World Powers Back Lifting Libyan Arms Embargo

Pamela Dockins

Voice of America

World powers say they will back Libya’s new government in its bid to lift a U.N. arms embargo, a move that could help the government combat internal security threats and fight Islamic State.

Secretary of State John Kerry announced the decision following a multi-nation meeting chaired by the United States and Italy.    

The United States and the international community “stand ready, to provide humanitarian, economic and security support to the new Libyan government,”  Kerry said.  But he said world powers are not talking about troops or “boots on the ground" in Libya.

The internationally recognized Government of National Accord is facing challenges from rival factions and Islamic State-affiliated militants who have established a base in the central city of Sirte and have used that base to launch attacks in neighboring Tunisia.
 
In a joint news conference Friday, Libyan Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj described the situation in his country as “bad” in terms of the economy and security.
 
He urged world powers to provide additional training and equipment for Libyan forces, saying Libya’s neighbors would not be “spared” if terrorism grows inside the country.
 
"Libya is a keystone for access to the Sahel, the Maghreb, the Near East and the Mediterranean and Europe and to have Daesh have a foothold in Libya is bad for everybody," he said.
 
Libya has been grappling to overcome the chaos that followed the 2011 ouster and killing of leader Moammar Gadhafi.  World powers are hoping the Government of National Accord can unite the country.
 
Representatives from 19 other countries in the region joined the talks, along with the United Nations, African Union, EU and Arab League.

​​Effort to Help Stabilize Nagorno-Karabakh
 
Another focal point was a multi-national effort to help stabilize Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnic Armenian enclave within Azerbaijan that was the scene of intense fighting in April.  

The two countries accused each other of violating a cease-fire.  The flare-up was partly fueled by a worsening economic situation in Azerbaijan because of the fall of oil prices.
 
Monday’s sessions are the first time the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan have met since the flare-up.
 
A senior State Department official said the United States wants both countries to re-commit to a 1994 cease-fire agreement and a negotiating process that will lead to a comprehensive settlement.
 
“We would like to see an outcome where the presidents agree to certain steps that can reduce tensions along the line of contact,” the official said Monday.
 
The official, who spoke before the talks, also said the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe needed enhanced monitoring for violations in the disputed region.  The U.S., Russia and France serve as co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, which has been working to find a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

​​Ongoing Concerns About Syria's Stability
 
The talks in Vienna follow Kerry's visit to Saudi Arabia, where he sought that government's support in strengthening a ceasefire agreement between Syrian government forces and rebels before broader talks on Syria.
 
Tuesday, the 17-nation International Syria Support Group will convene in Vienna to discuss the stalled political talks, difficulties in maintaining the February cease-fire and uneven U.N. results in delivering humanitarian aid.  U.N. Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura has indicated he will await the results of the  meeting before setting a date for the next round of proximity talks between the government and the opposition.

Kerry will also attend a NATO ministerial meeting in Brussels and then will travel to Burma in a show of U.S. support for the country's newly elected government.
 
In the following week, Kerry will join President Barack Obama in Vietnam.

A New Big Three?

G. Murphy Donovan

If nothing else, Vladimir Putin is a leader who paints Russia’s image with broad strokes. He overcame a KGB and Communist past to create a kind of democratic autocracy in Russia. He literally, and figuratively, restored Christianity and orthodox churches across the land. In his spare time, Putin rides Harley Davidson bikes with the Night Wolves, Russia’s first post-Communist motorcycle club, an organization that might be the only state-sponsored political club for bikers on the planet.

The Russian president rehabilitated the Russian armed forces too in the wake of the Afghan/Chechen debacles. More recently, Putin has unchained the bear and changed the complexion of politics and dissent in the Caucuses, Georgia, Ukraine, and now Syria. Russian push back against NATO expansion, and regime change follies, is a predictable, if not understandable, response to a hapless Brussels. Why European politicians seek a fight with Russia in the middle of an Islamic migrant blitz is a mystery to tacticians, strategists, and veteran diplomats alike.

The Russian president recently exposed Turkey too, as NATO’s Achilles’ heel, a terrorist 5^th column between East and West. NATO turned a blind eye to the Erdogan/Baghdadi oil cartel until the Russian Air Force began destroying north bound convoys. The CFO for the Turk/ISIS connection appears to be Billy Erdogan, son of the duplicitous Turkish president. Across the border, Syria was another small war stalemate until Putin stepped in.

