More

NATO Accused Of Overstepping Libya Mandate After Airstrike Reportedly Kills Gaddafi's Son

Libya Nato Airstrike Gaddafi

First Posted: 05/01/11 05:18 PM ET Updated: 07/01/11 06:12 AM ET

BRUSSELS (AP) -- After two airstrikes in a week on targets close to Muammar Gaddafi, NATO was on the defensive Sunday over accusations that it was overstepping its mandate by trying to kill the Libyan leader.

Russia said Sunday that the bombing of the home of Gaddafi's youngest son raised "serious doubts" about NATO's assertions that it is not targeting the Libyan strongman or his relatives.

"Disproportionate use of force ... is leading to detrimental consequences and the death of innocent civilians," the Russian Foreign Ministry warned.

International law does not explicitly forbid attacks on military commanders during wartime, but the U.N. Security Council mandate authorizing NATO action charged alliance forces with establishing a no-fly zone and protecting civilians from attack.

Security council members Russia, China and Brazil have warned that attempts to change the regime or eliminate its members would be a violation of the mandate.

Alliance officials and allied leaders emphatically denied they were hunting Gaddafi in order to break a stalemate in the war between the better-trained government forces and the lightly armed rebels. NATO said the Libyan government's announcement that Gadhafi's son and three grandchildren were killed in the airstrike late Saturday remained unconfirmed.

"All NATO's targets are military in nature and have been clearly linked to the Gaddafi regime's systematic attacks on the Libyan population and populated areas. We do not target individuals," said Canadian Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, who commands NATO's operation in Libya.

Bouchard said the strike was part of NATO's strategy to disrupt and destroy "the command and control of those forces which have been attacking civilians."

Michael Clarke, director of the Royal United Services Institute, a London military think tank, noted that NATO warplanes have been shifting their focus in the past two weeks, from providing close support for the rebels on the front lines to focusing on military and government communication nodes. The immediate aim appeared to be to impair Gaddafi's ability to direct units surrounding the besieged enclave of Misrata on the Mediterranean coast, where pro-regime forces have suffered a series of setbacks, he said.

Another aim could be to increase the psychological pressure on Gaddafi and the people close to him, by demonstrating "that the war is getting closer to them," he said.

Another analyst said that there was a fine line between hitting military command-and-control centers, and hitting the people commanding and controlling Libya's armed forces.

"You're obviously risking hitting Gaddafi and members of his family, certainly those members involved in commanding the military," said Nate Hughes, director of military analysis at Stratfor, a global intelligence company.

Hughes said there was confusion about the aim of the strikes partly because of an "inherent contradiction" about what NATO's military objectives were. Politicians in the U.S., Britain and the Netherlands are talking about forcing Gaddafi out of power but NATO continues to insist that the strongman is not a target, he noted.

NATO took over command of the operation on March 31, after its governing body approved military plans to implement a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for the protection of civilians from attacks by regime troops.

One of the first targets of the international force after the start of hostilities, was Gaddafi's Bab al-Aziziya presidential compound – which was previously bombed by U.S. warplanes in 1986 in retaliation for the attack on a German disco in which two U.S. servicemen were killed.

Last Monday, another strike on the same complex destroyed two more buildings.

At a joint news conference a day later, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and British Defense Minister Liam Fox denied the warplanes had targeted Gaddafi specifically, but said they would continue to take aim at his command centers.

NATO says the air offensive, which began on March 21 with attacks by a U.S.-led coalition, has so far destroyed or damaged about 600 targets, including about 200 tanks and armored personnel carriers, as well as dozens of surface-to-air missile sites, ammunition dumps and artillery pieces.

It declined to say Sunday how many command centers had been attacked.

___

Lynn Berry in Moscow contributed.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

BRUSSELS (AP) -- After two airstrikes in a week on targets close to Muammar Gaddafi, NATO was on the defensive Sunday over accusations that it was overstepping its mandate by trying to kill the Libyan...
BRUSSELS (AP) -- After two airstrikes in a week on targets close to Muammar Gaddafi, NATO was on the defensive Sunday over accusations that it was overstepping its mandate by trying to kill the Libyan...
Filed by Alexander Belenky  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,717
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (33 total)
08:10 AM on 05/11/2011
If it is not Genocide what would you /they call it????????????

https://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/notes/esat-ethiopia/47-ethiopian-migrants-died-trying-to-escape-the-unrest-in-libya/172900136098684
06:27 PM on 05/05/2011
The World won't have world peace as long as we have the US doing these horrible things around the World.

I wish you people would just stop!
01:49 PM on 05/02/2011
I don't see the bombing of a home of one of Gaddafi son and three grand children have to do with enforcing a no fly zone??? This is clearly a terrorist attack and violation of the UN mandate.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
albant
11:45 AM on 05/02/2011
So, only Saint US has the right to have secret torture sites in puppet countries, Guantanamo base with uncharged and defenseless, waterboarded inmates, Abu Grahib and US generals ordering tortures and executions. And finally, an US President ordering to kill another head of state.

