Net tightens on Kadhafi as arrest warrant sought
Two government buildings in Tripoli were on fire in Tripoli early Tuesday
Pressure mounted on Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi on Tuesday as the International Criminal Court prosecutor sought his arrest, NATO jets pounded his capital and his truce offer was snubbed.
Compounding the strongman's woes, a security services building and the headquarters of Libya's anti-corruption agency were on fire in Tripoli early Tuesday after apparently being hit by NATO air strikes.
Russia is meanwhile to hold talks on Tuesday with envoys of the Libyan leader before having a separate meeting with rebel representatives at a later date.
In The Hague, ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo applied on Monday for warrants for the arrest of Kadhafi, his son Seif al-Islam and intelligence head Abdullah Senussi for crimes against humanity.
The Argentine prosecutor said there was evidence "that Moamer Kadhafi personally ordered attacks on innocent Libyan civilians."
A panel of ICC judges will now decide whether to accept or reject the prosecutor's application.
Moreno-Ocampo said thousands of people had been killed and around 750,000 people forced to flee since Kadhafi ordered his forces to crush protests against his four-decade autocratic rule that began on February 15.
British Foreign Secretary William Hague called on the international community to "fully support" the ICC.
"I welcome this announcement. The human rights situation in western Libya and the behaviour of the Kadhafi regime remains of grave concern," Hague said.
The rebels too hailed the move by the ICC but said that Kadhafi ought to be tried in Libya first.
"The National Transitional Council welcomes the decision of chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, to request an arrest warrant," the rebel administration's vice president, Abdel Hafez Ghoga, said.
"We would like him to be tried in Libya first before being put on trial in an international court," he added.
The Libyan regime however claimed the ICC prosecutor was acting on "incoherent" information.
"Unfortunately, the ICC was from the start of the Libyan crisis dependent on media reports to evaluate the situation in Libya. As a result, the ICC has usually reached incoherent conclusions," government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim said in a statement.
On the ground, two buildings on Al-Jumhuriya Avenue, close to Kadhafi's residence were on fire early Tuesday, with firefighters battling to douse the flames that were tearing through the two facing buildings, said an AFP correspondent brought to the area with other journalists by Libyan authorities.
Government spokesman Ibrahim later said that the rebel National Transitional Council (NTC) had directed NATO to attack the anti-corruption agency in a bid to destroy files related to former regime officials who have joined the rebellion.
"We believe that NATO has been misled to destroy files on their corruption cases," he told journalists.
Three explosions had also been heard late on Monday in the same area.
Parts of Tripoli have been targeted almost daily by NATO-led strikes launched on March 19 after a UN resolution called for the protection of civilians from Kadhafi's regime.
Russia abstained for the UN Security Council vote on international military intervention in a move that helped the measure to pass but has since argued that the current campaign breaches the UN mandate.
Although Moscow has refused to accept the rebels as a legitimate power in Libya and still has formal ties with the Kadhafi regime, it has agreed to meet them.
"We have agreed Moscow meetings with representatives of both Tripoli and Benghazi," the ITAR-TASS news agency quoted Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov as saying ahead of Tuesday's talks with Kadhafi's representatives, who have not been identified.
"The Tripoli envoys will be here tomorrow," Russia's top diplomat said on Monday.
He added that the trip by the rebel representatives had been delayed for "technical" reasons but had originally been scheduled for Wednesday.
Kadhafi's prime minister Baghdadi Mahmudi on Sunday offered a truce to UN special envoy, Abdul-Ilah al-Khatib, in return for an immediate NATO ceasefire.
Mahmudi said after meeting Khatib that Libya wants "an immediate ceasefire to coincide with a stop to the NATO bombardment and the acceptance of international observers," the official Libyan news agency JANA reported.
There has been no immediate response from NATO nor the NTC but previous truce offers by the regime have been rejected by the rebels, who say they won't lay down their arms until Kadhafi's regime stops attacking civilians.
NATO said on Monday that its warships thwarted a bid by Kadhafi's forces to use small boats loaded with improvised explosive devices to threaten aid ships heading to the port city of Misrata.
It was the third time in nearly three weeks that NATO encountered Kadhafi forces off the coast, after catching them laying sea mines in Misrata's harbour on April 29 and beating back a boat attack on the port last week, NATO said.
A NATO bomb disposal team discovered around one tonne of explosives and two human mannequins inside a boat abandoned by the loyalist force. The explosives were destroyed by an allied warship using small arms fire.
(IC Publications)
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Friday, March 18, 2011
Security Council Approves ‘No-Fly Zone’ over Libya, Authorizing ‘All Necessary
Security Council
6498th Meeting (Night)
Demanding an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute “crimes against humanity”, the Security Council this evening imposed a ban on all flights in the country’s airspace — a no-fly zone — and tightened sanctions on the Qadhafi regime and its supporters.
Adopting resolution 1973 (2011) by a vote of 10 in favour to none against, with 5 abstentions (Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation), the Council authorized Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory — requesting them to immediately inform the Secretary-General of such measures.
Recognizing the important role of the League of Arab States in the maintenance of international peace and security in the region, and bearing in mind the United Nations Charter’s Chapter VIII, the Council asked the League’s member States to cooperate with other Member States in implementing the no-fly zone.
The Council stressed the need to intensify efforts to find a solution to the crisis that responded to the legitimate demands of the Libyan people, noting actions being taken on the diplomatic front in that regard. It further demanded that Libyan authorities comply with their obligations under international law and take all measures to protect civilians and meet their basic needs and to ensure the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance.
In that connection, the Council specified that the flight ban would not apply to flights that had as their sole purpose humanitarian aid, the evacuation of foreign nationals, enforcing the ban or other purposes “deemed necessary for the benefit of the Libyan people”.
It further decided that all States should deny permission to any Libyan commercial aircraft to land in or take off from their territory unless a particular flight had been approved in advance by the committee that was established to monitor sanctions imposed by resolution 1970 (2011).
In tightening the asset freeze and arms embargo established by that resolution, the Council this evening further detailed conditions for inspections of transport suspected to be violating the embargo, requesting States enforcing the embargo to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General on the measures they were taking towards implementation.
It requested the Secretary-Secretary to create an eight-member panel of experts to assist the Security Council committee in monitoring the sanctions.
Introducing the resolution, the Foreign Minister of France, Alain Juppé, said “the situation on the ground is more alarming than ever, marked by the violent re-conquest of cities that have been released”. The Security Council could not stand by and “let the warmongers flout international legality”. The world was experiencing “a wave of great revolutions that would change the course of history”, but the will of the Libyan people had been “trampled under the feet of the Qadhafi regime”. Earlier Council measures had been ignored and violence against Libyan civilians had redoubled.
He said that the urgent need to protect the civilian population had led to the elaboration of the current resolution, which authorized the Arab League and those Member States wishing to do so to take all measures to protect areas that were being threatened by the Qadhafi regime. “We have very little time left — perhaps only a matter of hours,” he said, adding that each hour and day that passed “increased the weight” on the international community’s shoulders.
Speaking after the vote, representatives who had supported the text agreed that the strong action was made necessary because the Qadhafi regime had not heeded the first actions of the Council and was on the verge of even greater violence against civilians as it closed in on areas previously dominated by opposition in the east of the country. They stressed that the objective was solely to protect civilians from further harm.
Lebanon’s speaker stressed that the text would not result in the occupation of “one inch” of Libyan territory by foreign forces. The representative of the United Kingdom pledged that partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Arab League were now ready to act to support the text.
The representative of the United States said that today, the Council had responded to the Libyan peoples’ cry for help. The Council’s purpose was clear: to protect Libyan civilians. The Security Council had authorized the use of force, including enforcement of a no-fly zone, to protect civilians and civilian areas targeted by Colonel Muammar Al-Qadhafi, his allied forces and mercenaries.
The representatives of China and the Russian Federation, explaining their abstentions, prioritized peaceful means of resolving the conflict and said that many questions had not been answered in regard to provisions of the resolution, including, as the Russian representative put it, how and by whom the measures would be enforced and what the limits of the engagement would be. He said the resolution included a sorely needed ceasefire, which he had called for earlier. China had not blocked the action with a negative vote in consideration of the wishes of the Arab League and the African Union, its representative said.
The delegations of India, Germany and Brazil, having also abstained, equally stressed the need for peaceful resolution of the conflict and warned against unintended consequences of armed intervention.
Statements were also made made by the representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Portugal, Nigeria and South Africa.
The meeting was opened at 6:25 p.m. and closed at 7:20 p.m.
