because the people who supplied the weapons in the first place actually want them to go on and destabilise the rest of Africa. Also I wouldn't be too surprised if some of these weapons and the fighters that use them start turning up in Syria via Turkey.
On January 28th (28/2/12) the NTC formally adopted the law governing the election for the nation's Parliament. The law decrees that 70% of the seats must go to members of a listed party and 30% must go to independent candidate but does away with the provision that reserves 10% of seats for women. However in an effort to ensure that Libya's women get at least some say in how the new Libya is run on February 8th (8/2/12) the NTC adopted a law governing the selection of candidates for the committee that will write the nation's new constitution. 20% of those seats will be reserved for women.
Protests against the NTC have continued but without the explosions of violence like the one seen in Benghazi on January 21st (21/2/12). The protests seem to be driven by two main factors. One of which is allegations of a lack of transparency in the NTC which is being used to cover up corruption. This is demonstrated by the scandal that has engulfed an NTC run scheme that sends fighters who were injured in the war to foreign countries for medical treatment. Responding to pressure the NTC suspended the scheme on February 8th (8/2/12) after it emerged that the majority of the people who were benefiting from the scheme doing so because they had friends in the right places rather then because they'd been injured in the war. The main factor though is Libya's current dire financial situation. Despite an estimated income of US$44bn from oil alone the NTC expects to run a budget deficit of US$10bn in 2012. The more pressing problem though is a chronic lack of cash that means government employees are not being paid regularly and banks have been forced to limit cash with-drawls to 2000 Libyan Dinar (LD) per month. In response on February 8th (8/2/12) the UN's World Food Program (WFP) launched a food voucher scheme which hopes to feed 10,000 families in Benghazi. This is the type of scheme that the WFP and other aid agencies have been using in east Africa to tackle the food crisis/famine and involves giving people vouchers that they can exchange at local merchants for food. However in this case the problem seems to be with asset pricing rather then a shortage of food.
Over the past week though Libyan protesters seem to have been more interested in the situation in Syria rather then the situation in Libya. In solidarity with Syrian activists on February 5th (5/2/12) protesters stormed the Syrian Embassy in Tripoli and claim to have been granted ownership of the building by the NTC. Also on February 5th (5/2/12) protesters attacked the Russian Embassy in Tripoli burning flags, throwing rocks and breaking windows. The following day they went and did the same thing to the Chinese Embassy also in Tripoli. This is not the sort of thing that is going to go unnoticed by Russian and Chinese governments keen to do a lot of business in the new Libya. So the Assad government would be well served to remember that Russia and China's patience is not without it's limits.
Today's post is actually an update on the past two weeks in Libya. Apparently the people who are pushing for intervention in Syria find discussion of post-intervention Libya embarrassing.
Following January 26th's (26/1/12) criticism by the United Nations (UN), Amnesty International (AI) and Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) over the mis-treatment and torture of prisoners the National Transitional Council (NTC) has begun to make the right noises about trying to improve the situation. On January 29th (29/1/12) they announced that they are beginning the process of bringing all of the militia's prisons under the control of the Ministry of Justice. At a UN organised workshop on human rights on January 31st (31/1/12) the Deputy Prime Minister Mustafa Abu Shagur pledged to investigate allegations of torture. In an effort to hold the NTC to their word on February 2nd (2/2/12) the respected NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW) highlighted the case of Doctor Omar Brebesh - Qaddafi's former Ambassador to France. After being arrested by the Zintan Brigade militia on January 19th (19/2/12) Dr Brebesh was found dead the following day. After performing an autopsy HRW concluded that Dr Brebesh had died following torture and a severe beating. It will be interesting to see if the results of the NTC investigation into the case are the same as the results of the HRW investigation.
