The intemperance of Operation Osama Delight, sorry, Odyssey Dawn, has seemingly been put on hold as Nato's Operation Unified Protector has officially taken over from the "coalition of the willing", as the US-led Western alliance often styles itself.

The bombing of Libya in the name of protecting Libyans from themselves carries with it insupportable imperialistic insinuations that so many writers and scholars have been scrambling to expose since the March 19 France-led aerial onslaught on the people of Libya, be they the pro-Gaddafi government security personnel, civilians or the rebels from the East.

In reality no one has been spared the Western murderous attacks.

Children, civilians, pro-government soldiers and rebels have all been indiscriminately massacred by the marauding aerial Western forces.

At least, 13 rebels were reported killed by Nato air strikes on Saturday March 2; and the BBC explained how the Western forces fired on the rebels, who had a convoy driving between the towns of Brega and Ajdabiya.

The mollification for all atrocities committed by the West so far is quite rich, especially when one reads it from the West's mainstream media.

The Western media have adopted the phrase "this could not be independently verified", as a covering-line for every atrocity attributed to their forces "on overseas duties", as Western military adventurism is affectionately called by the media.

So, the BBC witnesses the bombing of a rebel convoy by Nato aircraft and goes on to see "at least 13" dead bodies, including the graves of those that had been hurriedly buried - and the same BBC has the temerity to say the "claim" that Nato killed these people "could not be independently verified".

Nato spokeswoman, Oana Lungescu surprisingly, or not so surprisingly, said Nato regretted "the deaths of civilians", as the Libyan armed rebels are called in the Western media.

She however, typically refused to accept full responsibility. "The exact details are hard to verify because we have no reliable source on the ground," Lungescu said. "Clearly, if someone fires at one of our aircraft they have the right to defend themselves."

Hopefully, the children and women who have been killed by shrapnel from attacking war planes are not part of the people firing at Nato aircraft.

According to Pepe Escobar, author of the book Globalisation, two diplomatic sources at the United Nations have independently confirmed that Washington has through Hillary Clinton, given the go ahead for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and crush the pro-democracy movement in the tiny kingdom.

The move was an exchange deal where the House of Saud got allowed to protect the al-Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain in return for an Arab League "YES" vote for Resolution 1973 - the UN Security Council enabling document for the bombardment of Libya.

The revelation reportedly came from two different diplomats, a European and a member of the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) group. One report was made to a US scholar while the other was made to Asia Times Online.

A quote attributed to one of the diplomats says, "This is the reason why we could not support Resolution 1973. We were arguing that Libya, Bahrain and Yemen were similar cases, and calling for a fact-finding mission. We maintain our official position that the resolution is not clear, and may be interpreted in a belligerent manner."

It is a vainglorious myth that a full Arab League endorsed a no fly zone over Libya, just like it is another remarkably dishonest myth that the African Union endorsed Resolution 1973.

Saudi Arabia did its private deal with Washington and then seduced, inter alia coerced three of the non-Gulf Cooperation Council Arab countries to get the vote at a sitting only attended by six members of the GCC and five other Arab nations that included Syria and Algeria, the only two countries that voted against a no fly zone on Libya.

In realistic terms, there were only eleven of the twenty two member states of the Arab League in attendance, and only nine out of the twenty two voted for a no fly zone.

For the African Union, South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon simply conspired to usurp the official position of the AU.
The three countries blatantly took advantage of their rotational presence at the UN Security Council to award themselves precedence over the rest of the 53 member states in the continental body. This was regardless of the fact that the AU Security Council had just issued its own resolution on Libya, appointing a five-member panel to start a negotiation process.

Presidents Paul Kagame, Robert Mugabe and Yoweri Museveni of Rwanda, Zimbabwe and Uganda, respectively, did openly condemn the behaviour of the three African representatives at the UN Security Council, but nothing much could be changed after the vote.

South Africa even usurped the power of the ruling ANC party, which has expressed serious reservations over the decision taken by its members seconded to government.

Particularly displeased is the ANC Youth League whose president was quoted by a South African newspaper as saying: "The ANC of (former president) Nelson Mandela would never have voted for the killing of fellow Africans imposed by our former masters."

For the Arab League, it was all a House of Saudi-led initiative, with Egyptian Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa trying hard to outshine all others in his keenness to impress Washington as he eyes to be Hosni Mubarak's successor back home.

In reality, the Great Arab Revolution of 2011 that saw the toppling of leaders in Tunisia and Egypt has been inexorably hijacked by the US-Saudi-Al-Qaeda counter revolution.

