http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/those-independent-militias/

 Those independent
militias<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/those-independent-militias/>
Filed under: Libya <http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/category/libya/> —
louisproyect @ 12:47 pm
 The Economist <http://www.economist.com/node/21526958> The rebellion’s
leaders
Good intentions, fragile legitimacy
The new Libya is in the hands of a largely self-selected bunch of civilians
and fighters who have done pretty well so far. What comes next is a lot
hazier

Aug 27th 2011 | *Benghazi* | from the print edition

*Those independent militias*

The NTC may be less able to restrain its fighters once the threat from
Colonel Qaddafi is removed. Much of the rebel manpower is grouped into
40-plus privately organised, privately funded militias known as
*katibas*(brigades). Each
*katiba* is usually drawn from one town, commanded by a respected local
military veteran or, in some cases, by the businessman who financed it. They
drive privately owned pickups or jeeps with mounted anti-tank or
anti-aircraft guns, captured from government arsenals or supplied by foreign
benefactors. Members are enthusiastic but usually have only cursory training
and very little sense of military discipline, often commuting to the front
from their homes. *Katiba *leaders say that they meet the NTC’s more
formalised military wing in an operations room to plan battles, but
decisions appear to be arrived at by consensus rather than through any
military chain of command.

Relations between the NTC and the *katibas* were brought to crisis point by
the assassination on July 28th of Abdel Fatah Younis, a defecting general
who became the NTC’s top military commander and may have wanted to bring the
militias under centralised control. The circumstances surrounding the
killing have yet to be explained. NTC judges had issued an arrest warrant
for General Younis on suspicion that he had made unauthorised contact with
Colonel Qaddafi, but the killers themselves are reported to have been rogue
*katiba* fighters with a personal vendetta against the one-time Qaddafi
loyalist.

They may have been members of the Abu Ubeidah Ibn al-Jarrah brigade, said to
be a force of former political prisoners, some of them radical Islamists.
After Younis’s death, the brigade was reportedly dissolved, and the NTC has
turned him into a martyr, standing for proper military discipline. Posters
of the confident, neatly uniformed general smilingly greet motorists on
several of Benghazi’s main streets.

In the aftermath of Younis’s assassination, *katiba* members swear that they
answer to the orders of the NTC. “We all have the same goal. We all want to
end this,” says Muftah Barrati, a senior official at the camp of one of
Benghazi’s largest *katibas*, the 17 February Martyrs Brigade. “When this is
complete, we all will return to our jobs.” He himself was a financial
manager for the computer company of Mustafa Sigizli, a businessman who
helped set up the brigade. Rebels, with no former jobs to return to, may be
given the option of joining a national army.

However, it would be a rare rebel force that did not derive some sense of
entitlement from the sacrifices made during a hard-fought war, and the *
katibas* still brush off requests by NTC officials to place themselves under
the authority of a unified command. Based on the barrages of celebratory
gunfire in Benghazi that erupt nightly to mark weddings, funerals or good
news from the front, *katiba* members enjoy owning automatic weapons and
would be reluctant to give them up.

Council members say that they know they would have more authority were they
an elected body. They have thus opted for a fairly swift transitional
period. The fall of Tripoli, when it is fully established, will set off an
eight-month countdown to provisional elections. Some say this timetable is
too short for a country with no experience of even single-party politics,
let alone of genuine democracy. A group of protesters holding a sit-in
outside NTC headquarters last week said that they suspected senior council
leaders of having cut a deal with a handful of Libyan political groups, such
as the Muslim Brothers and the National Front for the Salvation of Libya, a
long-established exile group. The experienced groups, complained the
protesters, had an unfair advantage in knowing how to campaign and win
votes.
 Comments 
(8)<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/those-independent-militias/#comments>
August 29, 2011
Who really beat
Qaddafi?<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/who-really-beat-qaddafi/>
Filed under: Libya <http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/category/libya/> —
louisproyect @ 11:05 pm

Sat Aug 27, 2011 at 08:30 AM PDT
Who really beat
Qaddafi?<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/27/1010769/-Who-really-beat-Qaddafi>

by Clay Claiborne <http://www.dailykos.com/user/Clay%20Claiborne>

[image: Follow clayclai on Twitter] <http://www.twitter.com/clayclai>
Now that it is clear that the 42 year reign of Mummar Qaddafi has come to an
end and there is little left to do on the military side beyond putting down
a few pockets of pro-Qaddafi resistance, the question of bragging rights to
this victory seems to be coming to the fore in certain western circles.

