The US Sixth Fleet has begun repositioning its ships in the Mediterranean, triggering speculation of a NATO invasion of Libya.
It comes as Libya’s long-time leader Colonel Gaddafi remains besieged in the capital Tripoli, with opposition forces nearby.
After the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that “nothing is off the table” when it came to Libya, the American Navy started to take tactical positions off the coast of that North African country. At this point, the possibility of any of the major forces in the region, like US military, NATO troops or even UN peacekeepers, setting their feet on Libyan shores should not be ruled out.
This was mirrored by comments of British Prime Minister David Cameron who has said that he would not exclude the use of the military there, and that there is a possibility that Britain could provide arms to the opposition forces. He also said he would support a no flight zone imposed over Libyan territory to stop Colonel Gaddafi’s jetfighters from making air strikes on military installations seized by the opposition.
It must be noted that NATO’s Secretary General has repeatedly stressed that NATO would not interfere in the situation in Libya unless the UN adopts a resolution to do so. Getting such a document, however, looks like an impossible task because Russia and China have already vehemently opposed any kind of outside interference in Libya and say the resolution will definitely be vetoed.
Western politicians are also playing a “weapons of mass destruction” card, saying the Libyan regime might have stockpiles of chemical weapons, despite the fact that Libya officially refused to continue the development of chemical weapons and signed international treaties accordingly.
In any case, possible external military interference in Libya might seriously damage the relationship between the Arab world and the West.
“This is very ugly, this return of humanitarian imperialism ,” believes Asia Times correspondent Pepe Escobar, who said that if sanctions against the Gaddafi clan are ok, then the NATO-US intervention in Libya already been openly discussed in Brussels would be a disgusting thing, but “it cannot be ruled out for the moment.”
The violence in Libya is continuing. Heavy weapons are allegedly being used against armed anti-government forces. The opposition insists that though it is armed, their weapons are nothing in comparison with the regular army still loyal to Muammar Gaddafi.
There are rumors of a food crisis in the country as the price of rice in Tripoli has allegedly risen by 500 percent, and food shortages are on the horizon.
Amidst the bloodbath in the country, Colonel Gaddafi has said that his people love him and are ready to die for him and Libya. Gaddafi is reportedly remaining in Tripoli.
Trends forecaster Gerald Celente says it is not support for the Libyan people, but interest in the country’s vast oil fields that is driving US rhetoric.
“The only reason they are interested in Libya is for their oil. Do you hear anybody screaming and yelling here about all those people that were killed last week on the Ivory Coast or in Sudan?” Celente questions. “We already heard Hillary Clinton say that they are willing to do anything for anybody in Libya that needs aid.”
Gerald Celente says the hypocrisy is “just beyond belief” and the western world is calling for the head of Gaddafi but not for the head of any other leader from rioting countries like Egypt, Bahrain, Tunisia or Yemen.
“Why? Because it is oil. You think we’d be in Iraq if the major export there was broccoli?” exclaimed Celente.