Don't tell us you're being bullied by Gaddafi, because you brought it on yourselves
So it turns out that the Libyan dissidents who raised the alarm about officials of the Libyan National Oil Company (including Yahia Ibrahim Yahia Gaddafi) trying to buy refined fuel outside Libya were correct after all.
timesofmalta.com, this morning
Malta stops tanker going to Libya
Mark Micallef
The Maltese government last Wednesday intervened to stop a Libya-bound Malta flagged vessel laden with fuel ordered by the Gaddafi regime , The Sunday Times has learnt.
The MV Breeze, a Greek managed tanker, was contacted and stopped by the Maltese authorities on route to the Libyan port town of Zawiyah.
The vessel had been loaded with some 25,000 tons of gasoline 95 – a refined fuel – at the Greek refinery Motor Oil (Hellas), after receiving an order from the Brega Petroleum Marketing Company, a subsidiary of the Libyan National Oil Company, which is on the UN sanctions list.
Sources said payment for the shipment is likely to have been made in cash.
Maltese port authorities notified the ship management that it was banned from carrying such cargo to Libya under the UN sanctions approved last month, and the vessel turned back to Greece immediately.
Last Friday, the ship was berthed 150km from the Greek city of Piraeus.
Sources said the government came under significant pressure from multiple sources within the Gaddafi regime in recent days to allow the vessel to proceed to Libya. But it held firm, pointing out the shipment violated UN sanctions.
Ironically, the oil rich regime has been suffering from severe fuel shortages with no access to the product at its many refineries, either because of damage to their infrastructure or because they were captured by the rebels.
The Maltese government has now referred the case to the UN Security Council’s Sanctions Committee, which will review the incident.
When contacted, a spokesman for the Office of the Prime Minister said he could not comment at this stage. However, he said the government was committed to observing and implementing the UN resolution and EU-imposed restrictions on Libya.
The news comes after anti-Gaddafi protesters in Malta tried to stop the Turkish-owned Mubariz Ibrahimov oil tanker from leaving the port, which they said was being loaded with fuel destined to Libya.
The protesters attempted to obtain an injunction to prevent the vessel leaving, but it was eventually given permission to depart after it was certified empty.
————–
Am I the only one to react with a WTF to this bit?
“Sources said the government came under significant pressure from multiple sources within the Gaddafi regime in recent days to allow the vessel to proceed to Libya. But it held firm, pointing out the shipment violated UN sanctions.”
What should have been the news here – that “multiple sources within the Gaddafi regime” exerted “significant pressure” on the Maltese government to let the shipment through, or that the Maltese government “held firm” and pointed out the violation of UN sanctions?
The first, of course – because the second should have gone without saying. The Maltese government does not have the option of colluding in sanctions-busting with Gaddafi, and Gaddafi’s regime knows about the sanctions so there was no need to point them out.
I am perplexed by what is fast becoming the government’s standard line: that it has heroically resisted this or that attempt at blackmail, bullying or subversion by the Gaddafi regime. If it is going to make a point of telling us about the attempts which it has resisted, then we are going to be left to wonder about the attempts which it has not, and which it has not told us about.
Why has the government said that it did not give in? It is not as though it had a choice, but telling us that it didn’t succumb makes me think that there was a moment there when some options were considered.
As for all this talk about coming under pressure from Gaddafi’s men, what can I say except that the government has brought all this on itself – and on us. It takes their calls. It accepts their flying visits. When it speaks to them, it addresses them still as “my friend”. It has announced categorically that it will not cooperate with the coalition forces in the ongoing military exercise (and I’m not talking about the airport here, either, because ‘military base’ is a much wider term than that), which means that Tripoli thinks Malta is on its side.
It’s time to begin slamming down the phone when they call, and to hell with the consequences – because clearly, the consequences of taking those calls are a lot worse.
26 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
So we will soon be moving into a little money-making genteel UN sanction busting as happened in 1986 .
Precisely, like the German Leopard tanks that were exported to Libya through Malta during the first UN embargo.
The ship carryng the tanks was moored in the Grand Harbour next to an Israeli ship that immediately took ‘note’ of the ‘cargo’ in the next ship.
I am sure we will be hearing more such stories during the current UN embargo of Libya. Some people make a lot of money from these illicit transactions. The Israelis already have a watchful eye on our freeport and cargo directed to Iran.
I heard that someone in high places in Brussels is linked to IRISL. Not surprisingly he defended Gaddafi’s regime recently, but retracted all soon after.
Where did you get this story about German Leopard tanks being sold to Libya? Do you mean the Belgian export of German-made Leopard tanks to Lebanon?
I confirm it was German Leopard tanks headed for Libya. I believe I read it on Newsweek at that time.
British newspapers more recently are reporting Israeli concerns on certain cargo being traded to Iran in our Freeport.
I do not think the ‘cargo’ carried a sticker with ‘Atomkraft? Nein danke!’
Well then Newsweek was wrong. Not for the first time either.