NATO and it’s allies are looking to increase their influence in Libya so
they can cash-in on post Qaddafi developments. Although they never managed
to get “boots on the ground” during the conflict as NATO would have liked, they
still hope to fulfill that
dream<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/24/1009976/-What-should-those-that-opposed-NATOs-intervention-in-Libya-demand-now?via=history>,
via some *“peace keeping”* or *“stabilization”* mechanism. Regardless of
whether they are successful in that quest, they will be peddling their
influence in a hundred other ways.

In preparation for that, they are now trying to take credit for the victory
over Qaddafi in subtle ways that will allow them to take ownership of it in
the public mind. Typical of the way they do that is the story that has been
circulating in the media in the past few days about a group of British SAS
on the ground in Libya. An example is this one in the
Telegraph<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8721291/Libya-SAS-leads-hunt-for-Gaddafi.html>24
Aug 2011:

*Libya: SAS leads hunt for Gaddafi
*
British special forces are on the ground in Libya helping to spearhead the
hunt for Col Muammar Gaddafi, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.For the first
time, defence sources have confirmed that the SAS has been in Libya for
several weeks, and played a key role in coordinating the fall of Tripoli.

With the majority of the capital now in rebel hands, the SAS soldiers, who
have been dressed in Arab civilian clothing and carrying the same weapons as
the rebels, have been ordered to switch their focus to the search for
Gaddafi, who has been on the run since his fortified headquarters was
captured on Tuesday.

I don’t want to address the question of whether or not this is true. Even if
the SAS were there, they can hardly take credit for this brilliant victory,
a *“key role”* could be anything. That could mean communications and
intelligence and it almost certainly meant supporting the sea assault by
Thuwwar from Misrata, but trying to imply that a handful western special
force Rambo types, who suffered no causalities as far as we know, are the
real authors and heroes of this victory is to take credit were it is not
due.

The campaign that routed Qaddafi’s Tripoli defenses in a few days was
masterful! First there were the coordinated campaigns in the west coming
down from the Nafusah Mountains and from in the east, west of Misrata, then
the convergence on Tripoli via three major roads, from the west, east and
south, together with an amphibious landing of a brigade from Misrata and the
uprising by secret forces already in Tripoli. It was a brilliant victory. It
showed great unity and coordination by freedom fighters from separate parts
of Libya and the leadership of their command staff in spite of the
assassination of their chief of staff, most likely by Qaddafi agents, only
weeks before. It will go down in military history as a classic victory.

The idea that the authors of this were some westerners who just parachuted
in and not the people who lived Qaddafi’s nightmare for 40 years and have
been fighting it for the last 6 months is ridiculous. Those most likely to
believe it are those that have some misconceptions about the supremacy of
western special forces and the inferiority of Arabs.

The Libyans are the ones that have been fighting in these lands since before
the Romans. They know the lay of the land and they knew the rising
capabilities of their people. The only thing they could never be sure of was
NATO, which was MIA for the early parts of the campaigns around both Misrata
and the Nafusah Mountains and bombed the wrong armies too many times. Why do
the British feel the need to resurrect the *“Lawrence of Arabia”* mythology
to try to snatch credit for this win from the revolutionary Libyan people?

full article:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/27/1010769/-Who-really-beat-Qaddafi
 Comments 
(10)<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/who-really-beat-qaddafi/#comments>
 Victim of CIA extraordinary rendition is now commander in
Tripoli<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/abdul-hakim-belhadj-military-leader-in-tripoli-and-victim-of-illegal-american-rendition/>
Filed under: Libya <http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/category/libya/> —
louisproyect @ 6:55 pm
 Abdul Hakim Belhadj: Military Leader in Tripoli and Victim of illegal
American 
Rendition<http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/middle-east/abdul-hakim-belhadj-military-leader-in-tripoli-and-victim-of-illegal-american-rendition>
 Headline <http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/category/headline> International
Affairs <http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/category/international-affairs>
Middle
East <http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/category/middle-east> — 28 August
2011

