COMMENTS

Mandarina second ago
All I smell from this article is Monitor & co and certain other greedy Professors abandoning a seeming sinking ship . ``Flattery for Hire was acceptable to these greedy lot who only saw the sign of `dollars ` when the going was good for Senior and junior Ghaddafi . With friends like these !!!

America and it`s usual culprit allies , will always take on the weakest link in a line up of despotic rulers , bomb everything out of existence willy nilly ... hey , mission accomplished . Long live the West`s two - faced diplomacy !

No fear of Haig trials and being brought to justice for human rights violations or accused of Crimes Against Humanity ; for `we are the United Nations , therefore the Law .

To think that little less than two months ago apart from the fair weather friends above , the war mongering Coalition of the willing - France , Britain , America et al were falling over themselves to see who will dine the Ghadaffi`s best . In the light of this , the world is waiting for the reason for such frenzy by these countries for a no-fly zone mandate which has since been implemented as an all out war , in which there is a stalemate .

Does the arrogance of these countries who behave like `modern crusaders ` know no end ?
All said , I will not be surprised if Monitor and the professors are not back in the same Libya in future seeking business as usual .

COMMENTS :LIBYA/ AMERICAN CONFLICT

Margaret James-Cooper
MARGARET JAMES - C COMMENTED ON :

SHOULD PRESIDENT OBAMA PUNISH THE TYRANT IN TRIPOLITO SPARE THE LIVES OF PEOPLEWHO WANT DEMOCRACY ?

With extreme views like that expressed by Ranjith Ravindiran he should be joining forces with war - mongers like Sarah Palin , Senators John McCain and Joe Liebermann .
Rolling on & on about mad dog Ghaddafi and democracy when the Arab world , and indeed the world is littered with worst despotic ` forever ` rulers , like the West`s darlings : King Fahd of Saudi Arabia who in the midst of America and its usual culprit allies ( baying obscenely for Ghaddafi`s blood ) have by proxy invaded Bahrain by un-democratically sending troops to quell a ` democratic ` uprising . The Arab world -Yemen , Bahrain , Syria , Gaza , Ahmadenejad`s Iran are all burning , and the jaw - jawing is all about dubious Benghazi renegades and it`s civilians - as if the only civilians in Libya are only in oil rich Benghazi .

The truth is , America / allies will always take on the weakest link in a chain of despots that does not have the weapons of `armageddon ` to fight back or oil to fight for . Witness Kim Jung Il`s North Korea : America , South Korea and Japan`s recent miltary manouevres to intimidate North Korea , but dared not attack .Then there is the perpetual fruitless war rhethorics on Ahmadenejad and Iran . African Ivory Coast is burning as we speak . Where were the frenzies for no - fly zones during the Rwanda massacre of the Tutsis and the Hutus . Remember hyperactive Georgian President ,Sakkasvilli who invaded South Osetia ? Why did America & NATO not go in after Russia` drastic reaction of destruction and mayhem to retake South Osetia and declaring it independent of Gerorgia !

Democracy ? Whose democracy ? The West`s notion of Democracy - these days applicable to only where their interests lies or , Cultural , tribal ` democratic ` ruling systems of other nations --Arabs , Africans etc which does not conform to the west`s idea of ` democracy ` ? Again to America / Allies , democracy has for a very very long time now been to judge similar problems by different double - faced hypocritical standards - depending on whose side they are on . America & Co will always turn a blind eye to atrocities perpetuated by their ` friends ` of whom Ghaddafi and his sons as recently as a couple of months were !

Disappointing that Democracy to Ranjith Ravindiran is `` if I was Obama I would enforce a strict no-fly zone over Libya effectively immediately `` . Typical , all guns blazing without any rationalizing the situation or its future ramifications . Another George Bush gun slinging premature mission accomplished IRAQ - as is happening now in Libya. Shame Obama was rail - roaded into the no-fly zone frenzy ochestrated by Britain , France et al , who it would seem were pursuing `vendattas of perceived Gaddafi`s sins of terrorist Paymaster General of yester years . A chance to give Ghaddafi a bloody nose & grab that `liquid gold ` .

Obama`s initial hesitance would have stemmed from a looming re-election in 2012 and not to forget his branding of Bush and McCain as war -mongers during his election campaigns . I suspect his `origins conscience ` played a part hence the insistence of the consent of that `gutless Arab League ` to give legitimacy to UN no-fly zone mandate

The paraphernelia of war was already assembled on Libyan shores before the mandate approval ; a done deal ! With an Arab League members worst than Ghadaffi , a toothless African Union , cowardly veto vote abstaining Russia and Human Right Tianemmen Square violating China -, and a ` yes man ` Banky Moon ,he needed not to have worried .

Be it Partitioning Libya in the guise of protecting civilians ; as if civilians are only to be found in oil rich Benghazi or any different from civilians in other parts of Libya, let Libya solve it`s own problems . America and NATO have since gone beyond UN mandate and the world turns a blind eye . 112 cruise missiles on the very first day ! . All is bound to end in TEARS - judging by American Miltary Escapades before now

Rising Oil Prices: Is Yemen Next?

