Doctor of Historical Sciences

Institute of Africa, Russian Academy of Sciences

African Union Keywords:, conflict in Libya, Muammar Gaddafi, UN Security Council resolutions-NATO and Libya, military intervention

The tragedy of Libya is reflected in many ways on the pages of our magazine ¹. This article examines, first of all, the attitude of the African countries and their continental organization - the African Union (AU).

The African Union was created at the beginning of the twenty-first century on the basis of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) at the suggestion of the then leader of Libya, Muammar Gaddafi, put forward by him at the OAU summit in Algiers in 1999.

The African Union differs from its predecessor in many aspects, the most important of which are two: more emphasis in its Founding Act on democracy and the protection of human rights, and a higher level of cooperation, especially in the field of defense.

The real test of these innovations took place ten years later during the tragic events in Libya, which began in February 2011, and, unfortunately, we have to admit that the AU did not pass such a test, although it is not only its fault.

The events in Libya began after the "revolutions" in Tunisia and Egypt and coincided with anti-government protests in Yemen, Bahrain and other Arab countries. By that time, the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (as the country was officially called) was a "welfare state": life expectancy exceeded 70 years, literacy rose to 70%, free education and health care were provided, and housing subsidies were issued. The country had no external debt and its human development index was the highest in Africa.

However, all these achievements did not prevent the protests of a part of the population that no longer wanted to put up with the dictatorship of Muammar Gaddafi, which lasted for more than four decades, even if it was presented as "direct democracy". Anti-government protests began on February 15, 2011, following political changes in Tunisia and Egypt, and the regime used force to suppress them, prompting accusations of human rights violations.

The Afro-Union has mechanisms to prevent the spread of conflict and correct the situation. There is a provision in the Founding Act of the AU that allows intervention "by a decision of the Assembly [of Heads of State and Government of the AU] in the event of aggravating circumstances, namely war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity"². And the AU began to act, but too late and too slowly.

Only on March 10, the Peace and Security Council (SMB)

The African Union has appointed a High-level Committee on Libya composed of the Presidents of the Republic of the Congo, Mali, Mauritania, Uganda and South Africa.³ A Union delegation was due to travel to Libya to assess the situation and mediate.

But other forces were much more hasty. On February 26, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1970, which was supported by all its members, including three African countries-Gabon, Nigeria and South Africa. This resolution included a ban on the supply of weapons, a freeze on funds belonging to top Libyan statesmen, a ban on their travel abroad, and even the referral of "the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya since February 15, 2011 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court" (ICC)^.4

The resolution was adopted without an investigation, amid various accusations spread by the so - called "international mass media" - from the alleged use of the Libyan Air Force against peaceful demonstrations to the distribution of viagra to government soldiers to commit violence against opposition supporters.⁵

It is worth recalling that the role of the ICC in Africa causes a lot of complaints. Prominent Ugandan researcher Mahmoud Mamdani wrote: "It is clear that if the ICC had existed then, we would not have had a transition from apartheid in the mid-1990s. South Africa is lucky that this transition was made internally." The same, in his opinion, is true of the pre --

end of the Mozambican Civil War ⁶.

Like the Peace and Security Council, the AU's legal bodies were slow to act, much later than the ICC. It was only on 25 March that the African Court of Human and Peoples ' Rights ordered the Libyan authorities to stop any actions that could cause loss of life or violation of the "physical integrity" of someone, and to report on the measures taken within 15 days. ⁷

* * *

"The war in Libya is based on deception, fabrications, lies," wrote Bangladeshi researcher Rahnuma Ahmed on the website of the Center for Global Studies, led by Canadian Professor Michael Chussodovsky.⁸

One of the first participants in this "war of lies" was none other than William Hague , the British Foreign Secretary (and former Tory leader), who actually supported the version that Gaddafi flew from Tripoli to Venezuela: "As for Colonel Gaddafi, I don't have any information that says he's there, but I do have some information that suggests he's on his way there." And his staff emphasized that W. Hague referred "not to media reports, but to information from other sources"⁹. The hint is clear enough.