As for Libya's most famous prisoner - Saif al-Islam Qaddafi - on January 31st his sister Aisha Qaddafi attempted to file a representation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in which she claimed that her brother was being denied access to a lawyer or the outside world. On February 2nd (2/2/12) the ICC rejected the application on the grounds that proceedings had not yet reached the point where the accused can make representations to the court. The move though does put pressure on the ICC to speed up proceedings so they do get to that point. It's worth noting that Aisha Qaddafi is herself a lawyer. On February 5th (5/2/12) interior minister Fawzy Abdilal told CNN that Saif al-Islam's trial could begin in Libya with in weeks or months. This is only a slightly stronger statement then saying that Saif al-Islam's trial could begin in Libya at some point in the future. Mr Abdilal's comments co-incided with the start of what seems to be a test run for a possible Libyan trial of Saif al-Islam. The NTC have put 41 civilians in front of a military tribunal in Benghazi accused of fighting for Qaddafi, aiding escaped prisoners and forming criminal gangs although the exact details of the offences remain vague at best. On February 7th (7/2/12) the case was adjourned until February 15th (15/2/12) to allow some of the defendants to instruct lawyers, the lawyers that have already been appointed to study the evidence and for the tribunal to consider whether the case should be heard in front of a civilian court instead.
As of today (10/2/12) the question of who controls Bani Walid remains. The townspeople appear to be in control. While they are no longer flying the Qaddafi Green flag and accept the NTC's rule they claim to still be loyal to Qaddafi's memory. Outside of the town the May 28th Brigade militia who the townspeople forced out on January 23rd (23/2/12) are camped out and promising to re-take the town. Bizarrely the stand off is having a wider positive effect with members of Libya's myriad of militias joining together in order to re-take Bani Walid and forming one big militia they are calling the National Guard. This single militia should be easier for the NTC to work with and integrate into Libya's formal security forces. Elsewhere the militias continue to cause problems. On February 1st (1/2/12) the Zintan Brigade and the Misrata Brigade got into a seemingly pointless gun battle in Tripoli over who controls the cities Police Academy building. The several hours of fighting apparently caused no fatalities and control of the Police Academy did not change remaining under the control of the Misrata Brigade. More worryingly on February 7th (7/2/12) members of the Misrata Brigade stormed a refugee camp in the Janzour district of Tripoli that was housing Black Libyans who had fled from the town of Tawergha. The Misrata Brigade killed five in what seems to be the latest round in their never ending mission to purge Black Libyans out of the new Libya.
In response to the militia's violence the NTC Chair Mustafa Abdul Jalil has proposed a regional security conference to tackle the problem of Libya's mass of weapons. These weapons are increasingly starting to turn up in the hands of militants such as Boko Haram in Nigeria and Tuaregs in Niger and Chad. Therefore I hope that this summit goes ahead and is successful in solving this serious problem. However I know it will be an uphill struggle because the people who supplied the weapons in the first place actually want them to go on and destabilise the rest of Africa. Also I wouldn't be too surprised if some of these weapons and the fighters that use them start turning up in Syria via Turkey.
On January 28th (28/2/12) the NTC formally adopted the law governing the election for the nation's Parliament. The law decrees that 70% of the seats must go to members of a listed party and 30% must go to independent candidate but does away with the provision that reserves 10% of seats for women. However in an effort to ensure that Libya's women get at least some say in how the new Libya is run on February 8th (8/2/12) the NTC adopted a law governing the selection of candidates for the committee that will write the nation's new constitution. 20% of those seats will be reserved for women.
Protests against the NTC have continued but without the explosions of violence like the one seen in Benghazi on January 21st (21/2/12). The protests seem to be driven by two main factors. One of which is allegations of a lack of transparency in the NTC which is being used to cover up corruption. This is demonstrated by the scandal that has engulfed an NTC run scheme that sends fighters who were injured in the war to foreign countries for medical treatment. Responding to pressure the NTC suspended the scheme on February 8th (8/2/12) after it emerged that the majority of the people who were benefiting from the scheme doing so because they had friends in the right places rather then because they'd been injured in the war. The main factor though is Libya's current dire financial situation. Despite an estimated income of US$44bn from oil alone the NTC expects to run a budget deficit of US$10bn in 2012. The more pressing problem though is a chronic lack of cash that means government employees are not being paid regularly and banks have been forced to limit cash with-drawls to 2000 Libyan Dinar (LD) per month. In response on February 8th (8/2/12) the UN's World Food Program (WFP) launched a food voucher scheme which hopes to feed 10,000 families in Benghazi. This is the type of scheme that the WFP and other aid agencies have been using in east Africa to tackle the food crisis/famine and involves giving people vouchers that they can exchange at local merchants for food. However in this case the problem seems to be with asset pricing rather then a shortage of food.