Action on Draft
Speaking before the vote, ALAIN JUPPÉ, Minister for Foreign Affairs of France, said the world was experiencing “a wave of great revolutions that would change the course of history”, as people throughout North Africa and the Middle East were calling for “a breath of fresh air”, for freedom of expression and democracy. Such calls for democratic transition had echoed through Tunisia, Egypt and Morocco. Everyone had witnessed the events with great hope and he believed “this new Arab springtime is good news for all”. The changes required the international community not to “give lessons”, but to help the people of those countries build a new future.
Yet, he said, while such transitions in other countries had not been met with extreme violence, the will of the Libyan people had been “trampled under the feet of the Qadhafi regime”, as Colonel Muammar Al-Qadhafi mercilessly attacked his own people. In light of those actions, the international community had responded swiftly; the General Assembly had suspended the country from the Human Rights Council, determining that the systematic and widespread attacks could constitute crimes against humanity. In addition, the Security Council’s earlier resolution had called for an immediate end to the violence and had referred the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court.
Unfortunately, those measures had not been enough and violence against Libyan civilians had been redoubled, he said. Again, the international community had acted with unanimity, particularly through the League of Arab States’ call on the Security Council to enact a no-fly zone and the African Union’s strong call for an end to the violence. “Yet, the situation on the ground is more alarming than ever, marked by the violent re-conquest of cities that have been released,” he said, stressing that the Security Council could not stand by and “let the warmongers flout international legality”.
In light of that, France had been working assiduously with the United Kingdom, the United States and other members of the international community calling for means to protect the civilian population. Those efforts had led to the elaboration of the current resolution, which authorized the Arab League and those Member States wishing to do so to take all measures to protect areas that were being threatened by the Qadhafi regime. “We have very little time left — perhaps only a matter of hours,” he said, adding that each hour and day that passed “increased the weight” on the international community’s shoulders. The Security Council had acted to ensure that democracy prevailed.
The Council then adopted resolution 1973 (2011) by a vote of 10 in favour to none against, with 5 abstentions (Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation).
NAWAF SALAM (Lebanon) said that Libya was suffering heavily, with hundreds of victims dying and thousands displaced. Faced with those risks and the great danger of those crimes, the United Nations had acted earlier, but Colonel Qadhafi had not heeded those actions. Lebanon, agreeing with the League of Arab States, had then called on the Security Council to establish measures to protect civilians. The Libyan authorities had lost all their legitimacy and the resolution was aimed at protecting Libyan civilians.
He stressed that the resolution would not have as a consequence occupation of “even an inch” of Libyan territory. He hoped that the resolution would have a deterrent role and end the Libyan authorities’ use of force. He reaffirmed full support for the county’s sovereignty, the need for full cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States, pursuant to Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter, and the necessity of a peaceful solution to the situation. The resolution was fraught with hope for Libya and its people, he concluded.
MARK LYALL GRANT (United Kingdom), agreeing that the Libyan regime had lost legitimacy, had violated the Council’s resolutions and was on the verge of assaulting Benghazi, said he had pressed for the early adoption of the current resolution. He pledged that partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Arab League were now ready to act to support the text. The resolution put the United Nations clearly behind the highest values of the Organization.
PETER WITTIG (Germany) said the Security Council’s intention was to stop the violence in Libya and send a message to Colonel Qadhafi and his associates “that their time is over [and] they must relinquish power immediately”. While the Council acted on Libya, North Africa was undergoing major political changes, meriting the international community’s full support. The aim should be to promote political transition in Libya, stop the violence and begin a true political process. “The people of Libya who have so clearly expressed their aspirations for democracy should be supported,” he said, adding that the Interim National Council was an important interlocutor in that regard.
He said his country was particularly concerned by the plight of the Libyan people and believed it was crucial to tighten existing sanctions to “cut [the Libyan regime] off” from the funds that had propped it up for so long. Decisions regarding the use of military force were always extremely difficult to take. Indeed, in the implementation of the resolution just adopted, Germany saw great risks, and the likelihood of large-scale loss of life should not be underestimated. Those that participated in its implementation could be drawn into a protracted military conflict that could draw in the wider region. If the resolution failed, it would be wrong to assume that any military intervention would be quickly and efficiently carried out. Germany had decided not to support the resolution and would not contribute its own forces to any military effort that arose from its implementation. Germany had abstained from the vote.
SUSAN RICE (United States) said that today, the Council had responded to the Libyan peoples’ cry for help. The Council’s purpose was clear: to protect Libyan civilians. The Council had adopted an earlier resolution that had sent a strong message, but Colonel Qadhafi and those that still stood by him had continued to grossly and systematically violate the most fundamental rights of the Libyan people. The Arab League had subsequently called on the Council to take more stringent measures, and the current resolution was an answer to that call, as well as a strong response to the situation in the ground.
She said the Security Council had authorized the use of force, including enforcement of a no-fly zone, to protect civilians and civilian areas targeted by Colonel Qadhafi, his allied forces and mercenaries. The text also tightened measures already approved under resolution 1970 (2011). In addition, it established a panel of experts to monitor short- and long-term implementation of the sanctions. She stressed that the future of Libya should be decided by the Libyan people. The United States stood with the people of Libya in their struggle to exercise their fundamental rights.
HARDEEP SINGH PURI (India), explaining his abstention, expressed great concern over the welfare of the population of Libya and supported the appointment of the Secretary-General’s Envoy. The report of that Envoy and that of others had not yet been received. As a consequence, today’s resolution was based on very little clear information, including a lack of certainty regarding who was going to enforce the measures. There must be certainty that negative outcomes were not likely before such wide-ranging measures were adopted. Political efforts must be the priority in resolving the situation.
MARIA LUIZA RIBERIO VIOTTI (Brazil) said her delegation was deeply concerned about the situation in Libya and regretted that the “strong message” sent by resolution 1970 (2011) had note yet been heeded. The Brazilian Government had earlier condemned the violence being carried out by Libyan authorities and had called on them to uphold and protect the right of free expression of the protesters and to seek a solution to the crisis through meaningful dialogue. Her delegation’s vote today should in no way be interpreted as condoning the behaviour of the Libyan authorities or as disregard for the need to protect civilians and respect for their rights.
She said that while Brazil stood in solidarity with all movements in the region expressing their legitimate demands for better governance, and had taken into account the Arab League’s call for strong measures to stop the violence through a no-fly zone, it believed that the resolution contemplated measures that went beyond that call. “We are not convinced that the use of force as provided for in operative paragraph 4 of the present resolution will lead to the realization of our common objective — the immediate end of violence and the protection of civilians,” she said, adding that Brazil was also concerned that the measures approved today might have the unintended effect of exacerbating the current tensions on the ground and “causing more harm than good to the very same civilians we are committed to protecting”. No military action alone would succeed in ending the conflict. Protecting civilians, ensuring lasting settlement and addressing the legitimate demands of Libyan citizens demanded a political process.
IVAN BARBALIĆ (Bosnia and Herzegovina) reiterated his delegation’s grave concern about the rapidly deteriorating situation in Libya. The Libyan people desperately needed humanitarian assistance, and the unimpeded access of that relief was an absolute necessity. He called on Libyan authorities to end their violence against the Libyan people and he believed the resolution was an answer to their legitimate call and to the call of regional organizations.
NÉSTOR OSORIO (Colombia) said his delegation was convinced that the purpose of the new resolution was essentially humanitarian and was conducive to bringing about conditions that would lead to the protection of civilians under attack from a regime that had lost all legitimacy. The Council had acted because the Government, through its actions, had shown that it was not up to protecting and promoting the rights of its people.
Colombia deplored the fact that the measures under resolution 1970 (2011) had not been heeded. It was also concerned that the current text had not been adopted unanimously. Colombia believed that the best way to ratchet up the pressure on the Qadhafi regime was to impose a no-fly zone, as called for by the League of Arab States. The grave situation on the ground made it clear that all conditions were present for the Council to enact further measures and tighten the sanctions approved under resolution 1970 (2011).
VITALY CHURKIN (Russian Federation) said he had abstained, although his country’s position opposing violence against civilians in Libya was clear. Work on the resolution was not in keeping with Security Council practice, with many questions having remained unanswered, including how it would be enforced and by whom, and what the limits of engagement would be. His country had not prevented the adoption of the resolution, but he was convinced that an immediate ceasefire was the best way to stop the loss of life. His country, in fact, had pressed earlier for a resolution calling for such a ceasefire, which could have saved many additional lives. Cautioning against unpredicted consequences, he stressed that there was a need to avoid further destabilization in the region.
JOSÉ FILIPE MORAES CABRAL (Portugal) said his country had voted in favour of the text because the attacks against civilians had continued after the passage of the last Council resolution, and conditions were deteriorating. He affirmed that today’s resolution addressed his country’s priorities, including protecting civilians, facilitation of unimpeded humanitarian aid, promotion of a national dialogue and guarantees for the territorial integrity and independence of Libya. He supported all diplomatic efforts to resolve the situation.