Russians still carry American astronauts into space too, while Washington maintains spite sanctions against Moscow - a testimony to Russian character and Obama era vapidity. With Putin, diplomacy is often just a door left ajar. The Russian space taxi serves Americans at NSA and affirmative action astronauts worldwide. The cutting edge of extra-terrestrial travel now requires a Kazak base and a Russian rocket.

Unlike European and American leaders, Vladimir Putin has no illusions about existential threats like open borders, Islamic imperialism, or religious fascism.

The Muslim world has been providing fighters to a half century of global jihad that targets and kills Americans and West Europeans with near impunity. Ironically, no Muslim nations are burdened with economic sanctions like those imposed on Russia. Indeed, America and Europe are now suffering from atrocity fatigue. Muslims continue to kill and maim while Washington and Brussels continue to rationalize global terror as the new normal.  

For apologists, calling Islam a “great” culture is the feckless rhetoric of enablers.

The boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel is similar to the Russian sanctions, movements motivated by bias and historical bigotry. Just as Israel won a series of wars against predatory Arabs, the West won the Cold War with inept Communism - and Europe still can’t take yes for an answer from a Russia that has reinvented itself.

Victory Day, celebrating Soviet success in World War II, has become the most significant holiday on the Russian calendar under Putin. Unlike America and Europe; victory, success, and the need to oppose fascism, including the religious variety, are mainstays of contemporary Russian vigilance. President Obama is about to visit Hiroshima in Japan, he has declined invitations to celebrate Victory Day in Russia.  Of the WWII “Big Three” allies that defeated fascist Germany and imperial Japan, Russia sacrificed the most to defeat the Nazis and save Europe.  Russia may have to rescue Europe from itself again in the 21^st Century.

While the Russian president cultivates “a never forget” ethic, the American president seems to never remember. Indeed, Barack Obama, as with Muslim history, seems to be ignorant about the legacy of uncommon cultures - and the difference between friendly and lethal competition. If a liberal like Roosevelt could make common cause with Joseph Stalin and a conservative like Ronald Reagan could do business with Mikhail Gorbachev, how is it that a political footnote like Barack Hussein Obama can’t do business with Vladimir Putin?

The face of 21^st century fascism is religious – and Islamic. There’s not much difference between secular and religious totalitarians. Coercion, terror, and atrocity is what they have in common.  Alas Europe, with the possible exception of Brexit England, seems to be channeling early 20^th Century behaviors that enabled National Socialism. Recall that Italy and Spain made common cause with fascism. France and Belgium rolled over like streetwalkers, and most of Scandinavia allowed Hitler’s vermin to take control uncontested. “Neutrality” in Europe before and during WWII was another word for appeasement. In the North, the flavor was Quisling; in the South, collaboration was called Vichy. The EU and NATO are not about defense today so much as they are about flirting with historical folly.

The parallels between mid- Century Europe and early the early 21^st Century European Union are difficult to ignore anymore.  Euocrats do not have a clue about common cultural or common kinetic defense. Terrorists live cheek to jowl with oblivious Belgians. The European Union seeks to solve the 5^th Column problem now by making Turkey an open border too!  

Some days it’s not difficult to conclude that clueless Europe and ruthless Mecca deserve each other. In the distant past, Islam was at the Gates of Vienna. Now the crescent and sword knocks on the doors of Westminster Abby. If common sense were currency, the European Union would be insolvent.

The loss of a feckless West Europe is sure to provide new opportunities for new alliances. Given the endemic chaos and aggression emanating from the Muslim world; Russia, China, and the United States might be the logical core for a new “big three,” alliance against 21^st Century totalitarians. One of the most obvious advantages of a new global military coalition would be economy. Unlike NATO dependencies, the Chinese and Russians will surely pay their own way.

Ironically, China and Russia are already fiscal allies, in so much as both have emerged as a kind budget Viagra for the US Department of Defense. It’s difficult to justify “huge” defense budgets at the Pentagon if the real threat is 5^th column migrants and terror driving a Toyota.

Only one candidate in the US presidential primaries suggests that small wars, strategy, and alliances should on the table in 2016. Hard as it is to forecast how such a discussion might go, any movement in new directions would be an improvement over the “new normal;” cooked threats, sanguinary inertia, and suicidal appeasement.

In small wars of a thousand cuts, time is not an American or European ally.