Over the past week though Libyan protesters seem to have been more interested in the situation in Syria rather then the situation in Libya. In solidarity with Syrian activists on February 5th (5/2/12) protesters stormed the Syrian Embassy in Tripoli and claim to have been granted ownership of the building by the NTC. Also on February 5th (5/2/12) protesters attacked the Russian Embassy in Tripoli burning flags, throwing rocks and breaking windows. The following day they went and did the same thing to the Chinese Embassy also in Tripoli. This is not the sort of thing that is going to go unnoticed by Russian and Chinese governments keen to do a lot of business in the new Libya. So the Assad government would be well served to remember that Russia and China's patience is not without it's limits.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 12, Week 3, Day 3.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 11, Week 2, Day 1." on 27/1/12.
This week a lot of things have happened in Libya. Few of them have been good.
For several months there have been protests against the National Transitional Council (NTC) due to it's perceived lack of transparency and a perceived bias towards western Libya. The heart of these protests has been the Ghar Yunis university in Benghazi. Last Friday (20/1/12) the deputy chair of the NTC Abdelhafiz Ghoga addressed students there to answer accusations that because he switched allegiance from the Qaddafi government to the NTC at the last minute he is nothing more then a self serving political opportunist. His answers clearly didn't go down well with the protesters who physically attacked him forcing him to flee. The following day (21/1/12) a much larger group of protesters from a wider range of backgrounds gathered outside the NTC's HQ in Benghazi and proceeded to attack the building with petrol bombs, grenades and high explosives succeeding in setting fire to the building while the chair of the NTC Abdul Jalil was inside. All further NTC meetings in the east of Libya have been forced to be held in secret. The NTC responded to the violence by suspending all delegates representing Benghazi in a move that is only likely to fuel further accusations of bias. Abdelhafiz Ghoga immediately resigned from the NTC in what appears to be a cynical attempt to boost his popularity in the east which will do nothing to dispel allegations that he is a political opportunist.
Another issue that has fuelled anger towards the NTC is the two week consultation period on the new election law that ended on Friday (20/1/12). In response to the consultation the NTC has rather sensibly dropped a Qaddafi era ban on dual nationals running for political office that excluded most of the talented Libyan diaspora and now intends to divide the country into electoral districts rather then having all candidates compete nationally. More worryingly they also dropped a ban on NTC members standing for election. This creates the risk that rather then doing their job properly NTC members will now abuse their positions in order to make sure they get elected. Most worrying of all though is that the NTC have dropped a quota reserving 10% of seats for women. Normally I'm not a fan of this sort of affirmative action because it often ends up with the minority it's supposed to protect becoming more marginalised as their credibility is reduced. Israel's quota for Palestinians and Iran's quota for Jews being prime examples. However Libyan society has historically been dominated by tribal culture and Islam neither of which place a particularly high value on women's rights. Therefore without a quota there is a very real risk that no female candidate will get elected meaning that women will have no say in the new Libya. The threat from militant Islam was demonstrated on Friday (20/1/12) when hundreds gathered in Tripoli calling for the adoption of a very strict interpretation of Sharia law. This follows and incident in Tripoli on Wednesday (18/1/12) when a militia took it upon themselves to arrest a man for drinking alcohol. His family and friends clearly saw things differently, got their guns and tried to free him leading to a gun battle that left at least one dead.
On Monday (23/1/12) members of Qaddafi's Warfalla tribe in Bani Walid rose up and threw the Zintan Brigade militia out of the town in a battle that left at least four dead. There are currently conflicting reports about who now controls the town. You may remember that along with Sirte and Sabha Bani Walid was one of the towns that kept fighting long after the fall of Tripoli. Then one day it suddenly stopped fighting and allowed the rebels in. This could have been because the townspeople suddenly had a change of heart but it is much more likely that the Qaddafi loyalists simply went into hiding in order to use the town as a base for a fightback once the NATO mission ended. This is supported by the fact that Bani Walid is where Saif al-Islam Qaddafi and Qaddafi spokesman Moussa Ibrahim were arrested. However from the way that tribal elders have been negotiating with the NTC following Monday's uprising suggests to me that rather then being the start of a new war it is simply another example of the Warfalla tribe using violence to win a bigger slice of Libya's wealth. That is a very dangerous route for Libya to go down because if it works then everyone will try it and Libya's dreams of freedom, security and democracy will become a distant memory.