Rising Oil Prices: Is Yemen Next?

Another ` Opinion `on a Libyan no fly zone .

Michael Williams
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 17 March 2011 14.30 GMT
Article history

US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, who has urged the assembly to 'go beyond' a no-fly zone in authorising action against the forces of Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi. Photograph: guardian.co.uk/Reuters
Much to his detriment, President Obama has been sitting on the fence regarding the Libyan civil war. The president should have had the courage of his convictions to say that although his sympathies and the sympathies of the American people are with those Libyans who desire freedom, human rights and democracy, this is a fight that only Libyans can win. Unfortunately, if Thursday's statement from US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice is any indication, Obama has caved to misguided and poorly thought-out arguments for direct intervention.

It is not in the national interest of the United States to institute a no-fly zone. Although a former administration official criticised the president for prioritising oil over human rights, this is not about oil; it is about sensibility and moral hazard. Many of the same people championing intervention in Libya – Senators Lieberman, Kerry and McCain, to name but three – also advocated for the Iraq war. Remember how that turned out? They thought that intervention would be as easy as apple pie; nothing could go wrong, they argued.

The first lesson of strategy, senators, is that no plan survives first contact with the enemy. Instead of planning for the best, one must plan for the worst. Note the most hesitant member of the administration regarding a no-fly zone has been the US secretary of defense: Robert Gates understands the complexity of the issue. Most other American and international politicians are disingenuous on numerous levels as to the real difficulties and dangers of an intervention.

First, those who advocate in favour of intervention assume that the outcome will be a free and liberal-democratic Libya. It is perhaps worth consulting our history books to remember that democracy does not just happen. It is a messy and long process. There is no guarantee that if the US supports a no-fly zone, democracy will result.

What if the outcome of the rebellion against Gaddafi were to be a hardline Islamic government? Would that be in the interests of the United States? Somehow, I imagine the president might then be criticised for having intervened. The 2006 elections in the Palestinian territories in which Hamas won 74 out of 132 seats in the Palestinian legislative council, illustrates that democratic elections do not always deliver governments committed to secular, liberal-democratic values.

Furthermore, instituting a no-fly zone is not easy. A no-fly zone will require a sustained and systematic assault on Libyan infrastructure such as airports, communication hubs and roadways. It will result in the destruction of US airplanes and there will be a loss of life on the ground and among the ranks of the US military. Recent history in the Balkans and Iraq also shows us that no-fly zones are the first step to a full-on ground assault. If they really want to institute a no-fly zone, politicians should at least be honest with the public about the reality of the situation.

Maybe, just maybe, if a no-fly zone had been instituted a week ago to prevent the outbreak of civil war, it might have worked. But the entire international community, not just the White House, equivocated on the issue. Now, it is too late. Creating a no-fly zone at this point would be the first step to escalating the war, not preventing or ending it. Indeed, Ambassador Rice admitted as much when she said that the UN must now authorise a resolution that "goes beyond" a no-fly zone.

Make no mistake about it, Gaddafi is a bad man and it would be in the interests of the United States and of mankind in general, if the Libyan people were able to oust him and replace him with a more democratic and more liberal government. But the Libyan people must do this. Freedom does not come free, but it is Libyans, not Americans, British or French people, who must pay the price for freedom in Libya.

It is laughable that the US's European allies – Britain without an aircraft carrier to support a no-fly zone; the French who have antagonised Nato for decades with repeated "nons"; and the Germans, whose military refuses to fight in southern Afghanistan – have pressed for this zone. Are we to assume that Britain, France and Germany will be doing the heavy lifting on this mission? I, and the rest of the American electorate, assume not. Europe is, of course, yet again prepared to fight to the last American.

Perhaps Europe should put its money where its mouth is. The US can only do so much. Even if a no-fly zone were a good idea, the US would be pained economically and military to put it in place. I have no doubt that the military could do it, but it will further strain our nearly fractured armed forces and it will add millions of dollars to our already staggering national debt.

There is nothing immoral about staying out of another country's civil war. There is, however, great moral hazard in getting involved. In the first place, we risk exacerbating the conflict. And then, if we intervene in Libya, why not in Egypt, why not in Bahrain, why not in Burma? The world is full of bad men who perpetrate evil acts upon their peoples, but the international system cannot function if the United States and Europe run around thinking it is their divine-ordained right to help "liberate" the rest of the world from its oppressors.

The goal of US foreign policy should be to make the world safe for democracy, not to make the world democratic. Our supposed moral superiority in intervening to "save" human rights is a mask for years of supporting dictators who have oppressed the very human rights politicians claim we must now defend. Maybe we should rethink our foreign policy from the ground up, rather than bombing someone else's country into dust to compensate for our lack of moral rectitude.

