Libya: NATO Pirates Take Ship At High Sea

August 3, 2011

According to the Petrolium Economists (currently VERY slow load) some Libyan rebels pirated an oil tanker with the help of "western" special forces:

Libyan rebel forces last night boarded a fuel tanker belonging to Muammar Gaddafi's regime, seized it and are sailing the vessel laden with gasoline to Benghazi.

The ship was boarded by Libyan nationals acting without the National Transitional Council's (NTC) knowledge, said a source familiar with the operation. A European government provided logistical support for the action, which is believed to have involved special forces boarding the ship from the air.
[…]
Nato began interdicting seaborne supplies of fuel to the regime in May, leaving the Cartagena and its cargo stranded in the Mediterranean. It was originally chartered to land the fuel in Tripoli.In recent weeks, it has been anchored off Malta and then Algeria. It recently returned to Malta to pick up more bunker fuel. It was boarded by special forces while sitting offshore Malta.
[…]
At 17:00 UK time on 3 August, the Cartagena was said to be sailing towards Benghazi. Ship-tracking services could not locate the vessel, suggesting its transponder had been shut off.

The Cartagena was at high sea and pirating it has certainly nothing to do with "protecting civilians" in Libya. My best guess is that the French did this. I am curious with what excuse NATO will come up for committing piracy on the open sea.

Posted by b on August 3, 2011 at 18:30 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Sound familiar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1FkTTGCBVw&feature=player_embedded

Posted by: hans | Aug 3 2011 19:38 utc | 1

I can’t quite see why we are bothering about Libya. Qaddafi is an evil dictator, of there is not much doubt. He has done a great job in defending himself in the media. I am impressed by the persistence. In the Guardian comment columns, he has virtually won the day.
The opposition are losing the media battle, but slightly winning the battle on the ground. As I said before, the rebels have virtually no offensive capacity. If they take somewhere, they run away against the slightest counter-offensive. But Qaddafi is not retaking territory, but rather slowly losing it.
Personally, I think we should withdraw our thoughts, and let it work itself out, even for NATO. Western interests are not that important.

Posted by: alexno | Aug 3 2011 20:17 utc | 2

do you really believe this story as is told, b.?
why would the ship go from Malta to Algeria and back for bunker fuel if it was stranded in the Mediterranean? Would that not be a waste of bunker fuel? why this emphasis that the NTC does not know about it. why would the source be so interested for a journalist to know about it, at the same time not naming the European country with the special forces. why this talk about selling the ship.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/26/us-libya-saras-idUSTRE73P5Q120110426
“Reuters reported on April 20 that Gaddafi’s government is circumventing international sanctions to import gasoline to western Libya by using intermediaries to transfer fuels between ships in Tunisia.
The Valle di Navarra’s owner, Navigazione Montanari SPA, said the tanker had been chartered by Saras for the voyage from Italy to Tunisia.
“We can confirm the Valle di Navarra left Sarroch with a 40,000 tonne cargo and delivered it to La Skhira on April 3,” said a source with the owner, who asked not to be named.
Ship tracking data provided by AIS Marine Traffic showed the ship sailed toward Tunisia at the end of March, and sailed away from Tunisia on April 4, after a five-day interlude in which there is no satellite tracking available.”

Posted by: somebody | Aug 3 2011 20:28 utc | 3

and of course there is also this
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/08/01/2340938/source-gaddafi-wants-chavez-to.html
The intelligence sources told El Nuevo Herald that the emissaries plan to request that Venezuela take control over more than a dozen tankers, each with a capacity to store more than 160,000 tons of oil, and the possibility to market more than 1.5 million barrels of Libyan crude oil through the South American country.
“[Gaddafi] is proposing that […] Venezuela assume ownership of the ships to continue operating them through Venezuela,” said one of the sources, who spoke under the condition of anonymity. “If this is done, it would be a violation of all sanctions.”
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/08/01/2340938/source-gaddafi-wants-chavez-to.html#ixzz1U09Ii7Jf
alexno, why are you posting here, if Libya is not significant for something …

Posted by: somebody | Aug 3 2011 20:54 utc | 4

alexno, why are you posting here, if Libya is not significant for something …
Of course I am interested in Libya. The issue here is whether it is worth the attention that the NATO intervention provokes. The important issue is who will win, not whether such or such a power has correctly obeyed UNSC resolution 1973.

