01.06.2011, 09:21
Kritische Stimmen über die Entwicklungen in Libyen und die Rolle der NATO:
Zitat:Top Diplomat Blasts Western Devastation of Libyan Infrastructures<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9003110153">http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9003110153</a><!-- m -->
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for European Affairs Ali Ahani in a meeting with a Swedish foreign ministry official slammed the NATO invasion of Libya, cautioning that the western powers are destroying the country's infrastructure under the pretext of safeguarding human rights.
Speaking in a meeting with the Swedish Foreign Ministry's Director-General for Middle-East and North Africa Robert Rydberg here in Tehran on Tuesday, Ahani denounced the Libyan invasion under the pretext of UN resolutions.
"The devastation of Libya's economic infrastructure by NATO's bombardments, based on wrong and egotistical interpretations of the [UN] Security Council's resolution, is unacceptable and deplorable," Ahani stated.
"Politically motivated and instrumental approaches to the honorable issue of human rights are by no means acceptable and will yield no result," he added.
...
Zitat:Libya: Politics of humanitarian intervention<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/201133111277476962.html">http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/op ... 76962.html</a><!-- m -->
The process of implementing the UN resolution on Libya was a poorly executed farce with no long-term foresight.
Mahmood Mamdani Last Modified: 31 Mar 2011 19:51
Iraq and Afghanistan teach us that humanitarian intervention does not end with the removal of the danger it purports to target. It only begins with it. Having removed the target, the intervention grows and turns into the real problem. This is why to limit the discussion of the Libyan intervention to its stated rationale – saving civilian lives – is barely scratching the political surface.
The short life of the Libyan intervention suggests that we distinguish between justification and execution in writing its biography. Justification was a process internal to the United Nations Security Council, but execution is not.
In addition to authorising a "no-fly zone" and tightening sanctions against "the Gaddafi regime and its supporters", Resolution 1973 called for "all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi." At the same time, it expressly "excluded a foreign occupation force of any form" or in "any part of Libyan territory".
The UN process is notable for two reasons. First, the resolution was passed with a vote of 10 in favour and five abstaining.
The abstaining governments – Russia, China, India, Brazil, Germany – represent the vast majority of humanity.
Even though the African Union had resolved against an external intervention and called for a political resolution to the conflict, the two African governments in the Security Council – South Africa and Nigeria – voted in favour of the resolution.
They have since echoed the sentiments of the governments that abstained, that they did not have in mind the scale of the intervention that has actually occurred.
...