|GOBIERNO, PARLAMENTARIOS Y FUERZAS MILITARES SUECAS, REPORTAN CRÍMENES DE GUERRA EN LIBIA|
|Martes, 22 de Noviembre de 2011 17:17|
November 4, 2011
The International Prosecution Chamber in Stockholm
Report on serious offences subject to public prosecution
Until March 2011, Libya was a sovereign secular state, ranked by the United Nations as a “High Human Development” country in a global context5 (HDI ranking 53 out 194, ahead of countries like Russia and Brazil) and the most advanced country on the continent of Africa.6 As late as January 4, 2011 – just weeks before the war started – several UN members applauded Libya’s continued commitment to upholding human rights.7
Today, seven months later, Libya has – as a result of decisions and actions by individuals, i.e., within the Swedish government and Sweden’s military forces – been turned into a bombed-out war zone with up to a million refugees8, under the control of a “National Transitional Council” (NTC) which is in the process of turning Libya into a theocracy regulated by Islamic Sharia law.9
The leadership and cadre of the NTC rebels is dominated by past and present members10 of designated terrorist organizations11 such as Al-Qaeda (AQ, AQI, AQIM)12 and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).13
The council is presently headed by a de facto triumvirate – holding executive/financial/military power:
On March 19, 2011, two days after the adoption of UN resolution 1973, this NTC/Al-Qaeda/LIFG rebel council announced the creation of a new Central Bank and a new oil company.17 Starting a “revolution” with the creation of a new Central Bank may be a possible “first” in world history and casts the long shadow of, as yet unidentified, international financial actors over the war against Libya.18
The pretext and framework for the attack on Libya by Sweden and other countries was United Nations Resolution 1973. This resolution authorized a ban on flights and measures “to protect civilians and civilian populated areas”, whilst excluding “a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory”.19
The reality, at the outset, is that participants in the NATO-led war were already in violation of Resolution 1973 and that the motive was not to protect civilians – but regime-change.
Testimony by former NATO military commander, General Wesley Clarke, confirms that, as early as 2001, the Pentagon was instructed to prepare for war against Libya20 – i.e., long before Libya was reported as a “problem” somehow in need of a “solution”.
Thus, the backdrop carries distinct echoes of colonialism,21 spiced with the general geostrategical redrawing of the entire Middle East, set in motion by the attacks in the US on September 11, 200122 and envisaged by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).23
The event that is said to have triggered NATO’s attack on Libya was the Libyan government’s own attempts to restore order and protect civilians in the Benghazi area, where an estimated one thousand jihadists24 (Al-Qaeda/LIFG) had stormed military storage facilities, and armed themselves and started to shoot up the neighbourhood.
Given the miniscule size and poor-to-non-existent training of this “rebel” contingent,25 the successful containment and disarmament of these rebels by the Libyan Government should have been a foregone conclusion – had it not been for the intervention of French and, subsequently, US airpower on the side of these Al-Qaeda jihadists.26
Since March 31, 2011, NATO has conducted 9658 air strike sorties,27 averaging 46-47 strike missions per day for 207 days. When assessing the gravity of the war crimes reported here, this massive air campaign needs to be contrasted against the realities on the ground.
What are these realities?
Even before UN Resolution 1973, Libya was reported to have no effective air force.28 Moreover, and in regional terms, Libya did not have much of a military to speak of, in the first place.
For example, indicated by the chart below, whereas neighbouring countries in the first decade of the 21st century escalated their military expenditures, Libya did the opposite.29
In fact, Libya under Qaddafi, was a remarkably constructive factor in the region – Qaddafi being the founding father of the African Union.30
Reported war casualties vary widely.31 What is clear is that the involvement of the armed forces of Sweden and other countries changed the outcome of what would have been the orderly neutralization of a local fringe Al-Qaeda/LIFG flurry into a full-scale regime-change (for the worse) with a death toll, injured and refugees to a very different order of magnitude.
As a result of initiatives taken by members in the Swedish Government, made possible by individuals in the Swedish Parliament, and carried out by individuals in the Swedish military, the state of Sweden today shares responsibility for the transformation of the most humanitarian and successful state on the African continent into a third-world war zone, run by a conglomerate of terrorist-designated rebels over which the agendas of Anglo-American intelligence and banking oligarchs cast their long shadow.
For more details on casualties, the destruction of civilian life, and civilian infrastructure brought by the military forces of Sweden and other countries, consider the Libya reports from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.43
Given existing international agreements and the clear violations committed by the participants of NATO’s Unified Protector campaign, of the intent and boundaries set by UN Resolution 1973, it is evident that crimes falling, among others, under the following categories have been and are being committed:
These crimes were not the result of mission-drift or mission-swings – but were pre-mediated for the purpose of imposing regime-change in Libya in violation of International Law.
Given the international consensus of the designation of, among others, Al-Qaeda and LIFG as “terrorists”, it is also evident that the following crimes have been and are being committed by the individuals reported here:
Dates and Periods:
Click here to see the suspects.
These MPs, listed below, voted in favor of the war at event 3 and later abstained:
Interviews with Brink, Dinamarca, Linde, Sjöstedt, and Lillemets (marked with * above) confirm that the reason for abstaining was the realization that the Swedish government was in violation of UN Resolution 1973 in its participation of the NATO-led war.52
Key suspects in the Swedish military:
Reported individuals from Sweden’s military establishment include the chain of command from Commander-in-Chief Sverker Göransson, down to all personnel who are part of the FL01/FL02/infoop operations . This also includes any staff members in Sweden involved in the planning, directing and execution of these operations, as well as, possibly, members of units such as Special Operations Group (SOG) and the parachute regiment at K3 and which may have been involved in the clandestine parts of the war against Libya in 2011 – including the atrocities reportedly committed by French and Danish SF units.
November 4, 2011
About Yellow BirdI am a teacher and used to live in Tripoli.
|Última actualización el Jueves, 24 de Noviembre de 2011 16:16|