The military commander who led the revolutionary forces into Tripoli, and
took the iconic *bab al-azizziya *was Abdul Hakim Belhadj (alternatively
spelled AbdelHakim Belhaj). He is now the military leader in Tripoli, who on
the night of liberation drew parallels between the fight in Tripoli and the
conquest of 
Mecca<http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/middle-east/the-conquest-of-tripoli>while
surrounded by several others celebrating around him. He has since held
more formal press conferences where he outlined the objectives of uniting
the military factions in Tripoli under a single command, taking weapons out
of the hands of militias, as well as rejecting the existence of any
extremists within the ranks of the revolutionary army.

Abdul Hakim Belhadj (also known as Abdullah al-Sadiq) was also previously
the leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which fought against
the Gaddafi regime for more than a decade. According to a piece written by
Nawaf al-Qudaimi<http://www.alasr.ws/index.cfm?method=home.con&contentid=11987>,
he had fought in Afghanistan from 1988, but returned to Libya in 1994. After
confrontation with the Gaddafi regime which led to the killing of the then
leader of the group Abdul Rahman al-Hattab, Belhadj managed to leave Libya
and returned to Afghanistan in 1995. Upon his return to Afghanistan he was
with the group of Libyan fighters which refused to join with Osama Bin
Laden’s al-Qaida movement. This group included several other leading figures
from the LIFG, whom subsequently elected Belhadj as the leader of the
movement.

As a result of the 9/11 attacks this group left Afghanistan and dispersed
amongst several countries, with Belhadj ending up in Malaysia where he was
detained and transferred for interrogation* in Thailand by American forces
during a period when numerous other personalities were also similarly
detained and questioned. Once the Americans realised that the group had no
connection to Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda, they were instead rendered to the Libyan
regime of Moammar Gaddafi (rather than Guantanamo) in the same year where
they ended up in the notorious Abu Salim prison in
Tripoli<http://www.amnesty.org.au/news/comments/346>.
This is of no surprise since Western intelligence agencies (of the same
nations now supporting the revolution) praise the information they
received<http://www.hmforces.co.uk/news/articles/6643-from-tripoli-to-surrey---the-long-escape-route-from-gaddafis-regime>from
the Libyan regime regarding Islamic opposition and so were not adverse
to delivering them any Libyans they kidnapped from elsewhere.

In 2008 Saif al-Islam initiated and and convened a set of meetings between
the Libyan regime and its facilitators including Ali al-Salabi (a leading
Islamic scholar in Libya who lent support to the Libyan uprising from the
start) and Noman Benotman (a former member of the LIFG who was reportedly
expelled from the movement in 2002 due to suspicions of his activities
whilst in London and of links with the Libyan
regime<http://www.libya-watanona.com/letters/v2007a/v02apr7j.htm>, and
has since become another in a long line of self-styled analysts of Islamic
movements that apparently embellish accounts of their past experiences to
burnish their credentials)  on the one hand with the leaders of the LIFG on
the other. The meetings resulted in the renouncement of certain ideas which
were published in a book entitled *Corrective Studies on the Doctrine of
Jihad, Hesba, and Rulings* (available online in Arabic) which sought to
dispel amongst other things the notion that the killings of civilians was in
any way Islamically permitted. Given that the group’s leaders had previously
refused to work with al-Qaeda it appears some of the book was written simply
to satisfy the Libyan regimes desire to demonstrate its ability to
rehabilitate 
“terrorists”<http://carnegieendowment.org/2011/03/09/dangerous-fallout-from-libya-s-implosion/6s9>as
part of Saif al-Islam’s charm offensive in the West, and to end the
suffering of its members in jail in exchange.

Belhadj and several other members of the LIFG were subsequently released
from Abu Salim prison in 2010, and at the beginning of the Libyan uprising
he and others from the movement joined the Libyan revolution under the
leadership of the National Transitional Council, and has characterised the
revolution as a popular uprising involving the whole of Libya.