Posted by: alexno | Aug 3 2011 21:33 utc | 5

@alexno #2 & #5
In post 5 you say it does not matter if NATO obeys the law. In post 2 you call Qaddafi evil. So Qaddafi is evil and NATO is lawless! Aren’t you half way to admitting that this is a war of naked aggression on the part of NATO for oil resources? And that force and murder has already superseded any “civilized” notion of the of the moral or the just?
Just wondering.
–Gaianne

Posted by: Gaianne | Aug 3 2011 22:09 utc | 6

Lies , mass murder, terrorism, supporting known terrorists, grand theft and now piracy…protected by the media, and enabled by the UN and its wretched RES 1973…wheres Banki to make a public apology of the Misuse of the now defunct UN!?

Posted by: brian | Aug 3 2011 22:16 utc | 7

‘I can’t quite see why we are bothering about Libya. Qaddafi is an evil dictator, of there is not much doubt. He has done a great job in defending himself in the media. I am impressed by the persistence. In the Guardian comment columns, he has virtually won the day.’
LOL Sorry Alex but millions of Libyans dont agree with your miseable assessment..and heres why:
http://davidrothscum.blogspot.com/2011/02/world-cheers-as-cia-plunges-libya-into.html
http://redantliberationarmy.wordpress.com/2011/03/27/reason-for-war-gaddafi-wanted-to-nationalise-oil/
Thats why he has won the day…You really are a sorry waste of intelligence, when you lie so openly.

Posted by: brian | Aug 3 2011 22:21 utc | 8

Libya is worthy of our attention because it is such a flagrant breach of international law and a calculated affront to the United Nations.
It is an example of really dangerous behaviour.
The use of the Security Council resolution 1973 to attempt regime change through a war of aggression, was a cynical reminder that nothing had changed since Iraq.
The alliance with reactionary dictators (besides any one of whom Ghadaffi is a saint) from the Arab League, the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia in particular, was clear notice to the world that NATO was going to resist any attempts by the Egyptian people to establish democracy. The Benghazi junta is a salafist/monarchist base on Egypt’s border.
The refusal to facilitate African Union mediation attempts was clearly designed to remind Africa that the US does not approve of African unity, and will not countenance independent foreign policy.
The French position, designed to reassert France’s rights to dominate north and west Africa, ought to have been utterly disowned by the international community, instead Sarkozy, one of the continent’s least attractive fascist criminals, a racist and a reactionary adventurer (cf Cote D’Ivoire) was given NATO’s full support in his evil folly.
The ICC, already pretty well discredited made an absolute joke of international criminal law by the haste with which it preferred its stupid charges against Ghadaffi (Viagra indeed!!)
The Secretary General of the UN, an American puppet, the most obvious puppet in the organisation’s not very glorious history, discredited himself and his organisation by his efforts to prevent the dreaded outbreak of peace.
I hold no brief for Ghadaffi. He’s not my type at all. But I hope that he wins this war. If he does, he will come out of it with a new understanding of the power and precious rights of the people. And with a thorough understanding of the need for African and Arab peoples to declare their independence from NATO and the Empire it serves.
Come to think of it I wasn’t too fond of the Vietnamese Communist Party either but the campaign they led to expel the foreign invaders was exemplary and it remains an inspiration to decent people everywhere.
As to Ghadaffi “defending himself in the media”, that is a bad joke. He has no power at all compared with that of the humanitarian interventionist/imperialists who dominate the media. What is true is that wherever the matter can be discussed with any freedom at all it quickly becomes apparent that any western European or American interested in fighting evil has no need to leave his own country.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 4 2011 2:02 utc | 9

The U.S. is currently trying to get Russia and China to agree to some UNSC statement on Syria. They are reluctant to do so as the UNSC resolutions on Libya were thoroughly abused by the “west”. This will make them even more reluctant to agree on anything similar with regards to Syria or any other country.
That’s the desirable outcome but I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the US is being led up the garden path on Syria. Several days ago a Pentagon spokesman ruled out US/NATO intervention in Syria which, in Yankee-speak, means intervention is well and truly on the table.
I’m confident that Russia and China are determined to help America get itself into as many quagmires as possible. The temptation, from post-Afghanistan Russia’s pov at least, must be irresistible. I won’t be even mildly surprised if Russia and China abstain when a Syria intervention resolution comes up at the UNSC.
Letting America exhaust itself conducting expensive fake wars all over the planet beats the heck out of direct confrontation and achieves a similar result at little or no cost. The Americans are fond of justifying their adventures in mass murder and vandalism by saying it’s better to “fight them over there.” The Sino-Russian interpretation of this mantra is smarter.
The bulk of Western Opinion will probably read a Russia-China abstention on Syria as an expression of common sense. Obama will probably even get Shrillary to congratulate them on their foresight…

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 4 2011 2:28 utc | 10

re 6
In post 5 you say it does not matter if NATO obeys the law.
No I didn’t say that at all. I was talking about whether it is worth talking about Libya, and how to estimate who will win. It has nothing to do with my personal opinion.