On Thursday (26/1/12) the Office of the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) presented a report on the treatment of prisoners in post-Qaddafi Libya. It expressed serious concern that some 8,500 prisoners are being held without charge or trial and are being tortured in 60 detention centres operated by Libya's various rival militias. It corroborated a similar report by Amnesty International (AI) that found there was systematic torture of prisoners by both militias and apparatus of the NTC in detention centres in Tripoli, Gharain and Misrata. The type of torture included beatings with whips, rubber hoses and metal bars along with the administration of electric shocks. In at least three cases AI found that the level of torture was severe enough to kill the victim. Also on Thursday Medecins San Frontieres (MSF) announced that it would no longer be working alongside the Misrata Brigade militia in their detention centres after being repeatedly asked to treat torture victims between torture sessions in order to prolong their torture.
As for Libya's most famous prisoner on Monday (23/1/12) the Libyan Justice Minister Kablifa Ashour announced that the International Criminal Court (ICC) had given Libya permission to try Saif al-Islam Qaddafi on their own. He was immediately contradicted by the ICC who said that no decision had been made. The ICC went on to confirm that the NTC had provided them with information about Saif al-Islam's detention by the agreed deadline of 23/1/12. However the ICC refused to release any details so it is unclear if the NTC has been able to confirm who exactly is holding Saif al-Islam prisoner, that he is being humanely treated and is being given access to a legal defence. At this point I have to say that although I understand that there are strong emotional reasons I can think of no practical reason why anyone in Libya would want to try Saif al-Islam themselves. From a Libyan perspective the best case scenario is that Saif al-Islam is executed after a swift and unfair show trial. This will undoubtedly anger Qaddafi supporters and further increasing the already very high internal tensions within the country. It will also totally destroy the international reputation of the NTC and the new Libya. An even worse scenario is that Saif al-Islam is given a fair trial in which he is allowed to run a defence that he only did what he did in order to prevent the revolutionaries committing worse crimes. In light of the OHCHR, AI and MSF reports this is looking like a very plausible defence and could result in Saif al-Islam being acquitted. Even if he is found guilty merely holding a trial of this type will not only anger Qaddafi supporters but will pit revolutionary against revolutionary massively increasing the chances that the new Libya will descend into a Congolese style hell hole.
In fact one of the reasons why the ICC was set up was that once a newly freed nation had got rid of their dictator the ICC would pick up the load of bringing them to justice leaving the nation free to fix the damage the dictator left behind.
This week a lot of things have happened in Libya. Few of them have been good.
For several months there have been protests against the National Transitional Council (NTC) due to it's perceived lack of transparency and a perceived bias towards western Libya. The heart of these protests has been the Ghar Yunis university in Benghazi. Last Friday (20/1/12) the deputy chair of the NTC Abdelhafiz Ghoga addressed students there to answer accusations that because he switched allegiance from the Qaddafi government to the NTC at the last minute he is nothing more then a self serving political opportunist. His answers clearly didn't go down well with the protesters who physically attacked him forcing him to flee. The following day (21/1/12) a much larger group of protesters from a wider range of backgrounds gathered outside the NTC's HQ in Benghazi and proceeded to attack the building with petrol bombs, grenades and high explosives succeeding in setting fire to the building while the chair of the NTC Abdul Jalil was inside. All further NTC meetings in the east of Libya have been forced to be held in secret. The NTC responded to the violence by suspending all delegates representing Benghazi in a move that is only likely to fuel further accusations of bias. Abdelhafiz Ghoga immediately resigned from the NTC in what appears to be a cynical attempt to boost his popularity in the east which will do nothing to dispel allegations that he is a political opportunist.
