03/13/2011

No-fly zone Libya: role of Israel

It is clear that the Israeli government who does not speak of the genocide on the Palestinians, does not support Gaddafi.
This is not surprising. Israel is the main military ally of the United States, Great Britain and France who, for the reason of oil, want a complete control over the Middle East.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Israeli minister favours Libya no-fly zone
Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, seen here in 2009, has said he believes a no-fly zone should be imposed on Libya to stop a "danger of genocide".
Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, seen here in 2009, has said he believes a no-fly zone should be imposed on Libya to stop a "danger of genocide".

AFP - Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon on Tuesday said he believed a no-fly zone should be imposed on Libya to stop a "danger of genocide".

Speaking at a conference in Brussels, Ayalon said international moves to impose a no-fly zone over Libya to stop Moamer Kadhafi using air strikes against his own people, had not been discussed by the Israeli government, but added:

"If you ask me personally, I think it should be imposed," he said.

There was "a danger of genocide" in Libya, he said.

"Morally we have to stop it", Ayalon said, adding "Its best to have the UN's okay."

US and European leaders have been weighing the use of NATO air power in a no-fly zone as Kadhafi fights a bloody rearguard action against encroaching rebels.

1 MARCH 2011 

HTTP://WWW.FRANCE24.COM/EN/20110301-ISRAELI-MINISTER-FAVO...

 

Comments

Illegality of the No-Fly Zones

The no-fly zones were unilaterally established by the U.S. government after the Persian Gulf War, supposedly to enforce UN resolutions on Iraq. There was one big problem, however: The United Nations never authorized the no-fly zones to be established. U.S. officials have always claimed that the U.S. government, as a member of the United Nations, has the right to unilaterally enforce any resolution of the United Nations. Such a position, however, is patently fallacious. Enforcement of an organization's rules and regulations belongs to the organization itself, not to each and every individual member of the organization.

Several years ago, the U.S. government knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately imposed an illegal embargo against Nicaragua. The case reached the World Court, which ruled in favor of Nicaragua and against the United States. As part of its judgment, the World Court awarded reparations to Nicaragua.

That official court judgment is still outstanding and remains unsatisfied. The U.S. government has continually refused to comply with the judgment and has even blocked attempts of the UN Security Council to enforce it.

Suppose Nicaragua unilaterally decided to enforce the World Court's judgment by establishing a no-fly zone in the southern part of the United States, backed up with Nicaraguan planes. Suppose also that whenever U.S. radar sites locked onto the Nicaraguan planes, the pilots would fire missiles at the sites, which would occasionally kill American radar operators and nearby civilians.

What would be the response of the U.S. government? How would the American people react, both to Nicaragua's "U.S. no-fly zone" and to the killings of U.S. citizens? Everyone knows the answer.

Posted by: Jan Boeykens | 03/14/2011

The comments are closed.