Haig was not alone. When the truth about the Libyan tragedy and those responsible for it became available, it became clear that one of those individuals was Navanetem Pillai, a South African lawyer who serves as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. It is a bitter irony that her words about "widespread and systematic attacks against civilians" and her reference to the defector's statement that "Gaddafi started genocide against the Libyan people" ¹⁰ were used by those who wanted to cover up their aggressive actions with the UN flag, which led to a gross violation of human rights, including the right to life itself. Her accusations were not confirmed by the International Commission of Inquiry on Libya set up by the UN Human Rights Council, but it was too late. ¹¹

According to Rahnuma Ahmed, the UN Security Council adopted two resolutions against Libya based on "unproven accusations". "Colonel Gaddafi is killing his own people in Benghazi and other parts of the country. He ordered the killing of 6,000 people. He hired African mercenaries to kill civilians. Jet planes were used to put down the "uprising". These accusations were widespread. " ¹² She referred to Russian satellite data, which showed that "nothing like this has ever happened on earth" and that "there have never been any attacks reported by some media outlets." ¹³

There is also no confirmation of claims that if forces loyal to the government retook Benghazi, mass killings of civilians would follow. In fact, in the cities occupied by them, there were no "serious signs" of this. For example, in the city of Ajabiya, which was again occupied by them and held for a week, no murders or mass graves were found.¹⁴

At the same time, Gaddafi's bellicose statements that he would go "from house to house" to clear the country of "cockroaches" and "rats" were used as evidence of his call to commit crimes against humanity. They were repeated by the media in different countries of the world, but he was not quoted as saying that " people who do not have weapons have no reason to be afraid." Moreover, Gaddafi simultaneously ordered his troops "not to pursue those of the protesters who drop their weapons and flee when the advancing forces reach the city." ¹⁵

* * *

The next phase in the Libyan tragedy began with the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution No. 1973 on March 17, 2011. This resolution authorized " Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting independently or through regional organizations or arrangements and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures... to protect the civilian population and their places of residence under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi," and also decided to "impose a ban on all flights in the airspace" of that country16.

While Brazil, China, India and Russia, as well as Germany abstained, the other 10 members of the UN Security Council voted in favour, including Gabon, Nigeria and South Africa. Their stance contradicted a decision taken by the AU a few days earlier, when its Peace and Security Council reiterated its objections to "any external military intervention [in Libya], no matter where it comes from."¹⁷.

The position taken by South Africa is particularly regrettable: while the "old" four BRICS members abstained from voting (although, in the author's opinion, they should have used a veto), the new member of this group supported it. Moreover, unlike the representatives of the abstaining countries, in particular, Russia and China, African diplomats in the UN Security Council did not express any reservations.

It should be noted, however, that the position of Gabon, Nigeria and South Africa was not supported by everyone in Africa. For example, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni wrote in an article: "The African members of the Security Council voted for the resolution... This was done contrary to the recent decision of the Peace and Security Council in Addis Ababa. Only an emergency summit [of the AU] could have made such a decision. " ¹⁸

The main purpose of this resolution - "regime change" - has been clear since its adoption. Mark Grant, the British representative to the United Nations, opened up the resolution immediately after the vote, saying that "the Libyan regime has lost its legitimacy" and that the resolution should "allow the people of Libya to free themselves from the tyranny of the Gaddafi regime." ¹⁹

Already the first steps of the so-called "coalition" ²⁰, which was soon directly replaced by NATO, went far beyond the creation of a"no-fly zone". Even before the end of the summit, the French Air Force attacked a column of Libyan armored vehicles, which, of course, had nothing to do with such a ban. In the first weeks of the war, the United States played a leading role in the operation, especially its African Command (AFRICOM). Maurice Carney, executive director of the American NGO Friends of the Congo, wrote:: "When AFRICOM was created... We were told that AFRICOM would focus primarily on humanitarian affairs-digging wells, providing training and providing support in disaster areas. But we quickly saw from the beginning of the NATO offensive in Libya that it was led by the African Command."²¹.

The day after the bombing began, Amr Moussa, the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States (LAS), who only a week earlier had called for the creation of a zone, lamented: "What is happening in Libya is different from the goal of establishing a no-fly zone; what we want is to protect civilians, not bomb them"²².