In the mean time, he allows himself to make jokes on TV about Drones and Predators, Ja ja ja.

Then, US "CERTIFIES" everyone else's human rights records while sending drones to kill civilians, another president's family, kidnap and torture "unfriendly individuals". Not to worry, they are just "colateral damage", an euphemism used to cover the truth: Assasinated civilians.

Good for US credibility abroad.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
albant
11:20 AM on 05/02/2011
Desperate for Oil?

Sure.

That's all that matters.
10:34 AM on 05/02/2011
Isn't it heartwarming to know our tax dollars are paying for bombs and missiles to kill children?

And we claim Gaddafi is evil?
10:01 AM on 05/02/2011
I have great respect for the Russian Foreign Minister. He is surely worth listening to. We have to stop killing leaders of other nations! We should also stop propping up dictators of any kind.
Gaylord P Farqua
Herb Gardner Amateur Chef, Historian and Political
07:38 AM on 05/02/2011
The kind hearted Russians hate to see all this violence. And, besides it screws up the delivery of the arms they have sold Colonel Loon.
06:11 PM on 05/05/2011
and so?

Only Americans are allowed to ship arms?
photo
madinpahuff
Domari Nolo
06:13 AM on 05/02/2011
Did I miss something? We're at war with Libya now too? When did Congress declare that? I've really got to keep up much more thoorughly with current events. †
Eric4969
Type Today Post Tomorrow
10:03 AM on 05/02/2011
That would be NATO but you can say WE if it makes you feel better
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
albant
11:15 AM on 05/02/2011
NATO is a puppet of Pentagon and/or CIA and US President.

The use of WE is correct.
06:12 PM on 05/05/2011
NATO = USA

USA = NATO

Only truely dum people don't know this aka Americans.
06:10 AM on 05/02/2011
France, Britain, USA using advanced weaponry to kill defenseless Africans. Not exactly new, is it?
10:02 AM on 05/02/2011
How about NATO fighting for defenseless Africans? Their leader seems happy to eliminate all of them without batting an eye.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:58 AM on 05/02/2011
Russia and Venezuela are quite correct to point out the obvious - that NATO targeted what it repeatedly said it would not. In response, the Admin assassination bin Laden. I'm sure it's now more than Russia and Venezuela who wonder at just how comfortable this Admin is with the trigger finger - as in, too comfortable.
03:32 AM on 05/02/2011
Russia is just not a tier one nation, and they can't stand it. Oil and gas you say? Step inside a typical Russian flat on a cold day, and you'll feel what that means to the average citizen. Their population is dropping like an anchor, and their women are online in the millions trying to marry a stranger just to get out. Search "Russian demographics" and "Russian women" to see for yourself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Taj Snead
If they dont like obama they sure wont like me
03:40 AM on 05/02/2011
They are paying people to have babies!!!! 11 grand last time i checked things are bad in russkiland
06:15 PM on 05/05/2011
Talking down Russia doesn't excuse you scuum bags for invading Libya.
08:58 PM on 05/06/2011
The US is not at war in Libya, Obama said so.
03:19 AM on 05/02/2011
I remember Georgia in 2008, the constant threats to Estonia and Ukraine, and I don't know why but I feel like saying Russia doesn't really have her word in this situation. Brazil supports the FARCs and discretly invades (supporting illegal farmers, foresters and gold diggers) most of the little nations which surround its borders (Paraguay, French Guyana...). As for China, well, it isn't necessary to go further
03:00 AM on 05/02/2011
Lets see Russia and China want to talk about justice and fairness. What about the human rights mandates that are consistently ignored by these two countries. What about indefinitely jailing citizens for disagreeing with the policies of their own countries.What about the killings of Journalists who write critical articles about the corruption that permeates within. These countries have issues with trying to kill a madman who would kill thousands if given the opportunity. This duplicitousness is sickening.
06:16 PM on 05/05/2011
You are rich!

You Americans are sooo easily duped into believing ANYTHING.

The US has killed the MOST CIVILIANS BY FAR in the past 2 decades. YES YOU ARE the murders ...NOT Russia, NOT China.

YOU.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
World Citizen
02:53 AM on 05/02/2011
This is soooo wrong. Its a fight between Gaddafi and some of his ex-ministers.

The NATO mandate is a no-fly zone and to protect civilians from attack.

So how in the heck could this mean that NATO''s AIR OFFENSIVE, led by U.S. which has destroyed 600 targets - NOT MEAN forcing a regime change? I don't see any difference between this and what happened in IRAQ.

Desperate for Oil? Let's just get rid of these repressive Arab leaders that control the oil and set-up our own people in each of these countries. But only those with oil. Let Syria alone cuz it doesn't have oil anyway. Who's next? Saudi Arabia? Russia?