Malta and Germany: "EU Refuseniks"
EU OBSERVER/Headline News/yesterday/Brussels
EU REFUSENIKS JUSTIFY STAYING OUT OF LIBYA ACTION
By Andrew Rettman
Germany and Malta over the weekend gave fresh reasons for staying out of the EU-US-Arab attack on Colonel Gaddafi.
Speaking in Der Spiegel on Sunday (20 March), German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle said he acted in a national tradition of military restraint and that Germany would have had to send soldiers to Libya if it had backed a UN resolution on the no-fly zone.
“We have considered this very carefully and made an important decision,” he explained. “Why does the West have primary responsibility instead of the countries in the region, the Arab League in particular?”
He added that the US can use German bases for anti-Gaddafi operations and that Germany will redeploy Awacs radar planes in Afghanistan to free-up US assets. He also noted that Germany has paid €5 million in aid for Libyan refugees.
The Westerwelle remarks came after criticism from commentators and from the Social Democrat opposition party, which said the no-fly zone has nothing to do with sending German soldiers.
Maltese leader Lawrence Gonzi told the Radio 101 station the same day that he will not let coalition forces use Maltese airports for security reasons.
“The prime minister re-iterated that his utmost priority was the country’s security and as Malta had only one airport, it could not be placed in danger,” a Maltese diplomat told this website. “[He] said that the situation was a grievous one and [that] one had to be extremely careful what to say.”
Malta lies just 350km from Libya. In 1986 two Libyan scud missiles nearly hit the Italian island of Lampedusa 620km away.
The African Union, China and Russia have also distanced themselves from Operation Odyssey Dawn.
28 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
The link:
http://euobserver.com/9/32029
Deutsche Presse-Agentur has picked up the story about the clash between pro and anti Gaddafi protestors outside the LIbyan embassy in Malta:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/africa/news/article_1627616.php/Pro-and-anti-Gaddafi-demonstrators-clash-in-Malta
They reminded their readers of the strong ties” between Malta and Gaddafi’s Libya.
Non-Maltese readers will also learn from the report that there is a “Libyan school” in Malta and that it’s full of pro-Gaddafi people.
No Ireland ?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110321/local/ireland-to-stay-neutral-over-libya
I think it would be very difficult for Ireland to take sides against Libya considering how much Gaddafi helped them against the British.
Although, unlike in Ireland’s case, there does not seem to be any evidence I find it difficult to think that the Labour party did not also received massive financial and other assitance from Gaddafi, especially in the ‘Golden Years’.
@C Falzon
Gaddafi did not help Ireland against the British. He helped the IRA. Quite a different matter.
That’s yesterday’s news. Have a look at today’s news:
1. Opposition to Libya assault grows as allies battle to protect united front (Independent)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/opposition-to-libya-assault-grows-as-allies-battle-to-protect-united-front-2249067.html#
2. Libyan operation hampered by confusion and dispute (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/21/libyan-operation-hampered-confusion-dispute
3. Libya conflict: MPs voice unease over military action (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/mar/21/libya-conflict-mps-unease-military-action-gaddafi
4. EU divisions grow over Libya operations (EurActiv)
http://www.euractiv.com/en/global-europe/eu-divisions-grow-libya-operations-news-503330
I am following the Foreign Affairs committee session in the European Parliament, with Cathy Ashton. Many, many dissenting voices. The rambo strikes have generated very bad PR for the coalition.
[Daphne – What, d’you mean worse than the criticism and bad PR directed their way before they actually did something about a No Fly Zone?]
THERE WERE ANOTHER THREE DISSENTING VOICES IN SPAIN!
And 336 in favour.
It’s called ‘The Fog of War’, Kevvy. Rant all you want. You’re biases are showing again.
Not one who usually gives a toss about what Kev says but….
Kev’s examples are exactly why I have lost all hope in most politicians. The equivocation is sickening. The fact that Kev is highlighting them for admiration is enlightening. But then again all I have to do is think of a certain Bonici who first says no to EU and then scurries off for a cushy job there thanks to my yes vote.
Oh well the price of democracy!
Do calm down, all of you. Four links is all I pasted. It’s not as if there’s a particular point to make. I am definitely not gloating, if that’s what you think.
A rise in dissenting voices should interest you. Don’t kill the messenger.
Kev –
1. The position that China and Russia have taken and their reservations is not todays news.
2. The debate you speak of is not about whether there should have been intervention in Libya, but about who is going to take charge of it as the US doesn’t want to take the lead, precisely because there are people like you around.
3. The MEPs who voiced unease are the same ones who voted overwhelmingly in favour of a no-fly zone and military intervention in Libya, including all five of Malta’s MEPs. Only 13 were against.
4. EU divisions grow? The European Union is democratic not autocratic. There is bound to be debate, disagreement and discussion. It is the outcome which counts.