The role of "leader" was assumed by the then President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy. Two days after the adoption of resolution No. 1973, on March 19, he convened a "Summit in support of the Libyan people" in Paris, which was attended by Western leaders, but from Arab countries - only three monarchies and Iraq, as well as Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa. At the same time, the disinformation campaign continued: initially, the media, including the official television of the European Union23, reported on the participation of the AU delegation, although it was not there. Later, the then chairman of the AU Commission, Jean Ping, said that the organization was not consulted before the Paris meeting, ²⁴ meaning that from the very beginning, the fate of an African country was decided without the participation of Africa. Moreover, the AU refused to join the" contact group " established in Paris and ignored the second "summit" in London on March 29-allegedly for "organizational" reasons.²⁵

The hypocrisy of Sarkozy and his colleagues was boundless. Less than four months before the bombing of Libyan territory began, the same leaders who ordered or facilitated it attended the 3rd Africa-EU Summit in Tripoli, where they expressed " gratitude to the Leader of the Revolution and the people of the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for their care and hospitality." and the attention"²⁶ provided by its participants.

The same Sarkozy received the Libyan leader in Paris as a dear guest, and, according to media reports, there is "convincing evidence" that the Libyan authorities decided to provide him with financial assistance in the campaign for the presidential election in 2007,27 and ^Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi did not hesitate to kiss the hand of the "leader's brother" during the conference. CAMP in Sirte, a city that was destroyed a year later by NATO bombing ²⁸.

* * *

Let us now return to the position and actions of Africa. Instead of attending the Paris summit, members of the high-level ad hoc Committee met on the same day in Nouakchott, where Mauritanian President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz said urgent action was needed "so that an African solution to the very serious crisis can be found", which should take into account "our desire to respect the unity and territorial integrity of Libya and the United Arab Emirates." rejection of any kind of foreign military intervention " ²⁹.

However, the participants in the attack on Libya did not want to allow an "African solution". A delegation from this AU Committee was scheduled to arrive in Libya on March 20, with the consent of both the authorities and the rebels. But this trip was disrupted by the "coalition", which did not make an exception even for the plane with representatives of the AU. Although resolution N 1973 referred to "the decision of the African Union Peace and Security Council to send its high-level ad hoc committee to Libya to facilitate dialogue that would lead to the political reforms necessary to reach a peaceful and lasting solution" ^.30

As A. Y. Urnov rightly pointed out in his monograph "Africa and the UN", many observers believe that the "coalition"of the United States and the United Nations is not a "coalition".

It hastened to launch bombardments to prevent the AU delegation from arriving in Libya, fearing that it might interfere with their plans.³¹

While the Committee expressed "its regret" that it was not expected to arrive in Libya on 20 March to meet "with the parties who agreed to deal with it", ³² it refrained from condemning the clearly illegal actions of the "coalition".

The tragedy has already begun, and the phrase "an African solution for African problems", so popular on the continent, has remained on paper, although the AU has tried, but without success, to regain a leading role in the settlement in Libya. In addition to convening several meetings of this Committee, a consultative meeting was held in Addis Ababa on March 25 with the participation of its members, 15 States represented in the SMB, neighboring countries of Libya and other countries in the region, as well as "multilateral and bilateral partners of the AU"³³, including the UN, the EU, the Arab League, the Organization of the Islamic Republic of the conference.

The AU invited the Libyan Government and the so-called Transitional National Council (TNC), formed by the opposition at that time, to discuss a road map that included, inter alia, a cessation of hostilities, the organization of political dialogue, and the implementation of "political reforms necessary to fulfill the aspirations of the Libyan people" ^.34 However, unlike the authorities, However, the opposition refused to negotiate, and the intervention continued.