Another issue that has fuelled anger towards the NTC is the two week consultation period on the new election law that ended on Friday (20/1/12). In response to the consultation the NTC has rather sensibly dropped a Qaddafi era ban on dual nationals running for political office that excluded most of the talented Libyan diaspora and now intends to divide the country into electoral districts rather then having all candidates compete nationally. More worryingly they also dropped a ban on NTC members standing for election. This creates the risk that rather then doing their job properly NTC members will now abuse their positions in order to make sure they get elected. Most worrying of all though is that the NTC have dropped a quota reserving 10% of seats for women. Normally I'm not a fan of this sort of affirmative action because it often ends up with the minority it's supposed to protect becoming more marginalised as their credibility is reduced. Israel's quota for Palestinians and Iran's quota for Jews being prime examples. However Libyan society has historically been dominated by tribal culture and Islam neither of which place a particularly high value on women's rights. Therefore without a quota there is a very real risk that no female candidate will get elected meaning that women will have no say in the new Libya. The threat from militant Islam was demonstrated on Friday (20/1/12) when hundreds gathered in Tripoli calling for the adoption of a very strict interpretation of Sharia law. This follows and incident in Tripoli on Wednesday (18/1/12) when a militia took it upon themselves to arrest a man for drinking alcohol. His family and friends clearly saw things differently, got their guns and tried to free him leading to a gun battle that left at least one dead.
On Monday (23/1/12) members of Qaddafi's Warfalla tribe in Bani Walid rose up and threw the Zintan Brigade militia out of the town in a battle that left at least four dead. There are currently conflicting reports about who now controls the town. You may remember that along with Sirte and Sabha Bani Walid was one of the towns that kept fighting long after the fall of Tripoli. Then one day it suddenly stopped fighting and allowed the rebels in. This could have been because the townspeople suddenly had a change of heart but it is much more likely that the Qaddafi loyalists simply went into hiding in order to use the town as a base for a fightback once the NATO mission ended. This is supported by the fact that Bani Walid is where Saif al-Islam Qaddafi and Qaddafi spokesman Moussa Ibrahim were arrested. However from the way that tribal elders have been negotiating with the NTC following Monday's uprising suggests to me that rather then being the start of a new war it is simply another example of the Warfalla tribe using violence to win a bigger slice of Libya's wealth. That is a very dangerous route for Libya to go down because if it works then everyone will try it and Libya's dreams of freedom, security and democracy will become a distant memory.
On Thursday (26/1/12) the Office of the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) presented a report on the treatment of prisoners in post-Qaddafi Libya. It expressed serious concern that some 8,500 prisoners are being held without charge or trial and are being tortured in 60 detention centres operated by Libya's various rival militias. It corroborated a similar report by Amnesty International (AI) that found there was systematic torture of prisoners by both militias and apparatus of the NTC in detention centres in Tripoli, Gharain and Misrata. The type of torture included beatings with whips, rubber hoses and metal bars along with the administration of electric shocks. In at least three cases AI found that the level of torture was severe enough to kill the victim. Also on Thursday Medecins San Frontieres (MSF) announced that it would no longer be working alongside the Misrata Brigade militia in their detention centres after being repeatedly asked to treat torture victims between torture sessions in order to prolong their torture.
As for Libya's most famous prisoner on Monday (23/1/12) the Libyan Justice Minister Kablifa Ashour announced that the International Criminal Court (ICC) had given Libya permission to try Saif al-Islam Qaddafi on their own. He was immediately contradicted by the ICC who said that no decision had been made. The ICC went on to confirm that the NTC had provided them with information about Saif al-Islam's detention by the agreed deadline of 23/1/12. However the ICC refused to release any details so it is unclear if the NTC has been able to confirm who exactly is holding Saif al-Islam prisoner, that he is being humanely treated and is being given access to a legal defence. At this point I have to say that although I understand that there are strong emotional reasons I can think of no practical reason why anyone in Libya would want to try Saif al-Islam themselves. From a Libyan perspective the best case scenario is that Saif al-Islam is executed after a swift and unfair show trial. This will undoubtedly anger Qaddafi supporters and further increasing the already very high internal tensions within the country. It will also totally destroy the international reputation of the NTC and the new Libya. An even worse scenario is that Saif al-Islam is given a fair trial in which he is allowed to run a defence that he only did what he did in order to prevent the revolutionaries committing worse crimes. In light of the OHCHR, AI and MSF reports this is looking like a very plausible defence and could result in Saif al-Islam being acquitted. Even if he is found guilty merely holding a trial of this type will not only anger Qaddafi supporters but will pit revolutionary against revolutionary massively increasing the chances that the new Libya will descend into a Congolese style hell hole.