You failed to mention that the President of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, spoke out against the same mission he voted in favour of, just as soon as the strikes started. But after he received a visit from Ban Ki Moon he lamely reversed his position.
Amr Moussa’s term as president of the Arab League expires next week. He is seeking election in Egypt. His campaign is funded by ultra-nationalist media who are totally against the idea that a dictator should come under attack (or scrutiny even) from foreign powers.
Kev voted for Dom Mintoff, Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, and Alfred Sant. Why would he know anything about democracy and dissenting views?
Daphne, you didn’t have to delete the comments to willywonka. It wasn’t as if I’m taking it seriously. I was just playing – teasing him, as you say. I think Etienne deserves a tease or two for being such a prat.
[Daphne – I cannot allow this website to be turned into the equivalent of a bar-room brawl between two people. If you want to carry on arguing, take it elsewhere. It gets boring for everyone else. Incidentally, who is Etienne?]
Etienne? Who is this Etienne I’m supposed to be kev?
Good second move. Never underestimate the power of denial. I’ll cut it short for you: You and Daphne can deny till kingdom come, but I sniffed your air even before I half-confirmed.
The final confirmation was so blatant it stole all the satisfaction.
Look at the bright side. You’re now back to your rational self and whatever I may say you’re still willywonka. It’s win-win.
[Daphne – Relax, Kevin, and stop imagining things. That’s the problem when you use this website to get involved in one-to-one fights with other people instead of just joining in the discussion, telling us what you think, and accepting what others think.]
what yu re saying is true but we ve got only one airport and is needed for commercial reasons ,if hal far and ta qali airfields were still in operation and could be used and the prime minister refuses permission than your argument will holds water
I think we should have done our bit in helping the coalition to get rid of this despicable despot once and for all by allowing our faciites – little as they are – to be used.
The military destruction of Libyan assets probably almost certainly means that Gaddafi’s missiles are no longer functional so we are in no danger. Furthermore with all the coalition air assets in Libyan airspace it is also extremely unlikely that any Libyan military would dare an attack on Malta (apart from the all too obvious implications of attacking an EU country).
The only missiles of significant range that Gaddafi had are the SCUD-B.
According to their specifications they would fall short of Malta by about 40Km if launched from the nearest point to Malta in Libya. They may possibly have done some upgrades, or even reduced the payload to extend the range a little, but even so I doubt he would bother sending us one. (I had previously mistakenly thought he had the longer range variant)
The only danger would have been an attack by a bomber or interceptor jet but there doesn’t seem much chance of that happening now.
The only real danger is terrorist style attacks against which we are in no more danger than the larger and more powerful countries that are actually doing something about Gaddafi.
“The only real danger is terrorist style attacks against which we are in no more danger than the larger and more powerful countries that are actually doing something about Gaddafi.”
Yes.That is the salient point in the raging debate about Gaddafi’s retribution. He didn’t threaten to fire missiles when he said he’s attack all sea and air traffic. How many times in the past four decades did he launch a military attack?
Right.
And how many times was he directly responsible for terrorist attacks?
‘German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle said he acted in a national tradition of military restraint’
Unhappy choice of words. There are many victims of Germany’s national tradition of military aggression still alive today.
Daphne, I’ve been following your commentary regarding Malta’s position on this war and tend to agree that it’s a shame that Malta didn’t take the same kind of stand that most (not all) of Europe did.
Yet seeing it from a practical point of view, the allies never did actually ask us to be a military base. Also, since we only have one airport, it would cause a great (and unnecessary) risk to us since this airport is a commercial one not a military one.
Italy are in a much better position to be of such assistance since they actually have the resources to be a military base. It would be stupid to turn MIA and the airstrip to a military one when there is no clear need to. The (righteous) allied military operation can continue as normal with or without Luqa being a base. Don’t you think it is an unnecessary risk? MIA has got nothing on Sigonella – it’s designed for commercial stuff not war, right?
Also, apparently Gonzi has specifically spoken against Gaddafi (according to what we heard yesterday on Bondi) and condemned him and his actions in a press conference or press release (forgot which one).
[Daphne – If he had, wouldn’t you have remembered? His said “The end of Gaddafi is inevitable.” That is not speaking against somebody or condemning their actions. To interpret it as such is fatuous.]
OK but what about the Malta-not-being-used-as-a-military-base bit?
Russia over many years managed to infiltrate sleeper spies into west German political parties, some got to high places with influence. Could it be ongoing?
@ John
Guido Westerwelle is, unfortunately, an elected member of the German parliament and one of its (currently) influential ministers, incidentally, as are Lawrence Gonzi and Tonio Borg in Malta.
Many individuals in Germany are not at all happy, and/or in agreement, with the policy shown by Westerwelle and his boss, Angela Merkel.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,752542,00.html
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,14926360,00.html
The 2 most successful EU countries are the 2 most consistant. MT and DE