Another two weeks passed before a delegation consisting of the Presidents of South Africa, the Republic of the Congo, Mauritania and the Foreign Minister of Uganda35 visited Tripoli on April ¹⁰, 2011, and then Benghazi, an opposition stronghold. Gaddafi accepted her settlement proposals, but the rebels rejected them.³⁶

As the intervention continued, the AU's statements became more critical of NATO. The emergency session of the AU Assembly, which met in Addis Ababa on May 25, adopted a special "Decision on the peaceful settlement of the Libyan crisis". It stressed the need for a ceasefire that would lead to a transitional period in a spirit of harmony and participation of all forces, during which the necessary reforms would be carried out, and then elections in which Libyans could "freely choose their leaders"³⁷. At the same time, the AU Assembly demanded "an immediate pause in the fighting and the NATO-led air campaign" [but not a complete end to them!], emphasizing its conviction that its continuation undermines the achievement of "the very purpose for which it was allowed, i.e., the protection of the civilian population" ^.38

The Assembly also expressed " Africa's surprise and disappointment at attempts to marginalize the continent in resolving the Libyan conflict." However, these complaints were not heard by the interventionists. Together with their accomplices, they also sabotaged the AU's intention to immediately deploy its observer mission in Libya, which was supposed to provide an independent assessment of events and facilitate "the subsequent deployment of a larger international mission involving the UN, the Arab League, the AU and other organizations."³⁹

Following this, on June 25, at a meeting with UN representatives, the High-level Committee handed over a letter in which its position was set out in more detail and more harshly. In particular, it was said that "ignoring the AU for three months and continuing to bomb the sacred land of Africa is authoritarian, arrogant and provocative." It has been rightly pointed out that the fighting between Government forces and armed rebels is not genocide. "This is a civil war... It is wrong to characterize every violence as genocide or imminent genocide in order to use it as a pretext to undermine the sovereignty of States... The UN should not take sides in a civil war... If they [the rebels] don't want dialogue, let them fight their war with Gaddafi without NATO bombing..."⁴⁰

However harsh such a statement may have been, in practice it was not significant. Recall that African countries have a mechanism for countering external aggression - a non-aggression and joint Defense Pact. The definition of aggression contained therein includes, inter alia, "the bombing of the territory of a Member State or the use of any weapon against the territory of a Member State", as well as "the blockade of the ports, coast or airspace of a Member State". AU members were required to "provide military assistance in the interests of their joint defense and security in the event of aggression or threats of aggression" and "to counter, individually or collectively, by all available means, aggression or threat of aggression against any Member State" ^.41 However, there is no information on any steps to implement these provisions in practice or at least discussing them during the foreign intervention in Libya.

In this regard, it is worth recalling how, when calling for the creation of the post of Defense Minister of the African Union at its summit in Sirte in 2005, Gaddafi told leaders of other countries that there are "2.4 million Africans on the continent."-

Russian soldiers", on which "$ 15 billion is spent annually". "So why do we need troops from outside Africa?"⁴².

The last potentially important step in the AU's attempts to reach a settlement in Libya was the visit of South African President Jacob Zuma as a member of the High-level Committee at the invitation of Dmitry Medvedev to Sochi in early July 2011, where the NATO-Russia summit was held. It took place immediately after the AU summit in Malabo, the capital of Equatorial Guinea, which confirmed the desire to achieve a political settlement in Libya.⁴³ However, the trilateral meeting between Medvedev, Zuma and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen did not yield any results. The bloc's leadership wanted only one thing - regime change in this country at any cost.

At the same time, the "war of lies" continued and intensified. The NATO command claimed that its targets were purely civilian, although it occasionally admitted "mistakes", especially when the"revolutionaries" themselves were the victims of the bombing. Rasmus-sen did not hesitate to state:"We carried out this operation very carefully, with no confirmed civilian casualties." ⁴⁴ But even Amnesty International, an organization known for its double standards (suffice it to say that it refused to demand the release of Nelson Mandela from prison), was forced to confirm their deaths, although it "documented" only 55 such cases.⁴⁵ But who would believe that only so many civilians were killed as a result of more than 9 thousand "shock" sorties of NATO aviation?⁴⁶ That there were an average of more than 160 such sorties per victim? It is not for nothing that critics began to call this organization "Amnesia International"...