This explains how Belhadj, a victim of the American rendition program, has
ended up as the military commander of Tripoli. While other members of the
NTC hold press conferences in Qatar, or give warmly received speeches at the
Arab league (a collection of representatives from regimes who lack integrity
and which enjoys zero credibility on the Arab, or for that matter, any,
street), Belhadj has been leading those alongside him forward to the
liberation of Tripoli. Though some of the opposition abroad felt betrayed by
the group’s dialogue with the regime which appeared to endorse it, and it
remains to be seen how independent figures such as Belhadj will remain given
the diplomatic and financial pressures that are being borne down upon the
NTC by NATO, it cannot be doubted that they do represent a legitimate voice
from within the society.

At this point it is worth reflecting on how this “terrorist” who was
illegally detained, interrogated and then rendered to the Libyans (and no
doubt subsequently tortured by them) is now considered by some as the hero
of the revolution <http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=1&id=26357> in
the context that this uprising has been military backed and now feted by
both politicians and media which further highlights what was discussed on
these pages recently – that the politics of ‘terrorism’, laws relating to
‘terrorism’ and media coverage on ‘terrorism’ is all based exclusively on
the political agenda and one in which Western interests drive the language
used<http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/middle-east/libya-western-interests-and-the-politics-of-hypocrisy>
.

The reality is that Belhadj is one of the most authentic faces of the Libyan
revolution. His opposition to the Gaddafi regime began more than 20 years
ago, and unlike several of the NTC members who up until and beyond the start
of the uprisings were either members of the regime themselves or living far
away in the West, he has been at the forefront of the struggle both
literally and figuratively. This is not to dismiss the role of others but
rather to emphasis that it will be natural for people to look to those such
as Belhadj as their leadership who sacrificed with them against Gaddafi on
the front lines. When he states that there is no extremism in the ranks of
the revolutionaries – he means those who would sanction the killing of
civilians for political goals (something which America and her NATO allies
would not be able to honestly claim for themselves), and not the British
government definition which labels anyone who believes in the application of
Islamic *Shari’a* law and the establishment of a State to apply them as an
extremist. There is little doubt that according to Western understanding
Belhadj along with many others in Libya and beyond in both Tunisia and Egypt
would be considered extreme, an indictment of the West’s rhetoric and policy
towards Islam and Islamic revival.

This further exposes the simplistic narrative regarding Islam, Islamic
movements, and so-called “Jihadi” movements. The lack of differentiation
between the mostly irredentist groups who sought to overthrow their
governments (almost invariably one form or another of unaccountable
oppressive police states) whether in Egypt, Libya or elsewhere and al-Qaida,
is inaccurate but expected from both the American government and its allies
in the Arab world and beyond. Post 9/11 the rhetoric of the “War (of)
Terror” has been used to justify all manner of abuses against a spectrum of
opposition in order to maintain the status quo which served the US
“strategic interests” in the region. This conflation has gone beyond even
groups which took up arms against the state, to include any Islamic
opposition. Hence support for a roll call of dictators from Karimov,
Mubarak, Abdullah, Hussain and Gaddafi was a given up until the beginning of
this year when events of the ground have forced the hand of the West to try
their best to back the winning horses to maintain some form of control over
the forthcoming changes to the political
setup<http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/middle-east/re-visiting-the-arab-sprin>.
As events develop in Syria and elsewhere, it is questionable how long the
ever sliding grip will be able to maintain its grasp.

* UPDATE – According to a Human Rights Watch
report<http://www.scribd.com/doc/56707491/37/Abdelhakim-Al-Khoweildy>,
he explicitly claims to have been tortured by the CIA themselves in Thailand

*Reza Pankhurst is a regular
contributor<http://www.newcivilisation.com/home/contributors> to
New Civilisation. He has a PhD from the London School of Economics
Government department, and also blogs at rezapankhurst.net.*
 Comments 
(4)<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/abdul-hakim-belhadj-military-leader-in-tripoli-and-victim-of-illegal-american-rendition/#comments>
 Misrata rebels defy “anti-imperialist”
analysis<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/misrata-rebels-defy-anti-imperialist-analysis/>
Filed under: Libya <http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/category/libya/> —
louisproyect @ 2:14 pm
  Misrata rebels defy Libya’s new
regime<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/29/misrata-rebels-defy-libya-regime>