U. JOY OGWU (Nigeria) said the resolution had been necessitated by the persistently grave and dire situation in Libya. “The current State of affairs leaves an indelible imprint on the conscience and compels us to act,” she said, adding that her delegation’s persistent calls for peace were rooted in the need to ensure the protection of civilians and the delivery of humanitarian assistance to those most in need, many of whom were Nigerian nationals. The League of Arab States and the African Union had spoken with one voice in condemnation of the situation in Libya.
She said that while her delegation had supported the current text, it also believed that foreign occupation was not an option to ensure peace. Nigeria supported language in the current text that negated that possibility. Nigeria was also encouraged by the fact that the political path to a solution was endorsed in the text. “Today, we have sent an unequivocal message to the Libyan people that the dignity and safety of every man woman and child is paramount,” she said, adding that when the fate of innocent civilians was in question, the international community, undaunted, must be ready to respond.
BASO SANGQU (South Africa) said his delegation was deeply concerned by what was fast becoming a civil war in Libya. He hoped it could be resolved in a peaceful manner, according to the will of the Libyan people. Any solution must also preserve the solidarity and integrity of Libya and, as such, South Africa supported the dispatch by the African Union of a special mission to the country. He encouraged that mission to work closely with the Secretary-General’s newly appointed Special Envoy on finding a peaceful solution.
He said that South Africa regretted that the Council’s previous resolution had not been heeded and believed that by adopting the current text, the Council had acted responsibly to answer the call of Libyan people. It would also speed humanitarian assistance to those that needed it most. He hoped the letter and spirit of the present resolution would be implemented in full.
Security Council President LI BAODONG (China), speaking in his national capacity, said that the continuing deterioration of the situation in Libya was of great concern to China. However, the United Nations Charter must be respected and the current crisis must be ended through peaceful means. China was always against the use of force when those means were not exhausted. His delegation had asked specific questions that failed to be answered and, therefore, it had serious difficulty with the resolution. It had not blocked the passage of the resolution, however, because it attached great importance to the requests of the Arab League and the African Union. At the same time, he supported the efforts of the Secretary-General’s Envoy to resolve the situation by peaceful means.
Resolution
The full text of resolution 1973 (2011) reads as follows:
“The Security Council,
“Recalling its resolution 1970 (2011) of 26 February 2011,
“Deploring the failure of the Libyan authorities to comply with resolution 1970 (2011),
“Expressing grave concern at the deteriorating situation, the escalation of violence, and the heavy civilian casualties,
“Reiterating the responsibility of the Libyan authorities to protect the Libyan population and reaffirming that parties to armed conflicts bear the primary responsibility to take all feasible steps to ensure the protection of civilians,
“Condemning the gross and systematic violation of human rights, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions,
“Further condemning acts of violence and intimidation committed by the Libyan authorities against journalists, media professionals and associated personnel and urging these authorities to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law as outlined in resolution 1738 (2006),
“Considering that the widespread and systematic attacks currently taking place in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya against the civilian population may amount to crimes against humanity,
“Recalling paragraph 26 of resolution 1970 (2011) in which the Council expressed its readiness to consider taking additional appropriate measures, as necessary, to facilitate and support the return of humanitarian agencies and make available humanitarian and related assistance in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Expressing its determination to ensure the protection of civilians and civilian populated areas and the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance and the safety of humanitarian personnel,
“Recalling the condemnation by the League of Arab States, the African Union and the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law that have been and are being committed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Taking note of the final communiqué of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of 8 March 2011, and the communiqué of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union of 10 March 2011 which established an ad hoc High-Level Committee on Libya,
“Taking note also of the decision of the Council of the League of Arab States of 12 March 2011 to call for the imposition of a no-fly zone on Libyan military aviation, and to establish safe areas in places exposed to shelling as a precautionary measure that allows the protection of the Libyan people and foreign nationals residing in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Taking note further of the Secretary-General’s call on 16 March 2011 for an immediate ceasefire,
“Recalling its decision to refer the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya since 15 February 2011 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and stressing that those responsible for or complicit in attacks targeting the civilian population, including aerial and naval attacks, must be held to account,
“Reiterating its concern at the plight of refugees and foreign workers forced to flee the violence in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, welcoming the response of neighbouring States, in particular Tunisia and Egypt, to address the needs of those refugees and foreign workers, and calling on the international community to support those efforts,
“Deploring the continuing use of mercenaries by the Libyan authorities,
“Considering that the establishment of a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya constitutes an important element for the protection of civilians as well as the safety of the delivery of humanitarian assistance and a decisive step for the cessation of hostilities in Libya,
“Expressing concern also for the safety of foreign nationals and their rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Welcoming the appointment by the Secretary General of his Special Envoy to Libya, Mr. Abdul Ilah Mohamed Al-Khatib and supporting his efforts to find a sustainable and peaceful solution to the crisis in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Determining that the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security,
“Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
“1. Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;
“2. Stresses the need to intensify efforts to find a solution to the crisis which responds to the legitimate demands of the Libyan people and notes the decisions of the Secretary-General to send his Special Envoy to Libya and of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union to send its ad hoc High-Level Committee to Libya with the aim of facilitating dialogue to lead to the political reforms necessary to find a peaceful and sustainable solution;
“3. Demands that the Libyan authorities comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, human rights and refugee law and take all measures to protect civilians and meet their basic needs, and to ensure the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance;
“Protection of civilians
“4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council;
“5. Recognizes the important role of the League of Arab States in matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security in the region, and bearing in mind Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations, requests the Member States of the League of Arab States to cooperate with other Member States in the implementation of paragraph 4;
“No-fly zone
“6. Decides to establish a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians;
“7. Decides further that the ban imposed by paragraph 6 shall not apply to flights whose sole purpose is humanitarian, such as delivering or facilitating the delivery of assistance, including medical supplies, food, humanitarian workers and related assistance, or evacuating foreign nationals from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, nor shall it apply to flights authorised by paragraphs 4 or 8, nor other flights which are deemed necessary by States acting under the authorization conferred in paragraph 8 to be for the benefit of the Libyan people, and that these flights shall be coordinated with any mechanism established under paragraph 8;
“8. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban on flights imposed by paragraph 6 above, as necessary, and requests the States concerned in cooperation with the League of Arab States to coordinate closely with the Secretary General on the measures they are taking to implement this ban, including by establishing an appropriate mechanism for implementing the provisions of paragraphs 6 and 7 above,
“9. Calls upon all Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to provide assistance, including any necessary overflight approvals, for the purposes of implementing paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above;
“10. Requests the Member States concerned to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General on the measures they are taking to implement paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above, including practical measures for the monitoring and approval of authorised humanitarian or evacuation flights;
“11. Decides that the Member States concerned shall inform the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States immediately of measures taken in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above, including to supply a concept of operations;
“12. Requests the Secretary-General to inform the Council immediately of any actions taken by the Member States concerned in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above and to report to the Council within 7 days and every month thereafter on the implementation of this resolution, including information on any violations of the flight ban imposed by paragraph 6 above;
“Enforcement of the arms embargo
“13. Decides that paragraph 11 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall be replaced by the following paragraph : “Calls upon all Member States, in particular States of the region, acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, and on the high seas, vessels and aircraft bound to or from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 or 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, calls upon all flag States of such vessels and aircraft to cooperate with such inspections and authorises Member States to use all measures commensurate to the specific circumstances to carry out such inspections”;
“14. Requests Member States which are taking action under paragraph 13 above on the high seas to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General and further requests the States concerned to inform the Secretary-General and the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) (“the Committee”) immediately of measures taken in the exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 13 above;
“15. Requires any Member State whether acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, when it undertakes an inspection pursuant to paragraph 13 above, to submit promptly an initial written report to the Committee containing, in particular, explanation of the grounds for the inspection, the results of such inspection, and whether or not cooperation was provided, and, if prohibited items for transfer are found, further requires such Member States to submit to the Committee, at a later stage, a subsequent written report containing relevant details on the inspection, seizure, and disposal, and relevant details of the transfer, including a description of the items, their origin and intended destination, if this information is not in the initial report;
“16. Deplores the continuing flows of mercenaries into the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and calls upon all Member States to comply strictly with their obligations under paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011) to prevent the provision of armed mercenary personnel to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;