US Congressman Ron Paul (who tried to become, albeit unsuccessfully, a candidate for president of the United States) wrote after the fall of the Libyan regime: "Americans may be tempted to celebrate the victory of the United States and NATO in Libya... But I believe that any enthusiasm for our adventure in Libya is premature. As the number of civilian casualties from NATO bombs increases during a war launched under the pretext of protecting civilians, even the initial argument for intervention is meaningless. We must not forget that there were no massacres in Libya before the NATO strikes. These strikes were presented as a pre-emptive humanitarian intervention. But as soon as NATO planes started bombing, civilians started dying."⁴⁷. It is no coincidence that the NATO leadership refused to investigate the deaths of civilians as a result of the bombing at all.⁴⁸ It is no coincidence that South Africa's Deputy President Khalema Motlanthe raised the question in a speech to Parliament whether the ICC would have the will to "unearth" the links and coordination between the "rebels" and NATO and open a case against those responsible, including NATO commanders (and politicians, I might add) ^.49 The crimes committed by NATO collaborators-murder, torture, prolonged detention without trial-are also obvious. In some cases, they are racist in nature: for example, 30 thousand residents of the city of Tavergi (mostly dark-skinned) were expelled from their homes ⁵⁰.

* * *

Security Council resolution 1973, however inadequate, still contained one important point: it excluded "the possibility of foreign occupying forces in any form being present in any part of Libyan territory"⁵¹. However, the armed intervention in Libya was not limited to air and sea attacks.

After their "victory", the forces that carried out such illegal actions became more outspoken. Although not only rumors, but also evidence of the presence of Qatari special forces in Libya appeared repeatedly and earlier, only on October 26, 2011, after the brutal murder of Gaddafi, the chief of the general staff of this country, Major General Hamad bin Ali al-Atiyah, said publicly: "We were among them, and the number of Qataris on the ground was several hundreds in each region. Training and communication were in Qatari hands... We acted as a link between the rebels and NATO forces. " ⁵² In particular, Qatari special forces participated in the assault on Gaddafi's stronghold in Tripoli - Bab al-Aziziya, among the so-called "defensive weapons" supplied by Qatar were Milan ATGM ⁵³. If we take into account that the number of" rebels "was quite limited, especially initially, this general's words mean that the Qataris" in every region "were the main striking force, except for those whom Western journalists called" Caucasians", i.e. people of European origin. The New York Times acknowledged: "Britain, France and other countries have deployed special forces on the ground in Libya to help train and arm the rebels." ⁵⁴

Undoubtedly, it was the intervention of NATO and its Gulf monarch allies that ensured the success of the"rebels". None other than Hillary Clinton acknowledged responsibility for the murder of Muammar Gaddafi when, trying on the toga of Julius Caesar, she said:: "We came, we saw, he died." ⁵⁵

She did this without knowing that the TV cameras were working. But Senator John McCain, who competed with Barack Obama

In the previous US presidential election, he was deliberately outspoken when, after a trip to Tripoli, he said in an interview that the new Libyan authorities had confirmed to him their desire to "repay" the US for its role in overthrowing Gaddafi: "So far, according to Pentagon and State Department officials, the bill has amounted to about $ 1.2 billion... They want to compensate us and our allies. They will undoubtedly become a very rich country. " ⁵⁶

* * *

But let's go back to Africa again. It seems that the capture of Tripoli by Gaddafi's opponents gave a free hand to those on the continent who had previously only paid lip service to African unity and sovereignty. The unified position of the AU (if it really existed) began to "crack" when several member countries, starting with Nigeria, recognized the NTC in spite of it. By the end of August 2011, there were already 17 such countries, and then recognition by the AU was announced by its Chairman, President of Equatorial Guinea Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo at the UN high-level meeting on Libya, ⁵⁷ which was a clear violation of the fundamental Constituent Act of the African Union, which proclaimed the condemnation and rejection of recognition "unconstitutional change of Government " ⁵⁸. It is hoped that the change of leadership of the AU Commission, the election of Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, an intelligent and determined woman who has held ministerial posts in South Africa for more than 18 years, will give the organization the necessary consistency and firmness to its policy.