Support Eman Al-Obeidi http://www.change.org/petitions/protect-eman-al-obaidi-from-gaddafi-regime#?opt_new=t&opt_fb=t
Nobody wants to burn those bridges.
“The security aspect aside, Malta’s economic interests in the Libyan connection are very extensive, in terms of Libyan investment in Malta, Maltese investment in Libya, Maltese exports to that country and arrivals from it, which are included in our tourism totals.
That is the immediate concern, which could have long-term consequences. If Libya ends up in a stalemate, divided between east and west, or if the Gaddafi regime survives for a length of time, or even if it loses but parts of it remain at large outside Libya, the security implications on our own soil could become very real.
That ugly potential scenario lies in the future. In the short term we have to project Malta as it really is. It is good that there is political consensus about that need. The private sector and the rest of us too should do their part through contacts and relations abroad.”
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/…/making-malta-s-position-clear
Being in denial corrupts from within.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110327/opinion/making-malta-s-position-clear
Lino Spiteri’s opinion piece from today’s The Sunday Times going on how Maltese investors in Libya are going to lose their shirt on their Libyan investments and not a single word of condemnation of Gaddafi……still toeing the PL/MLP party line.
The rule of thumb for investments is as old as the hills.
If you are after a 100% return you invest in Libya or in Zim.
If you are content with 1 or 2% you go for the Confederatio Helvetica.
Elementary.
Lino Spiteri is a Mintoffjan from the Golden Years of the Malta Labour Party in government.
What the hell do you expect?
Oh no he isn’t. He’s a white-haired wise man who opposed Mintoff, was pro-EU and wanted VAT all along.
Wrong, Baxxter. He was in bed with the old fart. Saw the light years later. Changed clothes (when his hair went white), and became an ‘intellectual’.
@Baxxter
You’re right. Here’s a photo of Lino Spiteri opposing Mintoff and Gaddafi in Labour’s Golden Years (first picture):
http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2011/02/23/why-labour-is-mum-about-libya-1/
Ah, yes, he was pro-EU and wanted VAT – for a moment I’d forgotten that he was Sant’s right hand man.
The ship involved in the sanctions-busting attempt is Malta-flagged. I wonder what steps are being taken to ensure that other Maltese-registered ships won’t try to do likewise. After the neutrality debacle, we do not need further bad press.
@ Lino Spiteri
You pays your money and you take your chances …however dear sir, one has to accept that one cannot control the result.
Lino Spiteri tries (very hard) to look impartial, but his success is minimal.
Daphne, if everyone does his part Gaddafi will fall. Malta is doing more than it is needed.
[Daphne – Really? How so? I would say that Malta is doing less than is needed, but what it wants to do and no more. God forbid everyone else should have taken that same approach because Gaddafi would be back in control by now and thousands would have been butchered.]
We should know who sold that jet fuel to the Gaddafi regime. Was it the Greeks who put Crete at the disposal of the UN backed Forces?
[Daphne – That’s exactly what I mean about reporters not asking the right questions.]
It’s immaterial for now to know who provided the fuel for the Gaddafi regime, but Malta did its part by not allowing that illegal fuel to reach Gaddafi.
[Daphne – John, please. Malta did not ‘do its part’. Malta obeyed the law. Do you go home every evening to tell your wife ‘I didn’t murder anyone today, even though I really felt like it and at one point was under considerable pressure to do so’? What are you suggesting here – that, faced with a choice between breaking the law and not breaking it, Malta deserves applause for doing its part in not busting sanctions? I just don’t believe this way of thinking.]
Should Malta or any country start policing other countries to see wether UN sanctions are being observed?
[Daphne – There is a difference between policing and turning a blind eye when information sits down on your desk and shouts at you ‘Look! Information on sanctions busting!’ Once that sort of information comes to your attention, you are obliged to act on it.]
Malta saw to it that the law was not broken. I would call that policing. The tanker had the intention of breaking the law, not Malta.
[Daphne – I find myself having to count to 10 rather a lot with comments like these. Malta would have broken the law itself had it allowed that ship through. I don’t think you need simple legal principles explained to you; you’re probably just pretending. But just in case: 1. the tanker was in breach of the law; 2. once Malta had information about this tanker, it found itself with a position before the law too; it could have let the tanker through (against the law) or not let the tanker through (in line with the law). That is not policing. If a sales assistant in a jewellery shop refuses to unlock the door to let a robber in, she is not policing. If she lets him in fully aware of his intentions, she breaks the law.]
A clear conscience never fears midnight knocking.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110327/local/malta-shooting-at-migrants-rai-presenter-claims
Bullied by the Italians now ?
Slamming down the phone? Haven’t these people heard of answering machines?
It’s started to bite.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12870684
LADY DAP}NE CARUANA GALIZIA IS NOT THE PRIME MINISTER. Were she, we will be lacking all sorts of goods.
http://www.life.com/gallery/32542/gaddafi-the-last-supervillain#index/3