“Ban on flights
“17. Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft registered in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or owned or operated by Libyan nationals or companies to take off from, land in or overfly their territory unless the particular flight has been approved in advance by the Committee, or in the case of an emergency landing;
“18. Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft to take off from, land in or overfly their territory, if they have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the aircraft contains items the supply, sale, transfer, or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, except in the case of an emergency landing;
“Asset freeze
“19. Decides that the asset freeze imposed by paragraph 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply to all funds, other financial assets and economic resources which are on their territories, which are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or by individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or by entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and decides further that all States shall ensure that any funds, financial assets or economic resources are prevented from being made available by their nationals or by any individuals or entities within their territories, to or for the benefit of the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and directs the Committee to designate such Libyan authorities, individuals or entities within 30 days of the date of the adoption of this resolution and as appropriate thereafter;
“20. Affirms its determination to ensure that assets frozen pursuant to paragraph 17 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall, at a later stage, as soon as possible be made available to and for the benefit of the people of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;
“21. Decides that all States shall require their nationals, persons subject to their jurisdiction and firms incorporated in their territory or subject to their jurisdiction to exercise vigilance when doing business with entities incorporated in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or subject to its jurisdiction, and any individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, and entities owned or controlled by them, if the States have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that such business could contribute to violence and use of force against civilians;
“Designations
“22. Decides that the individuals listed in Annex I shall be subject to the travel restrictions imposed in paragraphs 15 and 16 of resolution 1970 (2011), and decides further that the individuals and entities listed in Annex II shall be subject to the asset freeze imposed in paragraphs 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011);
“23. Decides that the measures specified in paragraphs 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply also to individuals and entities determined by the Council or the Committee to have violated the provisions of resolution 1970 (2011), particularly paragraphs 9 and 10 thereof, or to have assisted others in doing so;
“Panel of Experts
“24. Requests the Secretary-General to create for an initial period of one year, in consultation with the Committee, a group of up to eight experts (“Panel of Experts”), under the direction of the Committee to carry out the following tasks:
(a) Assist the Committee in carrying out its mandate as specified in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution;
(b) Gather, examine and analyse information from States, relevant United Nations bodies, regional organisations and other interested parties regarding the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;
(c) Make recommendations on actions the Council, or the Committee or State, may consider to improve implementation of the relevant measures;
(d) Provide to the Council an interim report on its work no later than 90 days after the Panel’s appointment, and a final report to the Council no later than 30 days prior to the termination of its mandate with its findings and recommendations;
“25. Urges all States, relevant United Nations bodies and other interested parties, to cooperate fully with the Committee and the Panel of Experts, in particular by supplying any information at their disposal on the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;
“26. Decides that the mandate of the Committee as set out in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall also apply to the measures decided in this resolution;
“27. Decides that all States, including the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, shall take the necessary measures to ensure that no claim shall lie at the instance of the Libyan authorities, or of any person or body in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, or of any person claiming through or for the benefit of any such person or body, in connection with any contract or other transaction where its performance was affected by reason of the measures taken by the Security Council in resolution 1970 (2011), this resolution and related resolutions;
“28. Reaffirms its intention to keep the actions of the Libyan authorities under continuous review and underlines its readiness to review at any time the measures imposed by this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011), including by strengthening, suspending or lifting those measures, as appropriate, based on compliance by the Libyan authorities with this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011);
“29. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.”
Libya: United Nations Security Council proposed designations
Number
Name
Justification
Identifiers
Annex I: Travel Ban
1
QUREN SALIH QUREN AL QADHAFI
Libyan Ambassador to Chad. Has left Chad for Sabha. Involved directly in recruiting and coordinating mercenaries for the regime.
2
Colonel AMID HUSAIN AL KUNI
Governor of Ghat (South Libya). Directly involved in recruiting mercenaries.
Annex II: Asset Freeze
1
Dorda, Abu Zayd Umar
Position: Director, External Security Organisation
2
Jabir, Major General Abu Bakr Yunis
Position: Defence Minister
Title: Major General DOB: --/--/1952. POB: Jalo, Libya
3
Matuq, Matuq Mohammed
Position: Secretary for Utilities
DOB: --/--/1956. POB: Khoms
4
Qadhafi, Mohammed Muammar
Son of Muammar Qadhafi. Closeness of association with regime
DOB: --/--/1970. POB: Tripoli, Libya
5
Qadhafi, Saadi
Commander Special Forces. Son of Muammar Qadhafi. Closeness of association with regime. Command of military units involved in repression of demonstrations
DOB: 25/05/1973. POB: Tripoli, Libya
6
Qadhafi, Saif al‑Arab
Son of Muammar Qadhafi. Closeness of association with regime
DOB: --/--/1982. POB: Tripoli, Libya
7
Al‑Senussi, Colonel Abdullah
Position: Director Military Intelligence
Title: Colonel DOB: --/--/1949. POB: Sudan
Entities
1
Central Bank of Libya
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
2
Libyan Investment Authority
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
a.k.a: Libyan Arab Foreign Investment Company (LAFICO) Address: 1 Fateh Tower Office, No 99 22nd Floor, Borgaida Street, Tripoli, Libya, 1103
3
Libyan Foreign Bank
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family and a potential source of funding for his regime.
4
Libyan Africa Investment Portfolio
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
Address: Jamahiriya Street, LAP Building, PO Box 91330, Tripoli, Libya
5
Libyan National Oil Corporation
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
Address: Bashir Saadwi Street, Tripoli, Tarabulus, Libya
6498th Meeting (Night)
Demanding an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute “crimes against humanity”, the Security Council this evening imposed a ban on all flights in the country’s airspace — a no-fly zone — and tightened sanctions on the Qadhafi regime and its supporters.
Adopting resolution 1973 (2011) by a vote of 10 in favour to none against, with 5 abstentions (Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation), the Council authorized Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory — requesting them to immediately inform the Secretary-General of such measures.
Recognizing the important role of the League of Arab States in the maintenance of international peace and security in the region, and bearing in mind the United Nations Charter’s Chapter VIII, the Council asked the League’s member States to cooperate with other Member States in implementing the no-fly zone.
The Council stressed the need to intensify efforts to find a solution to the crisis that responded to the legitimate demands of the Libyan people, noting actions being taken on the diplomatic front in that regard. It further demanded that Libyan authorities comply with their obligations under international law and take all measures to protect civilians and meet their basic needs and to ensure the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance.
In that connection, the Council specified that the flight ban would not apply to flights that had as their sole purpose humanitarian aid, the evacuation of foreign nationals, enforcing the ban or other purposes “deemed necessary for the benefit of the Libyan people”.
It further decided that all States should deny permission to any Libyan commercial aircraft to land in or take off from their territory unless a particular flight had been approved in advance by the committee that was established to monitor sanctions imposed by resolution 1970 (2011).
In tightening the asset freeze and arms embargo established by that resolution, the Council this evening further detailed conditions for inspections of transport suspected to be violating the embargo, requesting States enforcing the embargo to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General on the measures they were taking towards implementation.
It requested the Secretary-Secretary to create an eight-member panel of experts to assist the Security Council committee in monitoring the sanctions.
Introducing the resolution, the Foreign Minister of France, Alain Juppé, said “the situation on the ground is more alarming than ever, marked by the violent re-conquest of cities that have been released”. The Security Council could not stand by and “let the warmongers flout international legality”. The world was experiencing “a wave of great revolutions that would change the course of history”, but the will of the Libyan people had been “trampled under the feet of the Qadhafi regime”. Earlier Council measures had been ignored and violence against Libyan civilians had redoubled.
He said that the urgent need to protect the civilian population had led to the elaboration of the current resolution, which authorized the Arab League and those Member States wishing to do so to take all measures to protect areas that were being threatened by the Qadhafi regime. “We have very little time left — perhaps only a matter of hours,” he said, adding that each hour and day that passed “increased the weight” on the international community’s shoulders.
Speaking after the vote, representatives who had supported the text agreed that the strong action was made necessary because the Qadhafi regime had not heeded the first actions of the Council and was on the verge of even greater violence against civilians as it closed in on areas previously dominated by opposition in the east of the country. They stressed that the objective was solely to protect civilians from further harm.
Lebanon’s speaker stressed that the text would not result in the occupation of “one inch” of Libyan territory by foreign forces. The representative of the United Kingdom pledged that partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Arab League were now ready to act to support the text.
The representative of the United States said that today, the Council had responded to the Libyan peoples’ cry for help. The Council’s purpose was clear: to protect Libyan civilians. The Security Council had authorized the use of force, including enforcement of a no-fly zone, to protect civilians and civilian areas targeted by Colonel Muammar Al-Qadhafi, his allied forces and mercenaries.
The representatives of China and the Russian Federation, explaining their abstentions, prioritized peaceful means of resolving the conflict and said that many questions had not been answered in regard to provisions of the resolution, including, as the Russian representative put it, how and by whom the measures would be enforced and what the limits of the engagement would be. He said the resolution included a sorely needed ceasefire, which he had called for earlier. China had not blocked the action with a negative vote in consideration of the wishes of the Arab League and the African Union, its representative said.