* * *

A detailed analysis of the consequences of the war in Libya is beyond the scope of this article. Let's just say that the "democracy" established there is quite peculiar. Since the change of power, there have been attacks on the Prime Minister's office, the seizure of the capital's airport, the tragicomic story of the arrest of an employee of the International Criminal Court by local "atamans" in Zintan, and the real tragedy - the murder of the US ambassador and the destruction of the American consulate in Benghazi.

There is also no doubt that the Libyan tragedy was a heavy blow to the future of the African Union. And it's not just the loss of large funds that regularly came from Tripoli to his budget. More dangerous is the emergence of a sense of helplessness on the continent. As one of the African ambassadors put it to me: "Now, after Libya, no African country is safe."

The damage to African unity was caused both by the media's spread falsehoods about Gaddafi's recruitment of" black mercenaries " (even allegedly from Zimbabwe!), and real stories about the arrests, beatings and even deaths at the hands of "revolutionaries" of black Africans - both migrants from other countries and Libyan citizens.

Moreover, the consequences of the NATO intervention are already being felt outside of Libya. This includes a new armed conflict in Mali and the spread of dangerous weapons such as surface-to-air missiles to other countries.⁵⁹

And one last thing. Half a century ago, when the home powers were moving to grant independence to African countries, Portugal did not do so, being too weak economically to use neo-colonial methods of domination, and almost a decade and a half of brutal repression and wars followed in Angola, Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau.

Historical parallels are often risky, but maybe something similar is happening now. Having become noticeably weaker economically and seeking financial support from "emerging powers" (a rather strange term!), Western states are increasingly resorting to military force to impose their control on others. Undoubtedly, such actions will receive (and are already receiving) a response, most often "asymmetric", and thus pose a threat to stability not only in certain regions, but also on a global scale.

----- ¹ See, for example: Vasiliev A.M. Tsunami of Revolutions (N 3, 2011); his own-Tsunami of revolutions does not subside (N 6, 2011); Fituni L. L. The Middle East: technologies for managing Protest potential (N 12, 2011); Zelenev E. I. Smuta, anarkhia, revolyutsiya: Arab political culture on the way to the future (No. 1, 2012); Fituni L. L., Solodovnikov V. G. Towards the "Arab Winter" (No. 6, 2012); Khodynskaya-Golenishcheva M. S. The reverse side of the operation "United Defender" (No. 8, 2012); Nechitailo DA. Al-Qaeda and the Arab Spring (No. 9, 10.2012).

² African Union. The Constitutive Act - http://www.africa-union.org/root/au/aboutau/constitutive_act_en.htm

³ African Union. Peace and Security Council. 265^th Meeting. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. March 10, 2011. PSC/PR/COMM.2 (CCLXV) Communique - http://au.int/en/dp/ps/content/peace-and-security-council-265th-meeting-addis-ababa-ethiopia -decision-situation-libya

⁴ Resolution No. 1970 (2011), adopted by the UN Security Council at its 6491st meeting on 26 February 2011.

⁵ This absurd accusation was made by L. M. Okambo, the prosecutor of the ICC, who is characterized by the use of double standards. It may be added that the ICC's own media relations representative accused Okambo in 2006 of forcing a South African journalist to have sex with him. Okambo dismissed the man, but the ICC was subsequently forced to pay him compensation.

^{Mamdani M.} 6 Saviours and Survivors: Darfur, Politics and the War on Terror. Malthouse Press Limited. Lagos, Benin, Ibadan, Jos, Port-Harcourt, Zaria. 2010, p. 234.

^{Bowcott O.} 7 and Wolfe-Robinson M. Gaddafi regime ordered to appear before Africa's highest court // Guardian. March 30, 2011 -http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/30/gaddafi-regime-africa-court

^{Ahmed R.} 8 NATO's War in Libya: Protecting to kill, killing to protect // Global Research. October 9, 2011 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26997

^{Waterfield B.} 9 Libya: Colonel Gaddafi 'flees' to Venezuela as cities fall to protesters - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews /africaandindianocean/libya/8339096/Libya-Colonel-Gaddafi-flees-to-Venezuela-as-cities-fall -to-protesters.html

^{Prashad V.} 10 NATO's craven cover-up of its Libyan bombing // Pambazuka News. 21.03.2012 - http://www.pambazuka.org/en/ category/features/80922/print

¹¹ Ibidem.

