U.S.-Libya agreement on terror lawsuits paves way for new relations

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

Qaddafi sure came around. What happened to Saddam certainly made an impression.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/14/africa/libya.php

Libya and the United States settled all outstanding lawsuits by U.S. victims of terrorism Thursday, clearing the way for the full restoration of diplomatic relations.

There were 26 pending lawsuits filed by U.S. citizens against Libya for the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and other attacks, said a senior Libyan government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the details of the deal had not been publicly announced.

There were three outstanding lawsuits filed by Libyans for U.S. airstrikes on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986, he said. Libyans say those strikes killed 41 people, including the adopted daughter of Muammar el-Qaddafi, Libya's leader.

The settlement completes an effort of nearly five years to rebuild ties between the two countries.

The agreement will be followed by an upgrading of U.S. relations with Libya, including the opening of an embassy in Tripoli, the confirmation of a U.S. ambassador and a visit by the U.S. secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, before the end of the year. It will also allow direct U.S. aid.

The deal also gives immunity to the Libyan government from any further terror-related lawsuits, the Libyan government official said.

The United States had no diplomatic relations with Libya from 1980 until late 2003, when Qaddafi pledged to abandon his programs for weapons of mass destruction, stop exporting terrorism and compensate the families of victims of the Lockerbie bombing and other attacks.

After that, the nation that once was a global pariah was given a reprieve from UN, U.S. and European sanctions, removed from the U.S. State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism and allowed a seat on the United Nations Security Council.

The last hurdle was compensation for Americans harmed in Libyan-sponsored attacks, including the Lockerbie attack and the 1986 bombing of La Belle discotheque in Berlin, which killed two U.S. soldiers.

The disco attack prompted Ronald Reagan, president at the time, to order the 1986 airstrikes on Libya. Reagan once referred to Qaddafi as the "mad dog of the Middle East."

Libya has paid the 268 families involved in the Pan Am settlement $8 million each, but was withholding an additional $2 million it owed each of them because of a dispute over U.S. obligations in return.

The main Libyan lawsuit was filed by 45 families of those killed in the 1986 airstrikes.

There are two other cases pending related to other incidents.

International institutions and foreign companies operating in Libya - including some U.S. companies - will contribute to a fund to compensate the U.S. and Libyan claimants, the Libyan government official said.

The top U.S. diplomat for the Middle East, David Welch, signed the deal with Ahmed al-Fatouri, head of U.S. affairs in the Libyan Foreign Ministry, in a ceremony before reporters and members of both delegations.

"We went through a long path of negotiations until we reached this agreement," Fatouri said just before the signing. "It opens new horizons for relations based on mutual respect."

"The agreement turns the page on the negative past forever," Fatouri said.

Welsh, a U.S. assistant secretary of state, said: "I'm optimistic that this agreement will be implemented soon. This agreement will settle the last major issue, which is compensation."

Welch called the deal a "historic agreement" and said he had delivered a letter from President George W. Bush to Qaddafi.

"This international agreement between the two sides ends any pending issue between Tripoli and Washington," said Azzam Eddine, a member of the Libyan team who negotiated the deal.

"It clears the way for normal and complete relations between Libya and the U.S.A."

[Peter1469]

See, violence is the answer sometimes. 

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

See, violence is the answer sometimes. 

I agree. What we need to remember is that violence has utility.

[Gunit Hussein Sangh]

actually if you research this a bit, you'll find that Libya and the Brits started negotiating this BEFORE dear leader started swinging his dick at Saddam. Qaddafi's son took over some of the responsibilites of government and he wanted to normalize relations with the rest of the world to get foreign investment. That's the reason they gave up their nuclear ambitions -- not because they were shaking in their booties over our glorious leaders conquest of a has-been dictator.

[conley]

actually if you research this a bit, you'll find that Libya and the Brits started negotiating this BEFORE dear leader started swinging his dick at Saddam. Qaddafi's son took over some of the responsibilites of government and he wanted to normalize relations with the rest of the world to get foreign investment. That's the reason they gave up their nuclear ambitions -- not because they were shaking in their booties over our glorious leaders conquest of a has-been dictator.

if anything the invasion and subsequent quagmire (now improving) in iraq has given madmen like ahmadenijad free reign to go wild with their nuclear ambitions. they know the us can't lift a finger because our military is completely spent. it probably emboldened the russians too, and it's going to get worse before its get better.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

actually if you research this a bit, you'll find that Libya and the Brits started negotiating this BEFORE dear leader started swinging his dick at Saddam. Qaddafi's son took over some of the responsibilites of government and he wanted to normalize relations with the rest of the world to get foreign investment. That's the reason they gave up their nuclear ambitions -- not because they were shaking in their booties over our glorious leaders conquest of a has-been dictator.