In fact one of the reasons why the ICC was set up was that once a newly freed nation had got rid of their dictator the ICC would pick up the load of bringing them to justice leaving the nation free to fix the damage the dictator left behind.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 12, Week 2, Day 3.
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 11, Week 1, Day 1." on 2/1/12.
Although the National Transitional Council (NTC) has promised not to award any new oil contracts until Libya elects a government it has promised to honour existing contracts and announced that it has plans to increase capacity. Former NTC member Ali Tarhouni has also indicated that contracts for this extra capacity will be awarded with a preference given to nations that helped overthrow the Qaddafi government. At present Libyan oil production (for February delivery) is back at it's pre-war levels of 400,000 barrels per day (bpd).
This coupled with the immense cost of post-war reconstruction has led many people to predict that Libya will be the world's fastest growing economy in 2012 and could become the Dubai of the Mediterranean by 2017. I'm not sure how Libyans should take that second prediction though because despite it's vast oil wealth Dubai is actually quite shaky economically and keeps needing bailouts from Abu Dhabi. However with a sensible government I can see no reason why Libya can't become one of the richest country's on the Mediterranean providing they remember to award their oil contracts on the basis of getting the best deal rather then rewarding war time allies. Before that though they really need to sort out their internal security problem by disbanding the militias and taking the guns out of circulation.
The NTC is already well aware of that problem and have begun a publicity campaign encouraging ordinary Libyans to hand their weapons back or at least leave them at home and stop shooting them in the air. The NTC has also unveiled a US$8bn fund to re-integrate revolutionary fighters through micro-finance loans to start homes and set up businesses and grants to provide training in trade skills. Both Italy and Turkey have also promised to help the NTC set up and train a Libyan police force. Jordan has also offered to take in revolutionary fighters and train them to be proper soldiers but to me that sounds like a recipe for a disloyal Libyan National Army.
So far these efforts to reign in the militias has only had a limited success. On January 9th (9/1/12) an Algerian provincial governor - Mohamed Laid Khelfi - was kidnapped from inside Algeria near the Libyan border. He was released from captivity unharmed 24 hours later inside Libya. No-one has yet claimed responsibility for the kidnapping but Libyan militias are obviously suspects. For their part the Algerians have blamed Al Qaeda but then they blame everything on Al Qaeda because if they're fighting Al Qaeda the US will give them lots of money. On January 13th (13/1/12) fighters from I believe the Misrata brigade militia and the al-Asabia brigade militia because one group accused the other of being loyal to the Qaddafis or something. The fighting went on through to the following Monday (16/1/12) leaving 4 dead and 50 injured before a NTC brokered deal saw both sides give their prisoners back and the fighting stopped.
The other issue that is casting a long shadow over Libya at the moment is Saif al-Islam Qaddafi who has not been seen or heard from in almost two months. Former NTC member Ali Tarhouni has announced that the International Criminal Court (ICC) is perfectly happy for Libya to try Saif al-Islam on it's own without ICC assistance. However to me this sounds like a disgruntled former employee trying to cause trouble because the ICC seem to be taking a very different position. Firstly they've pointed out that because the ICC warrant pre-dates the NTC's jurisdiction it is actually up to the ICC to give the NTC permission to try Saif al-Islam not the other way round. They have also given the NTC until January 23rd (23/1/12) to demonstrate that Saif al-Islam is alive, well and being treated humanely and is being given access to a lawyer. They also need the NTC to clarify whether he is being held as a prisoner of the NTC or as a prisoner of the Zintan brigade militia.
The NTC didn't help strengthen their argument that they're capable of giving Saif al-Islam a fair trial by welcoming Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir as an honoured guest on January 7th. As al-Bashir is currently subject to an ICC arrest warrant Libya should have arrested him and handed him over to the ICC rather then rolling out the red carpet for him. However in the NTC's defence al-Bashir's indictment by the ICC was a highly politicised decision driven by an expensive Israeli publicity campaign that resulted in Sudan being split in two. Given what's currently going on in Nigeria and the simmering tensions between east and west Libya I would say that al-Bashir is exactly the nasty piece of work the NTC needs to be talking too right now.