The delegations of India, Germany and Brazil, having also abstained, equally stressed the need for peaceful resolution of the conflict and warned against unintended consequences of armed intervention.
Statements were also made made by the representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Portugal, Nigeria and South Africa.
The meeting was opened at 6:25 p.m. and closed at 7:20 p.m.
Action on Draft
Speaking before the vote, ALAIN JUPPÉ, Minister for Foreign Affairs of France, said the world was experiencing “a wave of great revolutions that would change the course of history”, as people throughout North Africa and the Middle East were calling for “a breath of fresh air”, for freedom of expression and democracy. Such calls for democratic transition had echoed through Tunisia, Egypt and Morocco. Everyone had witnessed the events with great hope and he believed “this new Arab springtime is good news for all”. The changes required the international community not to “give lessons”, but to help the people of those countries build a new future.
Yet, he said, while such transitions in other countries had not been met with extreme violence, the will of the Libyan people had been “trampled under the feet of the Qadhafi regime”, as Colonel Muammar Al-Qadhafi mercilessly attacked his own people. In light of those actions, the international community had responded swiftly; the General Assembly had suspended the country from the Human Rights Council, determining that the systematic and widespread attacks could constitute crimes against humanity. In addition, the Security Council’s earlier resolution had called for an immediate end to the violence and had referred the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court.
Unfortunately, those measures had not been enough and violence against Libyan civilians had been redoubled, he said. Again, the international community had acted with unanimity, particularly through the League of Arab States’ call on the Security Council to enact a no-fly zone and the African Union’s strong call for an end to the violence. “Yet, the situation on the ground is more alarming than ever, marked by the violent re-conquest of cities that have been released,” he said, stressing that the Security Council could not stand by and “let the warmongers flout international legality”.
In light of that, France had been working assiduously with the United Kingdom, the United States and other members of the international community calling for means to protect the civilian population. Those efforts had led to the elaboration of the current resolution, which authorized the Arab League and those Member States wishing to do so to take all measures to protect areas that were being threatened by the Qadhafi regime. “We have very little time left — perhaps only a matter of hours,” he said, adding that each hour and day that passed “increased the weight” on the international community’s shoulders. The Security Council had acted to ensure that democracy prevailed.
The Council then adopted resolution 1973 (2011) by a vote of 10 in favour to none against, with 5 abstentions (Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation).
NAWAF SALAM (Lebanon) said that Libya was suffering heavily, with hundreds of victims dying and thousands displaced. Faced with those risks and the great danger of those crimes, the United Nations had acted earlier, but Colonel Qadhafi had not heeded those actions. Lebanon, agreeing with the League of Arab States, had then called on the Security Council to establish measures to protect civilians. The Libyan authorities had lost all their legitimacy and the resolution was aimed at protecting Libyan civilians.
He stressed that the resolution would not have as a consequence occupation of “even an inch” of Libyan territory. He hoped that the resolution would have a deterrent role and end the Libyan authorities’ use of force. He reaffirmed full support for the county’s sovereignty, the need for full cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States, pursuant to Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter, and the necessity of a peaceful solution to the situation. The resolution was fraught with hope for Libya and its people, he concluded.
MARK LYALL GRANT (United Kingdom), agreeing that the Libyan regime had lost legitimacy, had violated the Council’s resolutions and was on the verge of assaulting Benghazi, said he had pressed for the early adoption of the current resolution. He pledged that partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Arab League were now ready to act to support the text. The resolution put the United Nations clearly behind the highest values of the Organization.
PETER WITTIG (Germany) said the Security Council’s intention was to stop the violence in Libya and send a message to Colonel Qadhafi and his associates “that their time is over [and] they must relinquish power immediately”. While the Council acted on Libya, North Africa was undergoing major political changes, meriting the international community’s full support. The aim should be to promote political transition in Libya, stop the violence and begin a true political process. “The people of Libya who have so clearly expressed their aspirations for democracy should be supported,” he said, adding that the Interim National Council was an important interlocutor in that regard.
He said his country was particularly concerned by the plight of the Libyan people and believed it was crucial to tighten existing sanctions to “cut [the Libyan regime] off” from the funds that had propped it up for so long. Decisions regarding the use of military force were always extremely difficult to take. Indeed, in the implementation of the resolution just adopted, Germany saw great risks, and the likelihood of large-scale loss of life should not be underestimated. Those that participated in its implementation could be drawn into a protracted military conflict that could draw in the wider region. If the resolution failed, it would be wrong to assume that any military intervention would be quickly and efficiently carried out. Germany had decided not to support the resolution and would not contribute its own forces to any military effort that arose from its implementation. Germany had abstained from the vote.
SUSAN RICE (United States) said that today, the Council had responded to the Libyan peoples’ cry for help. The Council’s purpose was clear: to protect Libyan civilians. The Council had adopted an earlier resolution that had sent a strong message, but Colonel Qadhafi and those that still stood by him had continued to grossly and systematically violate the most fundamental rights of the Libyan people. The Arab League had subsequently called on the Council to take more stringent measures, and the current resolution was an answer to that call, as well as a strong response to the situation in the ground.
She said the Security Council had authorized the use of force, including enforcement of a no-fly zone, to protect civilians and civilian areas targeted by Colonel Qadhafi, his allied forces and mercenaries. The text also tightened measures already approved under resolution 1970 (2011). In addition, it established a panel of experts to monitor short- and long-term implementation of the sanctions. She stressed that the future of Libya should be decided by the Libyan people. The United States stood with the people of Libya in their struggle to exercise their fundamental rights.
HARDEEP SINGH PURI (India), explaining his abstention, expressed great concern over the welfare of the population of Libya and supported the appointment of the Secretary-General’s Envoy. The report of that Envoy and that of others had not yet been received. As a consequence, today’s resolution was based on very little clear information, including a lack of certainty regarding who was going to enforce the measures. There must be certainty that negative outcomes were not likely before such wide-ranging measures were adopted. Political efforts must be the priority in resolving the situation.
MARIA LUIZA RIBERIO VIOTTI (Brazil) said her delegation was deeply concerned about the situation in Libya and regretted that the “strong message” sent by resolution 1970 (2011) had note yet been heeded. The Brazilian Government had earlier condemned the violence being carried out by Libyan authorities and had called on them to uphold and protect the right of free expression of the protesters and to seek a solution to the crisis through meaningful dialogue. Her delegation’s vote today should in no way be interpreted as condoning the behaviour of the Libyan authorities or as disregard for the need to protect civilians and respect for their rights.
She said that while Brazil stood in solidarity with all movements in the region expressing their legitimate demands for better governance, and had taken into account the Arab League’s call for strong measures to stop the violence through a no-fly zone, it believed that the resolution contemplated measures that went beyond that call. “We are not convinced that the use of force as provided for in operative paragraph 4 of the present resolution will lead to the realization of our common objective — the immediate end of violence and the protection of civilians,” she said, adding that Brazil was also concerned that the measures approved today might have the unintended effect of exacerbating the current tensions on the ground and “causing more harm than good to the very same civilians we are committed to protecting”. No military action alone would succeed in ending the conflict. Protecting civilians, ensuring lasting settlement and addressing the legitimate demands of Libyan citizens demanded a political process.
IVAN BARBALIĆ (Bosnia and Herzegovina) reiterated his delegation’s grave concern about the rapidly deteriorating situation in Libya. The Libyan people desperately needed humanitarian assistance, and the unimpeded access of that relief was an absolute necessity. He called on Libyan authorities to end their violence against the Libyan people and he believed the resolution was an answer to their legitimate call and to the call of regional organizations.
NÉSTOR OSORIO (Colombia) said his delegation was convinced that the purpose of the new resolution was essentially humanitarian and was conducive to bringing about conditions that would lead to the protection of civilians under attack from a regime that had lost all legitimacy. The Council had acted because the Government, through its actions, had shown that it was not up to protecting and promoting the rights of its people.
Colombia deplored the fact that the measures under resolution 1970 (2011) had not been heeded. It was also concerned that the current text had not been adopted unanimously. Colombia believed that the best way to ratchet up the pressure on the Qadhafi regime was to impose a no-fly zone, as called for by the League of Arab States. The grave situation on the ground made it clear that all conditions were present for the Council to enact further measures and tighten the sanctions approved under resolution 1970 (2011).
VITALY CHURKIN (Russian Federation) said he had abstained, although his country’s position opposing violence against civilians in Libya was clear. Work on the resolution was not in keeping with Security Council practice, with many questions having remained unanswered, including how it would be enforced and by whom, and what the limits of engagement would be. His country had not prevented the adoption of the resolution, but he was convinced that an immediate ceasefire was the best way to stop the loss of life. His country, in fact, had pressed earlier for a resolution calling for such a ceasefire, which could have saved many additional lives. Cautioning against unpredicted consequences, he stressed that there was a need to avoid further destabilization in the region.
