Secret files: US officials aided Gaddafi

[RKP5637]

"Al Jazeera uncovers evidence that influential Americans tried to help the now-deposed Libyan leader cling to power."

Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/08/2011831151258728747.html

<snip>

"I found what appeared to be the minutes of a meeting between senior Libyan officials – Abubakr Alzleitny and Mohammed Ahmed Ismail – and David Welch, the former assistant secretary of state who served under George W Bush and the man who brokered the deal which restored diplomatic relations between the US and Libya in 2008.

Welch now works for Bechtel, a multinational American company with billion dollar construction deals across the Middle East. The documents record that, on August 2, 2011, David Welch met with Gaddafi's officials at the Four Seasons Hotel in Cairo, just a few blocks from the US embassy there.

During that meeting Welch advised Gaddafi's team on how to win the propaganda war – suggesting several "confidence building measures", the documents said. The documents appear to indicate that an influential US political personality was advising Gaddafi on how to beat the US and NATO."

<snip>

"According to the document, as the meeting closed, Welch promised: "To convey everything to the American administration, the congress and other influential figures." But it appears that David Welch was not the only prominent American giving help to Gaddafi as NATO and the rebel army were locked in battle with his regime.

On the floor of the intelligence chief's office lay an envelope addressed to Gaddafi's son Saif Al-Islam. Inside, I found what appears to be a summary of a conversation between US congressman Denis Kucinich, who publicly opposed US policy on Libya, and an intermediary for the Libyan leader's son."

<snip>

"Al Jazeera contacted representatives of David Welch and Denis Kucinich requesting comment and they have not responded."

Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/08/2011831151258728747.html

[xchrom]

1. recommend

[Frances]

2. If I had been asked to choose between Kucinich's

position and Obama's, I would have chosen Obama's.

I expect Kucinich thought that supporting Gaddafi would keep the US out of war and that he considered the ends justify the means.

[no limit]

3. And are you willing to hold yourself and Obama responsible if things go to shit there?

[Frances]

7. It is certainly possible that things may go to shit there

but it is certain they were in shit under Gaddafi.

Even though I much prefer King's nonviolent resistance to injustice, I think Obama had to choose between (1)supporting those countries trying to get rid of Gaddafi, which cost money and lives (though no American lives) and (2) not supporting those countries, which, of course, amounted to supporting Gaddafi.

[no limit]

9. So not getting involved meant supporting Gaddafi. Interesting. Why does that argument sound familiar

maybe because it was the Bush administration that said if you didn't support the Iraq war you supported Saddam.

You honestly don't see the irony?

And you didn't answer my question. Obama made the decision to help get rid of Gaddafi. If as a result things get worse than they were under Gaddafi does he share blame for that?

[Frances]

13. You ask a good question

Bush started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, so I think Bush deserves more responsibility for the outcomes there than Obama does for Libya where Obama supported other countries who had already intervened.

To sum up, Obama deserves a little credit for supporting countries that helped the people of Libya successfully overthrow Gaddafi. On the other hand, Obama will have to accept a little responsibility if the overthrow of Gaddafi results in a worse (though it's hard to see how things could be worse)government. With the Repubs controlling the purse strings, Obama will not have much money available to supplement the efforts of other countries to stabilize Libya, so basically Obama will have to hope that the other countries will invest as much into stabilizing Libya as they did in supporting the efforts of people in Libya to replace Gaddafi.

[no limit]

14. and you give a fair answer. Thanks

I still don't like your characterization that if you didn't support the intervention you supported Gaddafi. But I don't think you actually meant it that way.

[snagglepuss]

4. How could someone like Kucinich have anything but disgust for reprensible

scum like Gadaffi? I'd love to know how Kucinich rationalizes supporting scum with lived in the lap of insdescrible luxury while Libynas barely scrapped by and were denied even the veneer of freedom.

[dionysus]

8. wasn't he recently in syria pumping up assad as well?

[TheWraith]

12. How do DUers?

You can hardly go a day on DU without someone telling you that somehow, the Quaddafi family's absolute dictatorship, complete with brutal purges, murders, ethnic cleansing, etcetera, is somehow better than a popular uprising, for reasons that are rather vague but always seem to come back to either claiming that the rebels are western puppets, or that the uncertainty of non-dictator rule is worse.

Some people are so invested in the whole gestalt of "imperial western colonialism" that anyone who's anti-US has to be recast as a good guy. Case in point, Hugo Chavez, who if he were supported by the US would be decried here as a fascist.

[tularetom]

5. Talk about mixed signals

Kudaffy probably didn't know whether to shit or go blind. Here's the administration making all sorts of dire threats while other Americans are more or less promising him aid and support.

Much of a slime ball as he is I wouldn't blame him one bit for mistrusting us.

[RKP5637]

6. Yep, I think all of these countries we muddle/war in get a lot of mixed signals

from the US and hence mistrust us

[PRETZEL]

10. I know the implication is that Welch was there on the administration's behalf

but Welch works for Bechtel, a major international oil company with ties much closer to the prior administration.

What's not to say that what Bechtel was doing wasn't in their own interests?

[karynnj]

11. Subject is slightly misleading as it was a former official and Kucinich, who has NO jusristiction

on this at all.

We would need more details to see what each of these men were really doing here. The former official It is hard to tell if Welch was the referred to "influential US political personality". What is clear is that he might be considered a lobbyist for Libya - and beyond that advising them on defeating the US really sounds very illegal.