From 'British base' to 'permission to use' – and still no word from our own prime minister
He shouldn't wait until he has taken a decision before he speaks. He has to speak now and tell us what the options are.
BBC World reported an hour ago:
DAVID CAMERON SAYS UK JETS TO BE DEPLOYED
David Cameron has said Tornado and Typhoon warplanes are being deployed to help protect the Libyan people from “brutal” attacks by the Gaddafi regime.
The prime minister said planning was already underway for a joint UK, US and French operation after the UN backed a resolution authorising “all measures necessary” short of an invasion.
But in response, the Libyan regime said it was calling an immediate ceasefire.
France had said initial air raids could begin “within a few hours”.
Mr Cameron told MPs there was a “clear and unequivocal” legal basis for action in Libya.
The Tornado GR4, equipped with precision weapons, is among the first military assets the UK could use to defend a no-fly zone designed to protect Libyan civilians from action by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.
The planes are stationed at RAF Marham and RAF Lossiemouth, though it is not yet clear which military base they would ultimately fly from. Options include bases in southern France, southern Italy or RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, or – with permission – Malta.
25 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
No need to worry, there will be no attacks by British and French jets on Gaddafi now as a result of the ceasefire. By this move he has transformed hinself from agressor to victim.
Gaddafi now has control of almost all of Libya including the oil terminals. He will leave Benghazi and Tobruk, they cannot really thrive on their own. In the meantime “police” not “military” action will consoidate his power and get rid of opponents quietly.
Once again he outwits everyone and remains in power.
Wrong analysis. You are forgetting to put the freedom fighters in the picture. They will retake what was lost and move onto Tripoli itself.
They will try I agree but remember that the UN resolution bans the supply of arms to all parties including the rebels. They have shown that they are not militarily organised and they are therefore unlikely to succeed.
We just have to wait and see. My hunch is that they will make it. But from the preparations and declarations of the British and French, it does not seem that Gaddafi and friends are going to be let off the hook easily. It has finally been shown that he cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
The prime minister has already made it clear that his government will abide by the constitution: there will be NO military role for Malta, which will instead play a humanitarian role.
[Daphne – Kevin, have you read that bit in the Constitution about UN Security Council-mandated action? Clearly not. We are no longer ‘protected by the constitution’. We can no longer use neutrality as an excuse. And if we do, because it is our choice, then we will deserve all the scorn currently being heaped on Germany.]
Cameron, I would suppose, is aware of the Maltese government’s stance. The above is just what a BBC reporter chose to scribble.
[Daphne – Why do your sort think that the word ‘scribble’ is a disparagement of something written that you don’t like? It’s a literal translation of the disparaging Maltese ‘thazzez xi haga’ but it doesn’t follow through idiomatically.]
Government by default means that Malta is free to choose to lend its airspace, if not its runways, to forces doing the job we should be doing for ourselves.
And now that Belgium’s declared that its fighter planes will be involved, are you going to stage a hysterical protect f’nofs Brussil?
Kev is a (very) selective reader.
He is also a selective idiot.
This is not a matter of ‘neutrality’ and you know it. There are no warring nations here. Malta is not even neutral in relation to the revolt since the prime minister has already called for Gaddafi to step down.
So enough with this ‘neutrality’ deception.
The issue is foreign military presence; Malta’s role. Our constitution is clear, including the proviso you mention, over which the government should be very cautious.
If we allow our territory to be used this time, we would be creating a dangerous precedent. The danger is not imminent. But it would pave the way towards re-establishing Malta as a military base and I cannot see the benefits in this, especially when we have no idea what the outcome of the so-called ‘Jasmine Revolution’ would be across the Muslim/Arab world.
Your obsession with ‘Gaddafi the persona’ is distorting your vision to such an extent you fail to realise that the BBC & Co. are purposely setting up a fait accompli in relation to Malta’s ‘military role’. By the time the prime minister wakes up to remind Cameron that we have no military role to play, it would be considered by many as a strange thing to say.
The French are having a field day! French foreign ministry spokesman Bernard Valero told AFP:
France’s position on NATO has been constant since the beginning. We do not want NATO involved. We do not think it would be the right signal to send that NATO as such intervenes in an Arab nation. Allies have not taken a political position concerning NATO’s involvement.”
Finally Old Europe is shoving the USA military influence politely out of our neighbourhood. Let’s hope this gets resolved quickly and successfully for the Libyan people. If all goes well, this is going to be a historical moment for Europe. About effin’ time I say!
kev, get your conspiracy theories going… you’re going to have a field day after the dust settles on this one
‘Finally Old Europe is shoving the USA military influence politely out of our neighbourhood…..’ errrr ….. something wrong with that presence in Europe?
