Syria, oops no, I meant Libya ...
stratfor.com
U.S. Sending Message To Libya
7 May 2002
Summary
Related Analysis:
Axis Listing Will Force Assad To Make a Stand
Cuba's 'Axis' Listing a Cover for Other U.S. Goals
The recent classification by a White House official of Libya as proliferator of weapons of mass destruction was unusual, considering Tripoli's recent efforts to get on Washington's good side. The Bush administration may be sending a warning to Col. Moammar Gadhafi to keep his country's weapons out of the hands of al Qaeda, as well as trying to get the country more involved in the anti-terrorism campaign.
Analysis
The Bush administration May 6 added three more countries -- Cuba, Libya and Syria -- to the list of those trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Undersecretary of State John Bolton used a speech at the Heritage Foundation to warn that the United States will do whatever is necessary to keep those states from passing nuclear, chemical or biological weapons to terrorist networks. Administration officials said Bolton's speech was meant to broaden U.S. President George W. Bush's earlier "axis of evil" classification of North Korea, Iraq and Iran.
Libya's inclusion on the list is interesting and a bit confusing. The Libyan government, an extension of Col. Moammar Gadhafi, has few if any known ties to al Qaeda. And Gadhafi has cleaned up his act considerably since his overt hostility to the United States in the 1980s.
Bolton said that despite signs of decreasing tensions between Washington and Tripoli, Libya remains a major concern. Following the lifting of U.N. sanctions on Libya in 1999, he said, Gadhafi's government re-established ties with illicit suppliers of chemical weapons all over the world. He also said Libya has a fledgling biological weapons program that "may be capable of producing small quantities of biological agent."
Bolton added what has become the standard clarification to Washington's anti-terrorism message, which is that states that renounce terror and abandon WMD can become part of the U.S. effort, but those that do not can expect to become targets.
Libya's history of support for terrorism is a matter of public record. Throughout the 1980s, Gadhafi was blamed for the bombings of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and a Berlin disco frequented by U.S. soldiers. His government also supported and trained Philippine Muslim extremists.
But a combination of economic sanctions, U.S. air strikes and the loss of Libya's Soviet sponsor forced Gadhafi to re-evaluate his policies. He spent most of the 1990s trying to rehabilitate himself in the eyes of United States and Europe by backing away from terrorist groups, including expelling elements of the Abu Nidal militant organization from Libya in 1998.
Gadhafi increased his U.S.-friendly efforts in the wake of Sept. 11. He quickly condemned the attacks and reportedly gave Western intelligence officials lists of Libyan militants at large, the Financial Times reported. At the same time he has continued to crack down on Islamic militants in Libya. Of course, such actions are self-serving as well, since the few Islamists inside Libya are actively opposed to Gadhafi.
Libya does maintain chemical weapons, including nerve and blister agents. However, STRATFOR finds it extremely unlikely that the Libyan government would want these weapons to fall into the hands of al Qaeda. Besides his aforementioned opposition to Islamic militants, Gadhafi likely was aware of the consequences if al Qaeda obtained Libyan weapons even before Bolton spelled it out.
So why the tough line from the United States? One reason is that holding Libya directly responsible for its chemical stocks will force Gadhafi to lock down his weapons even tighter than before, hopefully to eliminate any chance that al Qaeda may get their hands on them. Second, Washington obviously wants to discourage Libya from acquiring more weapons, which could potentially be lost, sold or stolen. Third, the U.S. government likely doesn't want to spend any more time and resources in a slow rapprochement with Libya, and may want to force Tripoli to commit itself as a silent ally in the war against terrorism. |