This isn't about Bush, dude. Really....

Qaddafi runs the Libya, not his son. You really think a man of his temperament suddenly changes because his son wants foreign investment?

[conley]

actually if you research this a bit, you'll find that Libya and the Brits started negotiating this BEFORE dear leader started swinging his dick at Saddam. Qaddafi's son took over some of the responsibilites of government and he wanted to normalize relations with the rest of the world to get foreign investment. That's the reason they gave up their nuclear ambitions -- not because they were shaking in their booties over our glorious leaders conquest of a has-been dictator.

This isn't about Bush, dude. Really....

Qaddafi runs the Libya, not his son. You really think a man of his temperament suddenly changes because his son wants foreign investment?

quaddafi shut right up after reagan blew his house to smithereens. i'd give more credit to reagan than bush. quaddafi hasn't done diddly poo since then.

[Gunit Hussein Sangh]

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1195852,00.html

Ever since Monday's announcement that it was restoring full diplomatic relations with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, the Bush Administration has suggested that the onetime international pariah's decision to dismantle his weapons of mass destruction program was primarily the result of the U.S. war on terror and its toppling of Saddam Hussein. But for a brief moment in December 2003, the actual capture of the Iraqi leader almost delayed the first public sign of the historic rapprochement between Libya and the West.

Gaddafi's son Seif al Islam and government officials had spent months in secret negotiations with representatives of both the CIA and the British secret intelligence service MI6, working out the parameters of a deal in which Libya would give up its nuclear ambitions. But on Dec. 14, only a few days before an official announcement was to be made in Washington, Hussein was pulled out of a spider hole and Gaddafi had last-minute jitters. Worried that the humiliating capture of Saddam would be viewed as the driving force behind his voluntary disarmament, Gaddafi suddenly proposed a postponement. According to his son Seif al Islam, British Prime Minister Tony Blair pleaded with Gaddafi, "Please, we are in a hurry. It is a big success for all of us." The personal diplomacy worked, and an announcement was made on December 19 that Gaddafi had agreed to dismantle his weapons. Ten months later, after Western agents had worked to remove all the components of Libya's WMD program and dismantle its long-range ballistic missiles, Blair sent the Libyan leader a friendly letter of congratulation, addressing him as "Dear Muammar" and signing off, "Best wishes, Yours ever, Tony."

Blair's tone may have been affectionate and familiar, but the drawn-out process that led to Muammar Gaddafi coming in from the cold wasn't always so warm. At one point, Seif al Islam recalls, his father "suspected an ambush" by the West: getting him to give up his only deterrent but withholding diplomatic rehabilitation. A series of TIME interviews that began before Sept. 11 with Gaddafi himself, his influential son and key Libyan officials offer a unique look into the Libyan view of the secret talks and considerations that led to Gaddafi?s staggering reversal of fortune.

As early as February of 2001, Gaddafi told TIME that he was dramatically shifting Libya's strategic orientation, seeking normal relations with the West and an alignment with Africa rather than the Middle East. "I supported all liberation movements fighting imperialism," he said in February 2001, "but I believe that is over now." In a TIME interview in January 2005, he went further: "There is never permanent animosity or permanent friendship. We all made mistakes, both sides. The most important thing is to rectify the mistakes."


SEE 

[Peter1469]

Yes, he saw that his ass might have been next.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

Yes, he saw that his ass might have been next.

Exactly. Gaddafi saw the writing on the wall. Gunit is correct that he has been trying to repair relations with the West for a while now but the timing of his WMD surrender was just too much of a coincidence. Iraq undoubtedly made an impression. I was wrong, however, to suggest that Iraq was the catalyst for all of his conciliatory moves.

[Gunit Hussein Sangh]

it would have happened even if we had never gone into iraq. Dear leader is doing nothing more than spinning this in an attempt to fool people into believing some good actually did come out of his illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

it would have happened even if we had never gone into iraq. Dear leader is doing nothing more than spinning this in an attempt to fool people into believing some good actually did come out of his illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Maybe. Maybe not. This happened before things went sour in Iraq and the timing is hardly coincidental. I know you just can't bring yourself to say anything good about Bush. It's ok.