As far as I know, while America spent billions over the decades since the WWII to provide Europe with military security, Europe invested billions in economic projects on its own soil. Do you think America would not have been better off without all the defence expenditure to protect Europe from the hegemony of the USSR?
Your reasoning compares to that adolescent who at the first signs of independence from his parents would tell them politely that he does not need them any more in his neighbourhood. Not the wisest and most grateful of options, I would say.
American blood shed on Omaha beach means shit to Joseph A Borg.
Just look at it from this perspective:
They clearly did not want a NATO effort, but strictly UN, preferably with the active participation of the Arab League. That means they are avoiding what could seem like a Western confrontation, but…
Last November the UK and France signed a defence agreement for joint forces under the Lisbon treaty’s ‘enhanced cooperation’ clause applying for the EU’s common defence and security Policy.
So this Franco-British ‘initiative’ is in that vein… and you can see where I’m going. But as usual I’m too far ahead of my time.
Is it not obvious: the UN blessing is much more preferable than NATO unilateral action. The UN provided the international legitimate touch to it. And with the added request of the Arab League, all the pieces fell into place.
You do not have to be a Nostradamus to see that.
And as for the Common Defence and Security Policy, well, finally, a huge welcome if it ever materialises.
There is not much material for a conspiracy theory here.
or – with permission – Malta.
Referendum?
Tricky situation this…Gaddafi declares ceasefire. The rebels do not seem to want it (as reported on Al Jazeera) as they consider themselves now to be in a tactical advantage.
[Daphne – Gaddafi has not respected his own ceasefire. Misrata is still under attack.]
The resolution is based on military action in defence of civilians. What if, therefore, the oppositions forces attack? War means death, also civilian deaths. And these are no unarmed civilians we are talking about.
The news networks talk of the “rebel army”, or “opposition military”. So where does that leave the “Allies” now? (This is only Britan’s and France’s war…Egypt declared it would not participate, the USA is reluctant, and dont expect planes flying all the way from Qatar and the UAE to bomb Arab targets).
[Daphne – Albert, this is NOT ‘Britain’s and France’s war’. It is not a war. And action has been mandated by the UN Security Council. Leave aside your Labour Party prejudices for a moment and think about what this means.]
Do they attack the oppositon forces?
One good analysis from Sky: what if the situation remains blocked? No attacks on either side. Benghazi operates as an effective enclave, a UN protectorate. For how long?
Albert Farrugia, the objective of the Libyan revolution was to remove regime, not to split the country and they will not be content to stay in their enclave.
What about those Libyans who live in Zawija or Tripoli itself? Do you think they will resign themselves to living under the tyrant who has killed so many of their friends and relatives?
The revolutionaries will not, however, bomb their own people like Gaddafi is doing.
Besides Britain and France, many other countries, including Arab ones, will be involved, even if only symbolically.
Yes of course, referendum. And the question will be something like this: ‘Taqbel li Malta tithalla tintuza bhala bazi militari minn fejn jitilqu l-ajruplani qattiela biex joqtlu n-nies u dan naghmluh ghax inhobbu l-paci? U jekk jigri dan, taqbel li ahna bl-ebda mod mhu se nkunu qed nibzghu li l-quddiem nistghu nsofru minn biza’ ta’ terrorizmu li qabel qatt ma hassejna?’
Nies bhalek iqallghuni.
The only way of assuring ourselves that we will not have to be afraid of terrorisim from Gaddafi’s friends, is to make sure to get rid of him, the sooner the better, and there no better time than now Do you think he means what he said about the cease fire? he only wants to consolidate his forces for the last ditch. I hope the UN won’t trust him and finish him, once and for ever.
Now you are talking, silvio loporto.
The PM has just said that Malta wants to help the Libyan people in their fight against the Gadaffi regime but at the same time he said that Malta won’t be used as base for any military operation.
Military operation seem the only option available to get rid of Gadaffi’s regime and we want to help the Libyan people by standing aside.
Is this not hypocrisy at its best?
The prime minister should let the western forces use Malta to end Gaddafi’s regime and not be afraid of what Joseph Muscat says.
The sooner Gaddafi regime is finished the better.
What’s stopping the Prime Minister giving permission to the western powers to use Malta facilities to bomb Gaddifi’s army?
He should not wait for more Libyans to get killed in Benghazi. What does the prime minister think – that Gaddafi is going tto retain control and then thank him? Or is he afraid of what Joseph Muscat may say?