JOSÉ FILIPE MORAES CABRAL (Portugal) said his country had voted in favour of the text because the attacks against civilians had continued after the passage of the last Council resolution, and conditions were deteriorating. He affirmed that today’s resolution addressed his country’s priorities, including protecting civilians, facilitation of unimpeded humanitarian aid, promotion of a national dialogue and guarantees for the territorial integrity and independence of Libya. He supported all diplomatic efforts to resolve the situation.
U. JOY OGWU (Nigeria) said the resolution had been necessitated by the persistently grave and dire situation in Libya. “The current State of affairs leaves an indelible imprint on the conscience and compels us to act,” she said, adding that her delegation’s persistent calls for peace were rooted in the need to ensure the protection of civilians and the delivery of humanitarian assistance to those most in need, many of whom were Nigerian nationals. The League of Arab States and the African Union had spoken with one voice in condemnation of the situation in Libya.
She said that while her delegation had supported the current text, it also believed that foreign occupation was not an option to ensure peace. Nigeria supported language in the current text that negated that possibility. Nigeria was also encouraged by the fact that the political path to a solution was endorsed in the text. “Today, we have sent an unequivocal message to the Libyan people that the dignity and safety of every man woman and child is paramount,” she said, adding that when the fate of innocent civilians was in question, the international community, undaunted, must be ready to respond.
BASO SANGQU (South Africa) said his delegation was deeply concerned by what was fast becoming a civil war in Libya. He hoped it could be resolved in a peaceful manner, according to the will of the Libyan people. Any solution must also preserve the solidarity and integrity of Libya and, as such, South Africa supported the dispatch by the African Union of a special mission to the country. He encouraged that mission to work closely with the Secretary-General’s newly appointed Special Envoy on finding a peaceful solution.
He said that South Africa regretted that the Council’s previous resolution had not been heeded and believed that by adopting the current text, the Council had acted responsibly to answer the call of Libyan people. It would also speed humanitarian assistance to those that needed it most. He hoped the letter and spirit of the present resolution would be implemented in full.
Security Council President LI BAODONG (China), speaking in his national capacity, said that the continuing deterioration of the situation in Libya was of great concern to China. However, the United Nations Charter must be respected and the current crisis must be ended through peaceful means. China was always against the use of force when those means were not exhausted. His delegation had asked specific questions that failed to be answered and, therefore, it had serious difficulty with the resolution. It had not blocked the passage of the resolution, however, because it attached great importance to the requests of the Arab League and the African Union. At the same time, he supported the efforts of the Secretary-General’s Envoy to resolve the situation by peaceful means.
Resolution
The full text of resolution 1973 (2011) reads as follows:
“The Security Council,
“Recalling its resolution 1970 (2011) of 26 February 2011,
“Deploring the failure of the Libyan authorities to comply with resolution 1970 (2011),
“Expressing grave concern at the deteriorating situation, the escalation of violence, and the heavy civilian casualties,
“Reiterating the responsibility of the Libyan authorities to protect the Libyan population and reaffirming that parties to armed conflicts bear the primary responsibility to take all feasible steps to ensure the protection of civilians,
“Condemning the gross and systematic violation of human rights, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions,
“Further condemning acts of violence and intimidation committed by the Libyan authorities against journalists, media professionals and associated personnel and urging these authorities to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law as outlined in resolution 1738 (2006),
“Considering that the widespread and systematic attacks currently taking place in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya against the civilian population may amount to crimes against humanity,
“Recalling paragraph 26 of resolution 1970 (2011) in which the Council expressed its readiness to consider taking additional appropriate measures, as necessary, to facilitate and support the return of humanitarian agencies and make available humanitarian and related assistance in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Expressing its determination to ensure the protection of civilians and civilian populated areas and the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance and the safety of humanitarian personnel,
“Recalling the condemnation by the League of Arab States, the African Union and the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law that have been and are being committed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Taking note of the final communiqué of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of 8 March 2011, and the communiqué of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union of 10 March 2011 which established an ad hoc High-Level Committee on Libya,
“Taking note also of the decision of the Council of the League of Arab States of 12 March 2011 to call for the imposition of a no-fly zone on Libyan military aviation, and to establish safe areas in places exposed to shelling as a precautionary measure that allows the protection of the Libyan people and foreign nationals residing in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Taking note further of the Secretary-General’s call on 16 March 2011 for an immediate ceasefire,
“Recalling its decision to refer the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya since 15 February 2011 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and stressing that those responsible for or complicit in attacks targeting the civilian population, including aerial and naval attacks, must be held to account,
“Reiterating its concern at the plight of refugees and foreign workers forced to flee the violence in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, welcoming the response of neighbouring States, in particular Tunisia and Egypt, to address the needs of those refugees and foreign workers, and calling on the international community to support those efforts,
“Deploring the continuing use of mercenaries by the Libyan authorities,
“Considering that the establishment of a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya constitutes an important element for the protection of civilians as well as the safety of the delivery of humanitarian assistance and a decisive step for the cessation of hostilities in Libya,
“Expressing concern also for the safety of foreign nationals and their rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Welcoming the appointment by the Secretary General of his Special Envoy to Libya, Mr. Abdul Ilah Mohamed Al-Khatib and supporting his efforts to find a sustainable and peaceful solution to the crisis in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,
“Determining that the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security,
“Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
“1. Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;
“2. Stresses the need to intensify efforts to find a solution to the crisis which responds to the legitimate demands of the Libyan people and notes the decisions of the Secretary-General to send his Special Envoy to Libya and of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union to send its ad hoc High-Level Committee to Libya with the aim of facilitating dialogue to lead to the political reforms necessary to find a peaceful and sustainable solution;
“3. Demands that the Libyan authorities comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, human rights and refugee law and take all measures to protect civilians and meet their basic needs, and to ensure the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance;
“Protection of civilians
“4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council;
“5. Recognizes the important role of the League of Arab States in matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security in the region, and bearing in mind Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations, requests the Member States of the League of Arab States to cooperate with other Member States in the implementation of paragraph 4;
“No-fly zone
“6. Decides to establish a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians;
“7. Decides further that the ban imposed by paragraph 6 shall not apply to flights whose sole purpose is humanitarian, such as delivering or facilitating the delivery of assistance, including medical supplies, food, humanitarian workers and related assistance, or evacuating foreign nationals from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, nor shall it apply to flights authorised by paragraphs 4 or 8, nor other flights which are deemed necessary by States acting under the authorization conferred in paragraph 8 to be for the benefit of the Libyan people, and that these flights shall be coordinated with any mechanism established under paragraph 8;
“8. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban on flights imposed by paragraph 6 above, as necessary, and requests the States concerned in cooperation with the League of Arab States to coordinate closely with the Secretary General on the measures they are taking to implement this ban, including by establishing an appropriate mechanism for implementing the provisions of paragraphs 6 and 7 above,
“9. Calls upon all Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to provide assistance, including any necessary overflight approvals, for the purposes of implementing paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above;
“10. Requests the Member States concerned to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General on the measures they are taking to implement paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above, including practical measures for the monitoring and approval of authorised humanitarian or evacuation flights;
“11. Decides that the Member States concerned shall inform the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States immediately of measures taken in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above, including to supply a concept of operations;
“12. Requests the Secretary-General to inform the Council immediately of any actions taken by the Member States concerned in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above and to report to the Council within 7 days and every month thereafter on the implementation of this resolution, including information on any violations of the flight ban imposed by paragraph 6 above;
“Enforcement of the arms embargo
“13. Decides that paragraph 11 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall be replaced by the following paragraph : “Calls upon all Member States, in particular States of the region, acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, and on the high seas, vessels and aircraft bound to or from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 or 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, calls upon all flag States of such vessels and aircraft to cooperate with such inspections and authorises Member States to use all measures commensurate to the specific circumstances to carry out such inspections”;
“14. Requests Member States which are taking action under paragraph 13 above on the high seas to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General and further requests the States concerned to inform the Secretary-General and the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) (“the Committee”) immediately of measures taken in the exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 13 above;