^{Ahmed R.} 12 Op. cit

¹³ Russian military. "Airstrikes in Libya did not take place" // Russia Today. March 1, 2011. Cit. by: Ahmed R. Op. cit.

^{Stone A.} 14 The White House and the decision for Libyan intervention. A case of mangled information and sloppy analysis -http://www.nolanchart.com/article8509-the-white-house-and-the-decision-for-libyan-interve ntion.html

¹⁵ Ibidem.

¹⁶ African Union. Peace and Security Council. 265^tn Meeting...

¹⁷ Resolution No. 1973 (2011), adopted by the UN Security Council at its 6498th meeting on 17 March 2011.

^{Museveni Y.} 18 The Qaddafi I know // Foreign Policy. Washington. March 24, 2011 - http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/03/24/ thc_qaddafi_I_know?page-0,3

¹⁹ UK Mission to the UN. United Nations Security Council Resolution on Libya No-Fly Zone has been approved http://ukun.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/news/2011/563634482/libya

²⁰ Western powers unsuccessfully tried to create a broader alliance by drawing Arab countries into it, but only two of the "most democratic" countries, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, joined their "coalition". On the other hand, Sweden, a non-NATO member, unexpectedly joined the group. Perhaps this was done not so much for political as for economic reasons - to promote its JAS-39 Gripen aircraft to the arms market, especially since competitors also took part in the intervention. (Other people's wars. Center for Analysis of Strategy and Technology, Moscow, 2012, p. 262.)

^{Maurice Carney.} 21 AFRICOM expands mission in Africa -http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view &id=31 &Itemid-74&jumival-8346

^{Evans D,} 22 Arabs say Gaddafi must go, wary of Western action -http://www.reuters.com/article/20 1 1 /03/20/us-libva-idUSTRE7270JP20110320

²³ Libya Summit - March 2011 - http://tvnewsroom.consilium. europa.eu/event/libya-summit-march-2011/

²⁴ African Union absent from 2nd meeting on Libya as its chief pleads for funds // Sudan Tribune. March 30, 2011 - http://www.sudan tribune.com/African-Union-absent-from-2nd,38430

²⁵ Why Africa is ignored in global affairs // The Citizen. Dar es Salaam. March 31, 2011 - http://thecitizen.co.tz/editorial-analysis/47-colunmists/9542-why-africa-is-ignored-in-global-a ifairs.html

²⁶ Tripoli Declaration - http://europafrica.net/2010/12/01/tripoli-declaration/

^{Chrisafis A.} 27 Nicolas Sarkozy faces renewed claim Gaddafi agreed to fund 2007 campaign // The Guardian. London. April 29, 2012 -http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/29/nicolas-sarkozy-rejects-gaddafi-claim

²⁸ Berlusconi kisses Gaddafi's hand - http://www.youtubc.com/ watch?v=lqgNzwy4PmQ

²⁹ Emerging minds. African Union opposes foreign military intervention in Libya. (March 21, 2011) - http://emergingminds.org/ African-Union-opposes-foreign-military-intervention-in-Libya.html

³⁰ Resolution No. 1973 (2011)...

^Urnov 31 L. Yu. Africa and the UN, Moscow, Institute of Africa, 2011, p. 209.

³² Meeting of the AU High-Level Ad Hoc Committee on Libya. March 19, 2011 - http://allafrica.com/stories/201103200011.html

³³ African Union Consultative Meeting on the Situation in Libya. Addis-Ababa. Ethiopia. March 25, 2011. Communique http://www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/communique_-_Libya _eng [lj_0.pdf

³⁴ Ibidem.

³⁵ Interesting detail: According to the EU Delegation to Uganda, the EU has allocated 265,000 euros to finance the AU Committee's trip to Libya (see: Daily Monitor. Kampala -http://mobile.monitor.co.ug/News/-/691252/1131946/-/format/ xhtml/-/q6hhbiz/-/index.html). Even in such matters, the AU depends on the "goodwill" of so-called donors.

