Tag Archives: Hilary Clinton

Libyan Arms-for-Rebels Resolution.




There appears to be a debate as to whether or not UN Resolution 1973 gives the Coalition/NATO etc., currently bombing Libya, the permission to supply arms to Libyan rebels.

The simple answer is “No”.

Below is paragraph 13 from the currently-in-force  UN resolution 1973. This paragraph refers to UN Resolution 1970 (which is also still  in force).

13. Decides that paragraph 11 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall be replaced by the following paragraph : “Calls upon all Member States, in particular States of the region, acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, and on the high seas, vessels and aircraft bound to or from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 or 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, calls upon all flag States of such vessels and aircraft to cooperate with such inspections and authorises Member States to use all measures commensurate to the specific circumstances to carry out such inspections”

Please click on the link below. UN Resolution 1970 will  open in a separate window. Paragraph 9 is on Page 3.

UN Resolution 1970-Libya

This is Paragraph 9 of Resolution 1970:

Arms embargo

9. Decides that all Member States shall immediately take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, from or through their territories or by their nationals, or using their flag vessels or aircraft, of arms and related materiel of all types, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned, and technical assistance, training, financial or other assistance, related to military activities or the provision, maintenance or use of any arms and related materiel, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel whether or not originating in their territories, and decides further that this measure shall not apply to: 

(a) Supplies of non-lethal military equipment intended solely for humanitarian or protective use, and related technical assistance or training, as approved in advance by the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 24 below  

(b) Protective clothing, including flak jackets and military helmets, temporarily exported to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by United Nations personnel, representatives of the media and humanitarian and development works and associated personnel, for their personal use only; or 

(c) Other sales or supply of arms and related materiel, or provision of assistance or personnel, as approved in advance by the Committee

There is NO ambiguity in the above Section 9.

If  UN Resolution 1973 needs to be “interpreted” or if there is any ambiguity, there should be a new resolution. If  the USA, United Kingdom and France wish to donate or sell arms to Libyan civilians, they should seek explicit permission .

There have been well-known instances of UN resolutions being “interpreted” by politicians.

The last time this happened, hundreds of thousands of civilians perished in Iraq.

Meanwhile,whether Obama, Cameron and the rest like it or not,  Libya continues to be the subject of an arms embargo.


















…and on Haiti Earthquake Day


Feminist Hilary

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is in Oman today and this morning she spoke to civil leaders at a Town Hall meeting in Muscat.

She said that women can be a major power in the Middle East peace process as well as urging regional leaders to encourage and embrace the rising expectations and aspirations  of Oman’s rapidly rising  youth population.

The Secretary of State went on to cite the example of women in Northern Ireland taking the initiative to meet and be instrumental in the resolution of the “troubles”. She suggested that Arab and Israeli women could provide a similar peace impetus.

“Women played a major role in pushing the politicians to find some solutions,” she said. “It was very clear that there just couldn’t be a divide when people on both sides were suffering in the same way.”

However, she did stress that such an initiative would be long and difficult.

She said that if Arab nations were to succeed in the 21st century they should embrace the aspirations of women and youth.

Tomorrow, Ms Clinton visits Qatar on  before returning to Washington.


Treasury Select Committee Muppets

Yesterday’s “grilling”of Barclays boss Bob Diamond was embarrassing to watch. In the real world people such as the members of the Treasury Select Committee would never be around the same table as Mr Diamond because in commerce, they would not be good enough. The quality of question was  appalling and the committee members all showed that what was more on their mind that anything else was the fact that Bob Diamond had a far more successful career that they – and they didn’t like it.

The question from John Mann, Labour MP for Bassetlaw ” Why is it easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle  than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven?” produced a bemused silence from everyone, especially the smiling  Bob Diamond who is used to a slightly more focused line of questioning. “I’m stuck on that one,” he replied.

The rest of us were just plain embarrassed, especially when the Chairman of the Treasury Select Committee,   Andrew Tyrie ( Conservative member for Chichester)  added helpfully: “People have been stuck on that for 2,000 years.”

At that point, Bob Diamond must have been imagining that someone had slipped Mescalin into his Highland Spring.