Posted by: alexno | Aug 4 2011 9:55 utc | 11

re 8
Thats why he has won the day…You really are a sorry waste of intelligence, when you lie so openly.
Are you really unable to see how well Qaddafi has done in the media war? After all, he has b convinced that Libya is just a tribal war, and not an attempt to get rid of a gross megalomaniac, which is what the war is really about.
The problem with you guys is that you only see Libya in terms of the role of the Western powers. No wonder you don’t understand what I say.

Posted by: alexno | Aug 4 2011 10:01 utc | 12

At least a “mainstream” paper, The Telegraph in the UK, is reporting this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8680546/Libya-Nato-carried-out-raid-on-Gaddafi-oil-tanker.html
The article makes the point that there is no oil embargo on Libya and the only justification for this action appears to be that

The Cartagena is owned by the Libyan government’s shipping arm, the General National Maritime Transport Company, which is believed to be controlled by Col Muammar Gaddafi’s son Hannibal, who is on a sanctions list.

Posted by: blowback | Aug 4 2011 10:08 utc | 13

there is another twist – and sure wont be the last twist – to the story:
http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE76Q30I20110804?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0
“According to a Western diplomatic source speaking to Reuters last month, the Cartagena was prevented from reaching Tripoli not only by a hardening NATO line on fuel imports by Gaddafi but a captain with sympathies with the rebels.
The tanker loaded gasoline in a Turkish port. The Swiss company that sold the ship the fuel said the buyer had duped it by placing Tripoli, Lebanon, as the destination.
But when it left the port in early May, carrying enough fuel to fill nearly a million cars, it sailed west, to Lebanon, but its actual destination was Zawiyah, the main oil port adjacent to the Libyan capital.
NATO initially rubber-stamped the deal, saying the gasoline shipment to Libyan distribution company Al Sharara Libya Oil and Gas “concerns,” according to a May 4 fax obtained by Reuters and apparently sent in response to a request for NATO clearance.
But while the Cartagena was en route to Zawiyah, NATO intercepted the other west-Libya bound fuel tanker and the Cartagena spent the next month anchored off the Mediterranean island of Malta while the Libyan government tried to come up with another means of unloading it.”
Reminds me of the German Railway Guy complaining about Americans mispronouncing
Bayreuth so he would send them to Lebanon.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 4 2011 11:27 utc | 14

alexnos latest rant:
‘Are you really unable to see how well Qaddafi has done in the media war? After all, he has b convinced that Libya is just a tribal war, and not an attempt to get rid of a gross megalomaniac, which is what the war is really about.’
gross megalomaniac? you should apply to the US state dept propaganda section…youre missing out on your real vocation. Theres nothing megalomaniac about Gadaffi..there is about those who feel the need to lie to get rid of a very popular shrew and capable leader.

Posted by: brian | Aug 4 2011 21:38 utc | 15

and lets not forget, that both Alex and the media are aiding a toxic mix of jihadis(LIFG), free marketeers(TNC) CIA trained assassins(NFSL), monarchists, human traffickers(see Thomas Mountains articles) etc…thats what makes up the ‘revolutionaries’.

Posted by: brian | Aug 4 2011 21:40 utc | 16

Qatari plane supplies ammunition to Libya rebels

MISRATA, Libya, August 6 (Reuters) – A Qatari plane made a quick stop in the rebel-held Libyan city of Misrata on Saturday to offload ammunition destined for rebel fighters, sources with knowledge of the flight said.
Officials at the airport acknowledged a Qatari plane landed at Misrata airport but declined to reveal details of its contents.
“The plane offloaded six pick-up trucks which were packed with ammunition and minutes later it flew off again,” said one source, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Another source showed Reuters a photo of a plane shortly after its departure with “Qatar” written on underside of the fuselage.

No fly-zone and UN weapon embargo … sure

Posted by: b | Aug 7 2011 5:51 utc | 17

Back to Main