March 24, 2011
A wee oversight: sanctions cut rebels cash, access to arms
Now, one would have hoped that this would have been worked out, given past experience (from Libya crisis: live updates | World news | guardian.co.uk):
4.32pm: In his update to MPs, William Hague said Libya's National Oil Corporation would be subject to sanctions (12.46pm). The tightening of the economic noose on Gaddafi means the regime has been cut off from oil revenues. But economic sanctions will also hit the opposition, points out Samuel Ciszuk, a Middle East energy analyst with the IHS consultancy.Additionally by all accounts they are also fully subject to the arms embargo. Well that's really very very precious. The Guide already has the stocks he likely needs, so sanctions are a bit of high-mindedness without much effect, and he's by all accounts got major cash reserves on hand. So, the main effect of sanctions in the near term would appear to be to hobble the Rebellion. Brilliant.
The state-owned NOC subsidiary, the Arabian Gulf Oil Co. (AGOCO), the upstream, midstream and downstream infrastructure of which the opposition largely controls, has been named as a sanctioned entity, making any near-time efforts to sell crude through the eastern oil port of Marsa El-Harigh for now, rather impossible. For the opposition movement, which cannot fall back on rumoured large gold reserves, this poses a significant immediate problem.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Additionally by all accounts they are also fully subject to the arms embargo.
The text of the Security Council resolution -- full text in my other post and as pointed out by "alle" -- contains "notwithstanding" language that at least allows the arms embargo to be bypassed.
Posted by: matthew h at March 24, 2011 02:46 PM
This is a Whitehall constant - Bosnia, Spanish Civil War etc. Leaving one side with a comparative military advantage appears to be standard British policy.
Posted by: zenpundit at March 26, 2011 12:55 AM
what would seem easier to do, given the Electronic Warfare capacities of the USAF and the 'flexibility' described above of the UNSC resolution - would be to take out the broadcasting capacity of the Qaddafi regime, as below requested/demanded by the Council of Free Ulema:
Gaddafi, his sons, and associates have been directly ordering killings on Libyan television
channels. These orders have been fully implemented by Gaddafi’s criminal thugs and
mercenaries, resulting in the death of thousands and in tens of thousands of injuries.
All such murderous broadcasting has been aired utilizing space-segments and bandwidth
purchased from several broadcasting services and bandwidth-provision companies such
as Intelsat, Eutelsat, NileSat, and ArabSat.
Please help URGENTLY STOP all such broadcasting ability being provided to murderers
who have been systematically committing crimes against humanity. Their continued ability
to broadcast is resulting in the murder of innocent civilians. The Libyan people hold all
parties participating in the killing and maiming of our children, directly or indirectly, fully
responsible, and will pursue them through all legal means, including the International
Please help us spread this message, and do your very best to stop killer broadcasting.
Posted by: dawud at March 27, 2011 01:37 AM
This is a slight hijack, sorry about that. I am wondering if you would consider at some point writing a bit about Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, if you have any thoughts on the subject. Personally, I'm very curious about him. Most people in the west (including me) know next to nothing about him, except being considered an arab "progressive"; being the man behind AlJazeera who obviously have had some influence on what's now happening...
Posted by: SherwoodAndersson at March 27, 2011 05:28 PM
I don't have much to say about the Gulf, it's the area I have the thinnest experience and feel least like I know the workings.
I'd hazard the opinion though that Al Thani is clever in working with what he has, AJC buys him real cred, but at the same time that Qatar is both oil AND a major nat gas producer (much less cyclical) with a small population and less "issues" than its neighbours, he has the luxury to indulge in things. My impression is Qatar manages better governance than many others.
Progressive? Mmmm, more like fabulously rich enlightened despot. At least he seems clever enough not to blow it on utter inanities (a certain World Cup being an exception).
Posted by: The Lounsbury at March 28, 2011 12:04 PM