“15. Requires any Member State whether acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, when it undertakes an inspection pursuant to paragraph 13 above, to submit promptly an initial written report to the Committee containing, in particular, explanation of the grounds for the inspection, the results of such inspection, and whether or not cooperation was provided, and, if prohibited items for transfer are found, further requires such Member States to submit to the Committee, at a later stage, a subsequent written report containing relevant details on the inspection, seizure, and disposal, and relevant details of the transfer, including a description of the items, their origin and intended destination, if this information is not in the initial report;
“16. Deplores the continuing flows of mercenaries into the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and calls upon all Member States to comply strictly with their obligations under paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011) to prevent the provision of armed mercenary personnel to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;
“Ban on flights
“17. Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft registered in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or owned or operated by Libyan nationals or companies to take off from, land in or overfly their territory unless the particular flight has been approved in advance by the Committee, or in the case of an emergency landing;
“18. Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft to take off from, land in or overfly their territory, if they have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the aircraft contains items the supply, sale, transfer, or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, except in the case of an emergency landing;
“Asset freeze
“19. Decides that the asset freeze imposed by paragraph 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply to all funds, other financial assets and economic resources which are on their territories, which are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or by individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or by entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and decides further that all States shall ensure that any funds, financial assets or economic resources are prevented from being made available by their nationals or by any individuals or entities within their territories, to or for the benefit of the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and directs the Committee to designate such Libyan authorities, individuals or entities within 30 days of the date of the adoption of this resolution and as appropriate thereafter;
“20. Affirms its determination to ensure that assets frozen pursuant to paragraph 17 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall, at a later stage, as soon as possible be made available to and for the benefit of the people of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;
“21. Decides that all States shall require their nationals, persons subject to their jurisdiction and firms incorporated in their territory or subject to their jurisdiction to exercise vigilance when doing business with entities incorporated in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or subject to its jurisdiction, and any individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, and entities owned or controlled by them, if the States have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that such business could contribute to violence and use of force against civilians;
“Designations
“22. Decides that the individuals listed in Annex I shall be subject to the travel restrictions imposed in paragraphs 15 and 16 of resolution 1970 (2011), and decides further that the individuals and entities listed in Annex II shall be subject to the asset freeze imposed in paragraphs 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011);
“23. Decides that the measures specified in paragraphs 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply also to individuals and entities determined by the Council or the Committee to have violated the provisions of resolution 1970 (2011), particularly paragraphs 9 and 10 thereof, or to have assisted others in doing so;
“Panel of Experts
“24. Requests the Secretary-General to create for an initial period of one year, in consultation with the Committee, a group of up to eight experts (“Panel of Experts”), under the direction of the Committee to carry out the following tasks:
(a) Assist the Committee in carrying out its mandate as specified in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution;
(b) Gather, examine and analyse information from States, relevant United Nations bodies, regional organisations and other interested parties regarding the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;
(c) Make recommendations on actions the Council, or the Committee or State, may consider to improve implementation of the relevant measures;
(d) Provide to the Council an interim report on its work no later than 90 days after the Panel’s appointment, and a final report to the Council no later than 30 days prior to the termination of its mandate with its findings and recommendations;
“25. Urges all States, relevant United Nations bodies and other interested parties, to cooperate fully with the Committee and the Panel of Experts, in particular by supplying any information at their disposal on the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;
“26. Decides that the mandate of the Committee as set out in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall also apply to the measures decided in this resolution;
“27. Decides that all States, including the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, shall take the necessary measures to ensure that no claim shall lie at the instance of the Libyan authorities, or of any person or body in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, or of any person claiming through or for the benefit of any such person or body, in connection with any contract or other transaction where its performance was affected by reason of the measures taken by the Security Council in resolution 1970 (2011), this resolution and related resolutions;
“28. Reaffirms its intention to keep the actions of the Libyan authorities under continuous review and underlines its readiness to review at any time the measures imposed by this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011), including by strengthening, suspending or lifting those measures, as appropriate, based on compliance by the Libyan authorities with this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011);
“29. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.”
Libya: United Nations Security Council proposed designations
Number
Name
Justification
Identifiers
Annex I: Travel Ban
1
QUREN SALIH QUREN AL QADHAFI
Libyan Ambassador to Chad. Has left Chad for Sabha. Involved directly in recruiting and coordinating mercenaries for the regime.
2
Colonel AMID HUSAIN AL KUNI
Governor of Ghat (South Libya). Directly involved in recruiting mercenaries.
Annex II: Asset Freeze
1
Dorda, Abu Zayd Umar
Position: Director, External Security Organisation
2
Jabir, Major General Abu Bakr Yunis
Position: Defence Minister
Title: Major General DOB: --/--/1952. POB: Jalo, Libya
3
Matuq, Matuq Mohammed
Position: Secretary for Utilities
DOB: --/--/1956. POB: Khoms
4
Qadhafi, Mohammed Muammar
Son of Muammar Qadhafi. Closeness of association with regime
DOB: --/--/1970. POB: Tripoli, Libya
5
Qadhafi, Saadi
Commander Special Forces. Son of Muammar Qadhafi. Closeness of association with regime. Command of military units involved in repression of demonstrations
DOB: 25/05/1973. POB: Tripoli, Libya
6
Qadhafi, Saif al‑Arab
Son of Muammar Qadhafi. Closeness of association with regime
DOB: --/--/1982. POB: Tripoli, Libya
7
Al‑Senussi, Colonel Abdullah
Position: Director Military Intelligence
Title: Colonel DOB: --/--/1949. POB: Sudan
Entities
1
Central Bank of Libya
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
2
Libyan Investment Authority
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
a.k.a: Libyan Arab Foreign Investment Company (LAFICO) Address: 1 Fateh Tower Office, No 99 22nd Floor, Borgaida Street, Tripoli, Libya, 1103
3
Libyan Foreign Bank
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family and a potential source of funding for his regime.
4
Libyan Africa Investment Portfolio
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
Address: Jamahiriya Street, LAP Building, PO Box 91330, Tripoli, Libya
5
Libyan National Oil Corporation
Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and his family, and potential source of funding for his regime.
Address: Bashir Saadwi Street, Tripoli, Tarabulus, Libya
Sunday, March 13, 2011
IAM WITH YOU - JAPAN
I join the people of Japan as they clean up the mess created by the devastated earthquate and the resulting tsunami.
Silver and Gold have i not but what i have is to pray for God to guide Japan through this hard times. World leaders have to think twice about the negative activities that is slowly changing the phase of the world. The big question is CAN THE WORLD DO SOMETHING TO PREVENT THIS TRAGEDIES?
I mourn with you Japan.
Silver and Gold have i not but what i have is to pray for God to guide Japan through this hard times. World leaders have to think twice about the negative activities that is slowly changing the phase of the world. The big question is CAN THE WORLD DO SOMETHING TO PREVENT THIS TRAGEDIES?
I mourn with you Japan.
Friday, March 11, 2011
THE PLIGHT OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL THREE CANDIDATES
With the implimentation of the failed Single Spine Salary Structure (ssss) implimentation and the subsequest strike action by NAGRAT(National Association of Graduate Teachers) and that of the members of GNAT with its leaders falsefully claiming that they are not on srike, the load is now on the poor JHS and SHS students who are about to start their examinations.
It is true that the teachers are legitimately right in their claim for fair share of the national cake but does that has to negatively affect the innocent students? The fair wages and salary commission should have known that the salary they were paying teachers were not FAIR eventhough they claim there were errors in the implementation of the SSSS, now have the forgotten this basic computing principle - GIGO(garbage -in- garbage- out).
It was their own erroneous act that brought the confusion, they shoula not blame any software or controller for the problems arrising.
Who to blame, hmm, the teacher is equally important as any other professional but Ghana seems not to realise this basic fact, i completed Senior High School with a Friend in the same year. I opted to go to a teacher training college eventhough i had good passes as compared to my friend who opted for the nursing training college. We completed our respective colleges the same year but he was receiving more money than i did.
Am now in the University offering BSC degree. when i complete he will still be receiving more than me.
Is it a curse to be a teacher in Ghana?
The Government should do something before the country sprang into chaos because we can't afford Libya in Ghana.
It is true that the teachers are legitimately right in their claim for fair share of the national cake but does that has to negatively affect the innocent students? The fair wages and salary commission should have known that the salary they were paying teachers were not FAIR eventhough they claim there were errors in the implementation of the SSSS, now have the forgotten this basic computing principle - GIGO(garbage -in- garbage- out).
It was their own erroneous act that brought the confusion, they shoula not blame any software or controller for the problems arrising.
Who to blame, hmm, the teacher is equally important as any other professional but Ghana seems not to realise this basic fact, i completed Senior High School with a Friend in the same year. I opted to go to a teacher training college eventhough i had good passes as compared to my friend who opted for the nursing training college. We completed our respective colleges the same year but he was receiving more money than i did.
Am now in the University offering BSC degree. when i complete he will still be receiving more than me.
Is it a curse to be a teacher in Ghana?
The Government should do something before the country sprang into chaos because we can't afford Libya in Ghana.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
THE FAITH OF GHANA'S OIL
Wealth Is Not In Resources But In IDEASThis statement is absolutely true when you consider the situation in Ghana.