We really must look at recruiting Members of Parliament who are not quite as thick and not so intimidated by someone who earns in a year what they would earn in 10 lifetimes.

What happened to the Politics of Envy? Still there, it seems.


Eric Illsley MP

The good news for the self-confessed “tealeaf”  MP is that he can remain an MP and draw his salary for 11 months, even when banged-up.  Work that system, Eric!

An MP’s salary is a lot of snout.

How many MPs are still thinking “There, but for the Grace of God……”



The celebrities and opportunist politicians are but a distant memory. A year on and Haiti looks more-or-less the same as it did an hour after the earthquake, except that over 1 million people are living in tents and thousands are dying of cholera or malnutrition (that’s a nice word for starvation).

The £5 billion pledged has not materialised and you cannot feed and clothe people on promises.

Let’s not beat around the bush. Since Cuba has matured from dangerous Commie State to Interesting Tourist Spot, Haiti is no longer of any strategic importance. Its agricultural economy does not produce enough to feed its population. It populated by poor black people.

Remember Hurricane Katrina in 2005? Which group was left to fend for itself  for just that little bit too long? Who suffered the most because of the American Government’s intransigence. Yes. Poor black people.

Imagine if there had been  a hurricane or earthquake in Miami a year ago. By now even the golf courses would have been rebuilt.

We should all be ashamed of ourselves.

Copenhagen Cash

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has flown into Denmark – presumably on her Nimbus 2000 and told the delegates at the Copenhagen climate change/cash for the G77 meeting, that  her country was prepared to “work towards mobilising  $100 billion a year”  for developing countries.

The wording of that statement is very clever. It does not say that the USA will contribute $100 billion per year. Neither does it suggest that the Americans will be contributing anything . They will work towards mobilising. That’s good! That’s very good.

Here is the full quote: “In the context of a strong accord in which all major economies pledge meaningful mitigation actions and provide full transparency as to those actions, the US is prepared to work with other countries towards a goal of mobilising $100 billion a year to address the needs of developing countries.”

Genius! The African states are thinking that they’ve scored a decent amount of “wedge” and  the Americans know that the New Faith of Global Warming only has limited “legs”. The most important thing is that President Obama will be able to fly in like a latter-day Saviour and appear to have engineered a  famous victory.

We have to bear in mind that all these Copenhagen agreements, “strategies”  and handouts designed to deal with climate change will not be in place until after 2012, which is when the obligations of the Kyoto Protocol expire.

Today’s state of play in Copenhagen is confused  because the developed and developing nations remain at odds over who should cut emissions, how deep the cuts should be, and how much cash should be handed to the poorest nations.

Gordon Brown has arrived early so as not to be overshadowed by the American Presidential machine when it hits town. Gordon Brown  is the political equivalent of “dad-dancing”. It’s embarrassing but you cannot help but watch and cringe.

He has once again slipped into his Mittyesque Churchillian skin:

We must summon up the greatest level of ambition”, followed by  “The success of our endeavours depends on us forging a new alliance”  and   “In these few days in Copenhagen which will be blessed or blamed for generations to come, we cannot permit the politics of narrow self-interest to prevent a policy for human survival.”

The technical term for that sort of rhetoric is political “sincero-talk” . Many of us prefer to think of it as meaningless bollocks.

Surprisingly, he didn’t mention anything at all about “fighting them on the beaches”  but then again, Germany’s Angela Merkel is about to speak . Best not to rock das boot.

Outside the meeting,  the Danish Riot Squad will continue to throw tear gas and beat the crap out of protestors and sundry activists who believe that actions speak louder than words. They cannot fail to speak louder than some of the words we’ve heard this week.

Think about this: The politicians are supposed to know how doomed we really are.

So, if we are THAT doomed, why are they behaving like children and why do they all appear to be so laid back about the whole thing. The urgency with which they address their taxpayers appears to be totally missing from their deliberations.

Surely the polluted triple spectres of self-interest, opportunism and procrastination have no place in discussions which are supposed to decide the future well-being of the human race.

Or perhaps they know something that we don’t – or something that we’re not meant to know.