^{Fafim Kareem.} 36 Truce plan for Libya is rejected by Rebels // The New York Times. April 11, 2011 - http://www.nytimes.com/ 2011/04/ 12/world/africa/121ibya.html?_r=0

³⁷ African Union. Extraordinary Session of the Assembly of the Union on the State of Peace and Security in Africa. Addis-Ababa, Ethiopia. May 25, 2011. Decision on the Peaceful Resolution of the Libyan Crisis - http://www.nepad.org/system/filcs/D%C3%A9cision %20sur%201a%20situ.aton%20en%20Libye%20_Eng%20_.pdf

³⁸ Ibidem.

³⁹ Ibid.

⁴⁰ Quoted from: Ahmad A. Libya recolonised: New African bases for AFRICOM-NATO Combine // The Global Research. November 2, 2011 - http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context-va&aid=27425

⁴¹ African Union Non-Aggression Common Defence Pact (2005) -http://www.africa-union.org/root/au/documents/treaties/text/ Non%20Aggression%20Common%20Defence%20Pact.pdf

⁴² Statement of Brother Leader of the Revolution on the occasion of the opening of the Fifth Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union. Sirte, Libya. July 4, 2005 - http://www.africa-union.org/Summit/JULY%202005/Statement%20by%20Brother%20Le ader%20GADAFFI-%205th%20AU%20Assembly%20Sirte%20Libya. htm

⁴³ Zuma recruits Russia to AU's quest for peace in Libya // Mail and Guardian, 5 July 2011 - http://mg.co.za/article/2011 - 07 - 05-zuma-recruits-russia-to-aus-quest-for-peace-in-libya.

^{Chivers C.} 44 and Schmitt E. In strikes on Libya by NATO, an unspoken civilian toll // The New York Times. December 18, 2011 -http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/world/africa/scores-of-unintended-casualties-in-nato-w ar-in-libya.html?_r=l&pagewanted=all

^{Lehmann C.} 45 Amnesty and the NATO cover-up of war crimes in Libya - http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/amnesty-and-the-nato-cover-up-of-war-crimes-in-liby a-updated/

^{Prashad V.} 46 Op. cit.

^{Paul R.} 47 Mission accomplished in Libya? - http://paul.house.gov/ indexj)hp?option-com_content&task=view&id=1906&Itemid-69

⁴⁸ NATO: Investigate civilian deaths in Libya http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/14/nato-investigate-civilian-deaths-libya

^{Kgosana C.} 49 Motlanthe wants NATO probe // Sowetan. August 26, 2011 - http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/world/2011/08/25/ motlanthe-wants-nato-probe

^{Fafm K.} 50 Accused of fighting for Qaddafi. a Libyan town's residents face reprisals // The New York Times. September 23, 2011 -http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/24/world/africa/accused-of-fighting -for-qaddafi-tawerga-residents-face-reprisals.html?page wanted-allhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/24/world/africa/accused -of-fighting-for-qaddafi-tawerga-residents-face-reprisals.html?pagewanted-all

⁵¹ Resolution 1973 (2011)...

^{Black I.} 52 Qatar admits sending hundreds of troops to support Libya rebels /,/ The Guardian. October 26, 2011 - http://www.guardian.co.uk/ world/201 l/oct/26/qatar-troops-libya-rebels-support

⁵³ Ibidem.

^{Schmitt E.} 54 and Meyers S. Surveillance and coordination with NATO aided rebels // The New York Times. August 22, 2011 -http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/world/africa/22nato.html

⁵⁵ Hillary Clinton on Gaddafi: We came, we saw, he died -http://www.youtube.com/watch7v-Fgcdlghag5Y

^{Liherto J.} 56 Libya set to get back $37 billion from U.S. // CNN Money. October 20, 2011 - http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/20/ news/economy/Libyan_assets/index.htm

⁵⁷ AU finally recognized Libyan TNC. September 21, 2011 -http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/at-un-au-finally-recognises-libyas-tnc/98969/

⁵⁸ African Union. The Constitutive Act...

⁵⁹ See: Shubin G. V. Livia: "voennye uroki" proshgodnogo vozdukhaniya [Libya: "Military Lessons" of last Year's confrontation]. 2012, N 11.

Permanent link to this publication: