SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (39922)8/26/2002 9:15:45 AM
From: jcky  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Well, Nadine. This another one of those agree to disagree issues.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (39922)8/26/2002 2:05:05 PM
From: KLP  Respond to of 281500
 
OMG, Nadine, say it isn't so: Did I mention that Muamar Gaddafi is scheduled to be the next head of the UN Human Rights Council?).

Found several reasons this will be trouble....

All for One, One for All

The Organization of African Unity is dead, long live the African Union. Better luck this time?
BY PETER HAWTHORNE/DURBAN
time.com

A moment of silence, please, for the Organization of African Unity. Born almost 40 years ago in a wave of optimism that Africa could solve its own problems, the OAU never measured up and last week was mercifully killed off by its member states. Its replacement, the African Union, was launched with a whole new set of rules for managing the progress and viability of the continent. While the OAU was formed to fight colonialism, apartheid and foreign interference, the A.U. will concentrate on human rights, democracy, good governance and development.

But will the new organization suffer the same fate as its predecessor? The OAU sought merely to manage Africa's conflicts and crises. Instead, they have to be resolved — "and I do mean resolved," U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan told heads of state and other representatives of the OAU's 53 members gathered for the changeover in the South African harbor city of Durban last week. As the fanfares of the launch ceremony faded, however, some delegates were already uneasy.

The A.U.'s objectives and principles emphasize democratic codes of conduct that are certainly not practiced by several of its members. Unlike the OAU, the new Union also has the right to intervene in member states in cases of war crimes, genocide and "crimes against humanity." A Peace and Security Council is to be established, and a permanent pan-African peacekeeping force is planned for the future. If these had been in operation during the OAU days, it is argued, genocide and civil wars in countries like Sierra Leone, Angola and Rwanda might have been avoided.

The number one spoiler in the African Union and the factor that probably gives Western observers the greatest cause for concern is Libya's Muammar Gaddafi. Already smarting at the way his dream of a "United States of Africa" — with himself as President — was upstaged by the A.U.'s formation, Gaddafi was also dismayed at another recent bit of scene stealing: the launch of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), an economic initiative led by South Africa's Thabo Mbeki and other African leaders. Only months ago, Gaddafi was dismissing NEPAD as an exercise in neocolonialism. But a visit by Mbeki to Tripoli before the Durban summit brought the Libyan leader back on board, and last week he was even invited to join an expanded NEPAD implementation committee. Still, Gaddafi is clearly uncomfortable with some of NEPAD's requirements. If African countries want to qualify for Western aid, for instance, they must show they abide by principles of good governance, rule of law, democracy and sound economic management. Yet as Gaddafi told the Durban delegates: "We have democracy of our own style and patterns. We accept assistance, but we refuse conditions."

Gaddafi would still like the African Union to be based in Libya instead of Addis Ababa, the OAU's Ethiopian headquarters, and he is reported to be building a palatial meeting hall in Tripoli for the pan-African parliament that is envisaged for the Union. No decision has been made yet on where to locate the planned parliament, an African Court of Justice and an African Central Bank and Monetary Fund. South Africa's Mbeki, meanwhile, who much to Gaddafi's discomfort hosted last week's meeting and will serve as the A.U.'s chairman in its first year, is also in effect running NEPAD from its South African base. "While Mbeki holds the reins, the West is ready to do business," said a Western diplomat in Durban. "When Gaddafi puts his oar in, it tends to look the other way."

Apart from the Gaddafi factor, the African Union will have to figure out what to do with rogue members. "African leaders will be judged on how they deal with hard cases, not soft ones," says Tony Leon, leader of South Africa's opposition Democratic Alliance. One hard case has already surfaced: autocratic Zimbabwe. "Who will tell President Robert Mugabe that he's gone totally off the rails?" asks Mathatha Tsedu, head of the South African National Editors Forum. When the A.U. gets down to examining the fitness of its own members, it will have to look not just at Zimbabwe but also at Cameroon, Kenya, Liberia, Morocco, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Swaziland, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), where there are decidedly, as Gaddafi would put it, different styles of "democracy." Perhaps that assessment will even include Libya, where Gaddafi came to power in a 1969 military coup, rules by decree and has never had a democratic election.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (39922)8/26/2002 2:07:48 PM
From: KLP  Respond to of 281500
 
AFRICAN UNION GRAPPLES WITH WAR, CORRUPTION
diplomaticobserver.com

Africa's new African Union, tasked with enriching the poor continent, met to review its daunting mandate on Wednesday amid scepticism it can summon the collective will to turn fine words into deeds.

REUTERS- "Anybody who comes to power unconstitutionally cannot sit with us," Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo told reporters, citing a key tenet of the 53-nation AU, which replaced the long ineffectual Organization of African Unity (OAU) on Tuesday.

About 40 presidents and monarchs were in Durban to launch the AU, which has explicit pledges to improve human rights and fight corruption, with South African President Thabo Mbeki as chairman for its first year.
Analysts said some long-serving leaders would have to change the habits of a lifetime to turn the AU's aims into reality, something they failed to do under the OAU -- a body that prized African solidarity above the quality of government.

Analysts pointed to the absence from Tuesday's speeches of any substantive discussion of the AIDS pandemic ravaging the continent, the food crisis gripping southern Africa or the political tension in Zimbabwe.
"Politically the leaders want to be seen as part of this new era," said Ugandan commentator Robert Kabushenga. "But they also want to leave themselves a lot of leeway to go back home and go on doing what they want to their people and their neighbors."

"There must be the political will," Kenya's Daily Nation said in an editorial. "It is all too easy for an annual summit to be dominated by high-sounding rhetoric about African unity, while nothing practical is being done."
The AU began its first full day of operation on Wednesday trying to sort out confusion over where it would next meet.

Mbeki on Tuesday called a special or "extraordinary" AU summit to debate radical amendments to the AU's founding charter proposed in Durban by maverick Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

South African officials had said there was broad support for Mbeki's move to convene an interim meeting on the Libyan amendments and other unfinished business.

But Obasanjo said on Wednesday there would be no special summit before the scheduled meeting in Maputo in 12 months time.
"I believe that the point of view for an ordinary summit a year from now carried the day," Obasanjo told reporters.

Gaddafi, who grabbed centre stage at the celebrations on Tuesday with trademark anti-Western rhetoric, wants Africa to be a single state with one army and believes Mbeki as serving AU chairman should move to the body's headquarters in Ethiopia.

The ideas are likely to be ridiculed in Western capitals. Human rights groups called for strong steps by the AU, especially under a much-touted "peer review" mechanism in which presidents are meant to evaluate each other's performance, to root out abuses on a continent ravaged by war and corruption.

"Peer review is a positive step, but only if the process is transparent and given teeth," said Human Rights Watch. "It must be backed up by institutions that can ensure proper scrutiny and enforcement of human rights."

At their meetings on Monday, the heads of state approved the creation of a Peace and Security Council that will have greater powers to tackle conflicts than its predecessor in the OAU.

Top-level talks continued into the early hours on Wednesday to try to resolve one of Africa's worst conflicts, the many-sided war in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame said Congo leader Joseph Kabila had not resolved Rwanda's security concerns about its big neighbor in the talks on the four-year-old conflict.

"The concerns of Rwanda remain and they have not changed," Kagame, who met Kabila on Tuesday in the presence of Mbeki and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, told a news conference.

Rwanda accuses Kabila's government of harboring ethnic Hutu militias it blames for the slaughter of some 800,000 minority Tutsis and moderate Hutus in the 1994. It says it will not pull its troops out until the militias are disarmed.

The AU upheld a controversial OAU policy on Madagascar, refusing to recognize millionaire businessman Marc Ravalomanana as president, saying his administration took power unconstitutionally and calling for fresh elections.

Ex-president Didier Ratsiraka, now in Paris, had held power for more than two decades on the giant island. Ratsiraka fled to France last week after the United States and then France, Germany and China announced they would work with Ravalomanana.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (39922)8/26/2002 2:13:17 PM
From: KLP  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
And finally: Wednesday, 3 May, 2000, 16:21 GMT 17:21 UK
The long road to trial
news.bbc.co.uk

As the long-awaited trial of the two Libyans suspected of causing the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing opens in the Netherlands, BBC Monitoring looks at some of the shifts and turns in the Libyan position during the years it has taken to bring the case to trial:

26 March 1992: Libyan Ambassador to Belgium Mohammad Sharif Adin al-Fayturi says: "Libya was neither directly nor indirectly responsible.

"If the world court upholds Britain's request, there will be a great danger of small states being asked to hand over their nationals or being punished by the great powers."

1 May 1992: Libyan lawyer Ibrahim Legwell, representing the two suspects, says: "The defendents have agreed to be tried in Britain or the United States if a fair trail is assured."



12 November 1993: Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi says "We have no confidence in the West. We believe the suspected Libyans will not receive an objective hearing. Their human rights will be violated.

"We have courts of law in Libya. Whoever has any evidence may come and present it, and whoever is found guilty will be punished." <\b>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is not possible for someone to hand over their sons to an enemy
Col Gaddafi

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 February 1994: Col Gaddafi says: "Libya is closing the Lockerbie file because it knows that what it is going through is the price it has to pay to maintain its independence."

16 February 1994: Col Gaddafi says only an Islamic court would be competent to try the men.

"We have told them that it is not possible for someone to hand over their sons to an enemy ... However, should there be an Islamic court with an Islamic jury, whether in Brtain, America, France, Egypt or Malta, the venue would not matter any longer," he said.


20 October 1994: Libya proposes handing over the two suspects to the Arab League.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The trial should be in an independent Scotland.
Libyan news agency

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 March 1997: Lawyer Ibrahim Legwell tells the Libyan news agency Jana, in a reference to reports of corruption in the British Tory party: "If these are the morals of its [UK] officials, it is hardly reassuring for the nationals of another country to be tried by a country ... where corruption flourishes at the highest levels?"
5 September 1997: Jana says a trial should be in "an independent Scotland".

29 October 1997: Col Gaddafi says he would welcome a trial in a "neutral country".

18 April 1998: Libya says it is ready to accept a trial under Scottish law at the International Court of Justice in the Hague after a meeting with relatives of the victims.

28 August 1998: A Libyan Foreign Ministry statement says: "The Jamahiriyah [Libya] announces its acceptance of the content of Security Council Resolution 1192/1998 of 27 August 1998 ... but does not consider itself bound by the rulings of the agreement between the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, which is attached to the resolution."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the Netherlands will merely be a transit point
Col Gaddafi

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 September 1998: Col Gaddafi says: "We will not accept the [UN] resolution ... because it is an endorsement of piracy ... Libya objects to any drafts involving its nationals because it was not consulted ... it flouts the international will, it flouts human rights and international law."

11 September 1998: Col Gaddafi says: "The truth is that the Netherlands will merely be a transit point before the accused are sent to Britian"

1 October 1998: Gaddafi rejects the detention in the Netherlands of the two men on the grounds that they might be "abducted" by the USA and UK.

5 April 1999: Libya says it will hand over the two suspects after mediation by South African President Nelson Mandela and Saudi Prince Bandar in Tripoli.

"As a result of the efforts which have been made by a number of countries and foreign dignitaries, as well as the good offices of the much-respected Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Republic of South Africa and the UN secretary-general, to find a peaceful solution to the so-called Lockerbie issue and guarantee a just and fair trial of the two suspects before a court in the Netherlands ... the General People's Committee for Justice and Public Security has allowed them to travel in accordance with the arrangements made by the UN General Secretariat," the Libyan Foreign Ministry said.


3 May 2000: On the morning the trial opened, the Libyan news agency Jana quoted an Egyptian newspaper as saying the USA had stepped up efforts to indict the two suspects - Abdel Basset al-Megrahi and Al-Amin Khalifa Fhima.

Jana said: "This information forces us and the world to ask: if this information is true, is the internationally-agreed court a Scottish court or is it the US State Department?"

"America's attempts to influence the progress of the case are a flagrant violation of justice and an explicit interference in the competence of the court," Jana added.

"American attempts to influence the progress of the case could lead to the passing of a sentence which is not the court's. Therefore any indictment of the Libyan citizens would be passed under American pressure."


BBC Monitoring, based in Caversham in southern England, selects and translates information from radio, television, press, news agencies and the Internet from 150 countries in more than 70 languages.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (39922)8/26/2002 2:27:30 PM
From: KLP  Respond to of 281500
 
And one more on this as of today:
Ex-Aide: Abu Nidal Behind Lockerbie
Fri Aug 23, 6:50 AM ET
By SARAH EL DEEB, Associated Press Writer

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - Abu Nidal, the terrorist mastermind found dead in Iraq this week, was responsible for the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 in Lockerbie, Scotland, a one-time aide to the terrorist claimed.

AP Photo



In a series of interviews published in the Arabic Al Hayat newspaper this week, Atef Abu Bakr claimed that Abu Nidal told a meeting that his radical Fatah ( news - web sites)-Revolutionary Council was behind the bombing that killed 270 people, most of them Americans.

Abu Bakr is a former spokesman for the group and one of Abu Nidal's closest aides between 1985 and 1989, when he split with him over management of the organization. Abu Bakr's whereabouts were not known.

The attack has been blamed on Libya, and in March this year, a Scottish appeals court upheld the murder conviction of former Libyan intelligence agent Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi for the blast.

Al-Megrahi was sentenced to life in prison, with no possibility of parole for 20 years. A second Libyan, Lamen Khalifa Fhimah, was acquitted.

No comment was available late Thursday from the office of the Scottish prosecutors in the case against al-Meghrahi.

"Abu Nidal told a ... meeting of the Revolutionary Council leadership: I have very important and serious things to say. The reports that attribute Lockerbie to others are lies. We are behind it," Abu Bakr was quoted as saying in the interview to be published in the paper's Friday edition. The paper provided the AP with a copy of the article.

Abu Bakr did not say when the alleged meeting took place. The gathering was attended by five members of the council, including Abu Bakr and Abu Nidal.

'"If any one of you lets this (word) out, I will kill him even if he was in his wife's arms,'" Abu Bakr quoting Abu Nidal as saying.

The spokesman for Abu Nidal's group in Beirut, Ghanem Saleh, could not be immediately reached for comment.

Ghassan Sharbal, al-Hayat's assistant editor who conducted the interview, said he spoke to Abu Bakr before Abu Nidal's death was announced this week. He refused to provide other details.

On Wednesday, the Iraqi intelligence chief said in Baghdad the 65-year-old Abu Nidal ended his own life rather than face an Iraqi court for allegedly communicating with a foreign country.

The al-Hayat interviews began publishing on Tuesday.