Ghana is blessed with google of resources- Gold, Timber, Diamond, cocoa, Bauxite etc, but we are among the poorest Countries in the world, Whey? We lack human resources - lack of ideas to turn our resources to wealth. Are we rerady to learn to be able to turn our resources to wealth? we are always interested in seeking for loans from the developed world with a lot of conditions attached, but still our leaders are ready to sacrifice our resources for loans, why? because they need the money to enrich themselves.
The parliament of Ghana is Ready to send the country into Another sort of slavery again, why should we use our oil fields to guarantee for loan? are we really serious as a country. When you are hungry you don't eat with two hands, do you? if we had not discovered oil how would you had managed the country? Loans cannot develop our country, they will just increase our poverty level, we need to develop the citizens, change how we think, be disciplined, prevent corruption, work hard to increase our GDP, we sleep too much.
Our parliamentarians should begin to think as Honourable members as they are called and with a sense of patriotism and intelligence and eschew political bias. Why should the honourable member support some rude ideas because it is a philosophy of his/her party. HOW A MAN THINKS , SO HE IS.
IF YOU ARE VOTED TO BE A MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT AND YOU FORGET YOUR COUNTRY AND FOLLOW WEALTH, YOU ARE A DISGRACE TO YOUR CONSTITUENCY.
Whatever decision our honourable members take today will affect our next generation, Honourable members, the future of our country is in your hands. Do something so that your name will be included in our history books.
DO YOU WANT TO USE THE OIL FIELD FOR LOANS BECAUSE YOUR PARTY SAYS SO? READ ABOUT CAPE VERDE AND GUINEA.
GOD BLESS GHANA.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Virtualization is for IT, Cloud is for Applications
We all talk about server virtualization like it has been around forever. The fact that just about every IT vendor has fully embraced server virtualization and has marquee marketing and sales campaigns based on its massive success is hard to ignore. And why not, when you have companies like VMware stating that for every $1 spent on a virtualization license, there is an additional $16 spent in software, hardware, and services? Everyone, of course, wants a slice of the the pie and the great news is that there is no sign of a slowdown.
A quick reality check also shows that the majority of virtualization implementations are still very focused on consolidation that drives reduced capital expenditures. It's a pretty easy calculation for any company to make when they don't have to procure a new server for each IT request that comes through the door. IT operations further embrace server virtualization just for the simple fact that their job becomes easier and the risk of maintaining a rat's nest of individual servers is greatly simplified with server virtualization--a giant win for IT!
But what about the workloads that IT doesn't own and manage? The applications that "run the business," require special attention, and risk revenue or productivity loss if they go offline? Is virtualization the best platform for these workloads? Probably not.
Most IT organization categorize applications based on:
* What they need to operate - These are great server virtualization candidates.
* Investment applications - This is the gray area when it comes to virtualization. If you have already made investments in availability, specialized hardware, recent hardware purchases, etc., these application are most often best left as is.
* Containing stuff that won't virtualize and doesn't change much so folks leave it.
* Killing stuff that you have to dump as otherwise it kills you.
You may have a 35 year old mainframe application or old Cobol code that needs constant change that you have to outsource development since you don't have the expertise and it takes years to change the code and is risky. So when change is required, it gets a new system--maybe Oracle financials or SAP--and the function is migrated, not the code.
This migration process is the ideal on-boarding opportunity for the cloud, which is primarily focused on reducing operational expenses. We can debate the different cloud delivery models for hours (and I don't mean IaaS), but the tipping point is real. Not all workloads are ideal candidates for the virtualization platform. The initial consolidation effort is a no brainer; the tweeners require some careful thinking and will largely depend on the current investment and protection. The contain and kill workloads are ideal candidates that should leapfrog virtualization and move directly to the cloud.
CURTESY OF NETWORKWORLD.
A quick reality check also shows that the majority of virtualization implementations are still very focused on consolidation that drives reduced capital expenditures. It's a pretty easy calculation for any company to make when they don't have to procure a new server for each IT request that comes through the door. IT operations further embrace server virtualization just for the simple fact that their job becomes easier and the risk of maintaining a rat's nest of individual servers is greatly simplified with server virtualization--a giant win for IT!
But what about the workloads that IT doesn't own and manage? The applications that "run the business," require special attention, and risk revenue or productivity loss if they go offline? Is virtualization the best platform for these workloads? Probably not.
Most IT organization categorize applications based on:
* What they need to operate - These are great server virtualization candidates.
* Investment applications - This is the gray area when it comes to virtualization. If you have already made investments in availability, specialized hardware, recent hardware purchases, etc., these application are most often best left as is.
* Containing stuff that won't virtualize and doesn't change much so folks leave it.
* Killing stuff that you have to dump as otherwise it kills you.
You may have a 35 year old mainframe application or old Cobol code that needs constant change that you have to outsource development since you don't have the expertise and it takes years to change the code and is risky. So when change is required, it gets a new system--maybe Oracle financials or SAP--and the function is migrated, not the code.
This migration process is the ideal on-boarding opportunity for the cloud, which is primarily focused on reducing operational expenses. We can debate the different cloud delivery models for hours (and I don't mean IaaS), but the tipping point is real. Not all workloads are ideal candidates for the virtualization platform. The initial consolidation effort is a no brainer; the tweeners require some careful thinking and will largely depend on the current investment and protection. The contain and kill workloads are ideal candidates that should leapfrog virtualization and move directly to the cloud.
CURTESY OF NETWORKWORLD.
Friday, October 22, 2010
PREDICTING THE FUTURE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
Thinking about the future can help you shape it. Thinking too much about the future can make you spacey.
By the year 2019, thanks to information technology (IT), humans will have largely overcome the limits of our humanity. We will have found cures for the major diseases that kill 95 percent of us in the developed world. By 2029, we will become godlike—tiny computer chips embedded into our bodies will stop disease and reverse aging, ever expanding our lifespans.
Such are the prognostications of the current pied piper of the digital utopia crowd, Ray Kurzweil (http://www.kurzweilai.net). In a syndicated newspaper feature, he recently shared these and other rosy predictions about the power of IT. His main thesis is that IT doesn’t just lead to linear growth, as humanity has experienced in the past, but exponential growth, and not just with IT.
Kurzweil is the author of such books as The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology , Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever, and The Age of Spiritual Machines , and in them he has made other astonishing predictions. My favorite: Human and machine intelligence will merge and become indistinguishable, growing exponentially until we will be able to control how the universe evolves.
It’s easy to dismiss Kurzweil. His background is in speech recognition—a technology that, despite its years of promises, has never crossed into the desktop computing mainstream because of its inability to perform as well as pecking away at a keyboard and pushing around a mouse.
If you do dismiss him, though, you risk looking like a change-averse Luddite. The past is littered with failures of the imagination, even among those deeply involved with IT. Ken Olson, founder and chairman of Digital Equipment Corp., said in 1977, “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” Thomas Watson, president and CEO of IBM, in 1943 said, “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.”
Talking about talkies, H. M. Warner, co-founder and president of Warner Brothers, said in 1927, “Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?” According to an 1876 internal Western Union memo, “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.”
Kurzweil’s vision of the future is enticing, like a comic book, and he has his followers. Who wouldn’t want to become a Superman or Wonder Woman?
To be fair, computers are indeed amazing machines. PCs allow you to communicate with far more people than a phone or letter. They help you write far more efficiently than a typewriter or pen and paper. They make it possible to keep track of people and things far more easily than a roster or list. They let you budget, forecast, and plan far more effectively than a calculator or table. And they make education far more compelling than words and pictures on paper.
What’s more, unlike just about any other product on the market, personal computers over time decrease in price while they increase in power and ease of use.
Yet what our noggins do far better than today’s fastest supercomputers is “pattern recognition,” allowing us to know faces and appreciate a sunset.
Kurzweil thinks that, a quarter century from today, common computers will have these capabilities and others, including consciousness and the ability to have emotional and even spiritual experiences. I don’t think so.
As littered as the past is with failures of the imagination, it’s equally littered with products of over-excited imaginations. When has the last time you commuted to work in your flying car? What are you doing with all of the free time created by time-saving washing machines, microwave ovens, and other home appliances? How did you enjoy that vacation to the moon?
In his 2001 book, Technoromanticism: Digital Narrative, Holism, and theRomance of the Real , Richard Coyne discusses the romanticization of digital technology, contrasting it with rationalism and pragmatism.
Technorealism is the name that has been coined for thinking critically about the role that IT plays in society and history. At the Technorealism Web site (http://www.technorealism.org), you can read about its principles.
Sure, think about the future. Plan how to get where you want to go and what to do if the unexpected arises. But be careful about what you say about tomorrow. It’s a slippery place. As Lao Tzu said in the 6th century B.C., “Those who have knowledge, don’t predict. Those who predict, don’t have knowledge.” curved from: http://www.infotoday.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)