LIBYA BANKING - RE :AMERICA / LEHMAN CONNECTION

Libya-Owned Bank Got 73 Loans From Fed Discount Window After Lehman Fell
By Donal Griffin and Bob Ivry - Apr 1, 2011 5:46 PM GMT+0100


Arab Banking Corp ., then part-owned by the Libyan state, used a New York branch to borrow at least $5 billion from the U.S. Federal Reserve in 2008 and 2009. Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg News

Chart: Federal Reserve's Discount Window
Chart: Federal Reserve FOIA release timeline
Arab Banking Corp., the lender part- owned by the Central Bank of Libya, used a New York branch to get 73 loans from the U.S. Federal Reserve in the 18 months after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. collapsed.

The bank, then 29 percent-owned by the Libyan state, had aggregate borrowings in that period of $35 billion -- while the largest single loan amount outstanding was $1.2 billion in July 2009, according to Fed data released yesterday. In October 2008, when lending to financial institutions by the central bank’s so- called discount window peaked at $111 billion, Arab Banking took repeated loans totaling more than $2 billion.

Fed officials say all the discount window loans made during the worst financial crisis since the 1930s have been repaid with interest.

The U.S. government has frozen assets linked to the regime of Libyan ruler Muammar Qaddafi and engaged in air strikes against his military forces, which are battling a rebel uprising in the North African country. Arab Banking got an exemption that allows the firm to continue operating while barring it from engaging in any transactions with the Libyan government, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

Sanders Reacts

“It is incomprehensible to me that while creditworthy small businesses in Vermont and throughout the country could not receive affordable loans, the Federal Reserve was providing tens of billions of dollars in credit to a bank that is substantially owned by the Central Bank of Libya,” Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, wrote in a letter to Fed and U.S. officials.

The letter was addressed to Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and John Walsh, acting comptroller of the currency. The figure refers to the aggregate amount of loans the bank received under U.S. lending programs. Arab Banking, known as ABC, owed about $4 billion to the Fed under other bailout programs in the fall of 2009, data released in December show.

“ABC has a robust balance sheet, is amply capitalized and currently maintains a comfortable liquidity position,” the company said in an e-mailed statement. “ABC currently has no outstanding loans under any Federal Reserve, or other, emergency lending program.”

Libya’s Stake

Jack Gutt, a spokesman for the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, declined to comment. Arab Banking said Dec. 2 that Libya’s stake in the Manama, Bahrain-based lender had increased to 59 percent.

“There was an uneasy detente between the United States and Libya” when the loans were made, said William Poole, senior economic adviser to Merk Investments LLC and a former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “It would not happen in the morning.”

The New York branch, on Park Avenue in midtown Manhattan, deals mainly in trade finance, according to its website. David Siegel is the branch’s treasurer. The bank’s chairman is Mohammed Husain Layas, chief executive officer of the Libyan Investment Authority. The CEO is Bahrain-based Hassan Ali Juma.

“ABC’s New York branch conducts wholesale business and plays an important role in helping U.S. companies conduct business in the Middle East,” the company said in the statement. “The New York branch of ABC also participates in enhancing the liquidity of U.S. markets and virtually all of its employees are U.S. citizens.”

Company’s Loss

Arab Banking reported a loss of $880 million in 2008 as it took a $1.1 billion charge tied to structured investment vehicles and derivative products known as collateralized debt obligations. Arab Banking recovered during the next two years, posting profits totaling $265 million.

Libya previously shared the bank with the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and the Kuwait Investment Authority, both sovereign investment funds. The Libyan Central Bank bought out the Abu Dhabi stake in 2010 and took majority control, which prompted Fitch Ratings in December to downgrade Arab Banking’s credit rating.

In March, after the U.S. froze Libya’s assets, Fitch downgraded the bank’s credit rating again, this time to “junk” status. Contracts to protect Arab Banking’s debt, which typically rise as investor confidence deteriorates, increased by 186 basis points to 500 during March. A basis point equals $1,000 annually on a contract protecting $10 million of debt.

Uncertain Outcome

“Nobody knows how the situation in Libya is going to work out finally and who will ultimately be in charge and obviously who will be running institutions like the central bank,” Philip Smith, a London-based Fitch analyst, said in a phone interview.

Under the asset freeze, the bank has been prevented from conducting transactions with the Qaddafi regime and can thus continue trading with other customers as usual, Smith said.

Arab Banking “has a policy of complying with all applicable sanctions regimes and has conducted, and will continue to conduct, its dealings in strict and total compliance with all relevant laws and regulations,” the company said in the statement.

The bank listed deposits of $17.5 billion at the end of 2010. According to a report from the Fitch Ratings firm, the Libyan Central Bank places “sizeable deposits” with the lender. Marti Adams, a spokeswoman for the Department of Treasury, declined to comment on whether Arab Banking is holding any frozen Libyan assets.

“It is today escaping the economic sanctions imposed to hobble Muammar Qaddafi’s brutal regime,” Sanders said in his letter. “Why would the U.S. government exempt the Arab Banking Corporation from economic sanctions when it is primarily owned by the Central Bank of Libya?”

Bloomberg News has posted the Fed documents for Bloomberg Professional Service subscribers, as well as online at www.bloomberg.com.

To contact the reporters on this story: Donal Griffin in New York at Dgriffin10@bloomberg.net; Bob Ivry in New York at bivry@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: David Scheer at dscheer@bloomberg.net.