Although the National Transitional Council (NTC) has promised not to award any new oil contracts until Libya elects a government it has promised to honour existing contracts and announced that it has plans to increase capacity. Former NTC member Ali Tarhouni has also indicated that contracts for this extra capacity will be awarded with a preference given to nations that helped overthrow the Qaddafi government. At present Libyan oil production (for February delivery) is back at it's pre-war levels of 400,000 barrels per day (bpd).
This coupled with the immense cost of post-war reconstruction has led many people to predict that Libya will be the world's fastest growing economy in 2012 and could become the Dubai of the Mediterranean by 2017. I'm not sure how Libyans should take that second prediction though because despite it's vast oil wealth Dubai is actually quite shaky economically and keeps needing bailouts from Abu Dhabi. However with a sensible government I can see no reason why Libya can't become one of the richest country's on the Mediterranean providing they remember to award their oil contracts on the basis of getting the best deal rather then rewarding war time allies. Before that though they really need to sort out their internal security problem by disbanding the militias and taking the guns out of circulation.
The NTC is already well aware of that problem and have begun a publicity campaign encouraging ordinary Libyans to hand their weapons back or at least leave them at home and stop shooting them in the air. The NTC has also unveiled a US$8bn fund to re-integrate revolutionary fighters through micro-finance loans to start homes and set up businesses and grants to provide training in trade skills. Both Italy and Turkey have also promised to help the NTC set up and train a Libyan police force. Jordan has also offered to take in revolutionary fighters and train them to be proper soldiers but to me that sounds like a recipe for a disloyal Libyan National Army.
So far these efforts to reign in the militias has only had a limited success. On January 9th (9/1/12) an Algerian provincial governor - Mohamed Laid Khelfi - was kidnapped from inside Algeria near the Libyan border. He was released from captivity unharmed 24 hours later inside Libya. No-one has yet claimed responsibility for the kidnapping but Libyan militias are obviously suspects. For their part the Algerians have blamed Al Qaeda but then they blame everything on Al Qaeda because if they're fighting Al Qaeda the US will give them lots of money. On January 13th (13/1/12) fighters from I believe the Misrata brigade militia and the al-Asabia brigade militia because one group accused the other of being loyal to the Qaddafis or something. The fighting went on through to the following Monday (16/1/12) leaving 4 dead and 50 injured before a NTC brokered deal saw both sides give their prisoners back and the fighting stopped.
The other issue that is casting a long shadow over Libya at the moment is Saif al-Islam Qaddafi who has not been seen or heard from in almost two months. Former NTC member Ali Tarhouni has announced that the International Criminal Court (ICC) is perfectly happy for Libya to try Saif al-Islam on it's own without ICC assistance. However to me this sounds like a disgruntled former employee trying to cause trouble because the ICC seem to be taking a very different position. Firstly they've pointed out that because the ICC warrant pre-dates the NTC's jurisdiction it is actually up to the ICC to give the NTC permission to try Saif al-Islam not the other way round. They have also given the NTC until January 23rd (23/1/12) to demonstrate that Saif al-Islam is alive, well and being treated humanely and is being given access to a lawyer. They also need the NTC to clarify whether he is being held as a prisoner of the NTC or as a prisoner of the Zintan brigade militia.
The NTC didn't help strengthen their argument that they're capable of giving Saif al-Islam a fair trial by welcoming Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir as an honoured guest on January 7th. As al-Bashir is currently subject to an ICC arrest warrant Libya should have arrested him and handed him over to the ICC rather then rolling out the red carpet for him. However in the NTC's defence al-Bashir's indictment by the ICC was a highly politicised decision driven by an expensive Israeli publicity campaign that resulted in Sudan being split in two. Given what's currently going on in Nigeria and the simmering tensions between east and west Libya I would say that al-Bashir is exactly the nasty piece of work the NTC needs to be talking too right now.
Operation Oil Theft: Month 11, Week 4 Day 3
Originally titled; "Operation Oil Theft: Month 10, Week 3, Day 1." on 4/1/12.