City refuses to accept appointment by National Transitional Council of
former Gaddafi ally as Tripoli security chief

    - Chris Stephen <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/chris-stephen> in
      Misrata
      - guardian.co.uk <http://www.guardian.co.uk/>, Monday 29 August 2011
      09.40 BST

 [image: Misratans protest]

Misratans protest against the National Transition Council decision. The
placard reads: ‘Whoever helped kill Libyans will never lead us, even with
one word.’
Photograph: Irina Kalashnikova

The first cracks in Libya <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/libya>‘s rebel
coalition have opened, with protests erupting in Misrata against the
reported decision of the National Transitional Council (NTC) to appoint a
former Gaddafi henchman as security boss of Tripoli.

Media reports said the NTC prime minister, Mahmoud Jibril, is poised to
appoint Albarrani Shkal, a former army general, as the capital’s head of
security.

Protests erupted in the early hours of the morning in Misrata’s Martyr’s
Square, with about 500 protesters shouting that the “blood of the martyrs”
would be betrayed by the appointment.

Misrata’s ruling council lodged a formal protest with the NTC, saying that
if the appointment were confirmed Misratan rebel units deployed on security
duties in Tripoli would refuse to follow NTC orders.

Misratans blame Shkal for commanding units that battered their way into this
city in the spring, terrorising and murdering civilians.

NTC sources say Shkal, formerly a key confidant of Muammar
Gaddafi<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/muammar-gaddafi>,
turned rebel informer in May, passing valuable information back to the rebel
capital, Benghazi.

But Misratans believe that prior to that, he was operations officer for the
32nd brigade, whose overall commander is Gaddafi’s son Khamis.

The brigade took the leading role in a siege that saw tanks and artillery
bombard residential areas of the city, murdering several hundred civilians.

Shouting above anti-Jabril chanting and volleys of gunfire being fired into
the air, one protester, Mohammed Zubia, said many people were shocked by the
news. He said: “Mr Jabril says he wants to include all people who worked for
Gaddafi but how can we accept that? We need new blood.”

Mr Jabril, whose NTC executive installed itself in Tripoli over the weekend,
says he wants to build an “inclusive” administration. He appears to have the
tacit support of London, with the defence secretary, Liam
Fox<http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/liamfox>,
telling al-Jazeera it was important the NTC avoided excluding members of the
former regime.

London is believed to be keen to avoid a rerun of Iraq, where a
de-Baathification programme saw the ruling administration removed and chaos
follow the US-led invasion in 2003.

But Misratans say allowing Gaddafi regime officials to take key security
jobs is not the answer.

“I can’t see any justication for [it] whatsoever,” said Hassan al-Amin, who
returned to the town after 28 years’ exile spent in the UK. “We have a big
force in Tripoli. They are not going to follow orders from a war criminal.”

The president of Misrata’s council, Sheikh Khalifa Zuwawi, said Misratan
rebel troops controlling many strategic points across Tripoli may refuse to
obey NTC orders.

“I think all the Libyan *thwar* [revolutionary fighters] will not obey his
[Shkal's] orders, not just those from Misrata,” Zuwawi told the Guardian.
“Shkal is with Gaddafi. Not long ago he was using troops to shell people in
Misrata. Mahmoud Jibril cannot do it just by himself: it is against the
people.”

Behind the protests is a wider grudge between Misratans and the NTC, which
many accuse of representing Benghazi rather than Libyans as a whole.
Misrata’s military council continues to refuse to follow orders from NTC
army commanders, and some rebels complain that Misrata’s units and those
from the Nafua mountains, to the west, have not been recognised as having
been the key to the fall of Tripoli.

“We won’t follow his [Shkal's] orders, no,” said Walid Tenasil, a Misratan
fighter returning to garrison duty in Tripoli. “Our message to the NTC is:
just remember the blood. That is it.”

Misrata’s protests pose a potential security problem for the NTC because it
has come to rely on Misratan rebel units holding strategic points in the
capital.
 Comments 
(21)<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/misrata-rebels-defy-anti-imperialist-analysis/#comments>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to