In Libya the December 20th deadline for militia's to disband or leave the capital Tripoli has come and passed without the militias disbanding or leaving. If anything they're now causing more trouble then ever before. On Saturday (31/12/11) militia fighters crossed into Tunisia and kidnapped four Tunisian border guards. Although three of the guards managed to escape quite quickly and there are reports that the fourth was freed the following day suffering from gunshot wounds this is not the sort of thing that makes for good neighbourly relations between nations. If it continues then it will force the Tunisian government to do something about it. Then on Monday (2/1/12) members of the Tripoli Brigade militia arrested a member of the Misrata Brigade militia in Tripoli on suspicion of theft. On Tuesday (3/1/12) the Misrata Brigade then attacked the Tripoli Brigade in order to free their man provoking a lengthy gun battle that left at least five dead.
Quite apart from the warring militias the security situation in Libya is further threatened by the re-emergence of pro-Qaddafi fighters. On Sunday (1/1/12) the NTC announced that it had captured nine men in possession of high explosives who were said to be attempting to blow up Tripoli's power grid and re-launch the pro-Qaddafi Al Jamahiriya TV station. Although I think the talk of TV stations is actually an attempt to put pressure on neighbouring Egypt to close down another pro-Qaddafi TV station it does seem as though the NTC have foiled a legitimate terrorist attack. However the main worry is that rather then being a genuine attempt to overthrow the NTC the attack was intended as a power play by members of Qaddafi's Warfalla tribe using violence or the threat of violence to increase their political influence.
Despite these challenges that the NTC has succeeded in publishing a 15 page draft law governing the election of the National General Committee for discussion. Although I've been unable to get hold of a copy of the actual document to read from what I gather it takes a very provocative starting position with provisions to exclude some 75% of the Libyan population from the electoral process sowing the seeds for factional divisions and corruption. I also understand that much of the wording governing the formation of political parties and the drawing up of electoral districts is very vague and needs to be both clarified and strengthened.
Also Libya's oil production is up to 305,000 barrels per day (bpd) and is expected to be back up to the pre-war level of 400,000 bpd by the end of the month.
In Libya the December 20th deadline for militia's to disband or leave the capital Tripoli has come and passed without the militias disbanding or leaving. If anything they're now causing more trouble then ever before. On Saturday (31/12/11) militia fighters crossed into Tunisia and kidnapped four Tunisian border guards. Although three of the guards managed to escape quite quickly and there are reports that the fourth was freed the following day suffering from gunshot wounds this is not the sort of thing that makes for good neighbourly relations between nations. If it continues then it will force the Tunisian government to do something about it. Then on Monday (2/1/12) members of the Tripoli Brigade militia arrested a member of the Misrata Brigade militia in Tripoli on suspicion of theft. On Tuesday (3/1/12) the Misrata Brigade then attacked the Tripoli Brigade in order to free their man provoking a lengthy gun battle that left at least five dead.
Quite apart from the warring militias the security situation in Libya is further threatened by the re-emergence of pro-Qaddafi fighters. On Sunday (1/1/12) the NTC announced that it had captured nine men in possession of high explosives who were said to be attempting to blow up Tripoli's power grid and re-launch the pro-Qaddafi Al Jamahiriya TV station. Although I think the talk of TV stations is actually an attempt to put pressure on neighbouring Egypt to close down another pro-Qaddafi TV station it does seem as though the NTC have foiled a legitimate terrorist attack. However the main worry is that rather then being a genuine attempt to overthrow the NTC the attack was intended as a power play by members of Qaddafi's Warfalla tribe using violence or the threat of violence to increase their political influence.
Despite these challenges that the NTC has succeeded in publishing a 15 page draft law governing the election of the National General Committee for discussion. Although I've been unable to get hold of a copy of the actual document to read from what I gather it takes a very provocative starting position with provisions to exclude some 75% of the Libyan population from the electoral process sowing the seeds for factional divisions and corruption. I also understand that much of the wording governing the formation of political parties and the drawing up of electoral districts is very vague and needs to be both clarified and strengthened.
Also Libya's oil production is up to 305,000 barrels per day (bpd) and is expected to be back up to the pre-war level of 400,000 bpd by the end of the month.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)