Of course humanitarian imperialism dismisses interpretations like ones made by this writer in this essay as "conspiracy theories" - the catch-phrase designed to discredit any exposure of the dirty underhand dealings of the imperial authority.

Intellectuals from the community of humanitarian imperialism and their media side-kicks are the ones pushing the rhapsodic spin that says the bombing of Libya by Western forces prevented a hypothetical genocide in Benghazi.

These same humanitarian imperialists can easily explain away the Saudi invasion of Bahrain by simply telling the world that Saudi Arabia is acting to squash a hypothetical Iranian subversion in the Gulf.

They explain away the murderous illegal economic sanctions on Zimbabwe as a legitimate tool to "restore property rights" in Zimbabwe - of course, they want to restore colonial property rights that saw 4 000 white commercial farmers enjoying the right to own 75 percent of Zimbabwe's arable land for over 70 years.

When it comes to the people of Bahrain, we are meant to forget about the much-lauded "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P).
From a humanitarian imperialist point of view, these people must in fact be invaded and squashed for posing a threat of an Iranian domination in the Gulf - that way, making life difficult for the free-killing and Western-backed Israel.

The people of Bahrain are far too different from the West's Al-Qaeda bedfellows masquerading as pro-democracy fighters in eastern Libya today - the heavily armed Benghazi rebels often described by Western media as "civilian protesters".
The Benghazi rebels absolutely qualify for R2P because they are fighting a man who has denied the West free access to Libyan oil, and also opposed the establishment of Africom on African soil, besides continually calling for a United States of Africa.

The hope is that the rag-tag rebels can topple Col Gaddafi, or at the very least grab the Eastern part of Libya from him, of course with massive handholding from the imperial West.

In the sad event of a bomb-created post-Gaddafi Libya, no doubt the emerging country will be extensively promoted as a new democracy - quite complete with US intelligence assets, Special Forces, military bases and all manner of lucrative but shady deals involving Western business people.

However the spin from humanitarian imperialists will not change facts on the ground, regardless of the might of Western media and the West's high-tech propaganda model.

The fact remains that Operation Odyssey Dawn and its successor Operation Unified Protector will benefit a few players, among whom are the Pentagon through its ambitious Africom project, Nato, Saudi Arabia, Amr Moussa in his personal political pursuits, and little greedy Qatar.

The Western hysterical expression about saving civilians in Libya must be dismissed with the contempt it deserves. The civilians of Libya do not matter as their oil does. If they did not have that oil, they could be allowed to do whatever they felt like doing among themselves, from oppressing each other to protesting against each other until the cows come home.

The West would not care an inch.

The political views of the people of Libya also do not really matter for the West in the current scheme of things and, this is why Al-Qaeda fighting groups have been dressed up in pro-democracy apparel by the Western media.

There are other secondary beneficiaries waiting in the wings for the fall of Gaddafi. These include the al-Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain; weapons contractors; and, the generality of neo-liberals that often vulturously pick the pieces in every imperialistic aftermath.

One has to look at the Obama hypocrisy when he signed an order to covertly arm the Al-Qaeda rebels from Benghazi. This writer last week spent acres of space proving the Al-Qaeda links involving the Benghazi rebels. Those in doubt can revisit the piece "Osama, Obama in Operation Odyssey".

What Barak Obama has done in fact is to sign an assassination order for Muammar Gaddafi, and his desire may as well come to materialise as did that of his predecessor, George W Bush who pursued Saddam Hussein to the gallows.

But Obama only sings humanitarian songs for civilians belonging to countries ruled by leaders that prevent the US from imperially dominating their natural resources, such as the civilians of Libya, Zimbabwe, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela.

Obama sings no humanitarian songs for the civilians of Saudi Arabia, or those of Palestine or Bahrain. In fact, the system that employs Barak Obama will not allow him to sing humanitarian songs for such people.

Obama is a sorry excuse for a President.

He is an entrapped poor soul now fully being pushed to operate the imperial machine full throttle. The skinny fellow just woke up declaring a war without planning for it, even without congressional approval.

But Obama might go down in history as having created country number 54 for his father's continent. In the event that Col Gaddafi does not fall, or that Obama's assassination instructions are not successfully carried out, the West's plan B is to settle for a separate state in the East of Libya. For Col Gaddafi, that would create a North Korea like state in the West of Libya, perhaps called Tripolitania.

Then, east Libya would be armed like Israel so it can persecute Tripolitania into submission. The world may as well brace for a Tripoli-Benghazi long term standoff. Benghazi may soon be our next Seoul and Tripoli the new Pyongyang.

It is however hard to predict the survival of Col Gaddafi in the wake of reported fissures and defections within the ranks of his inner circle.

The US and its Western allies are not focusing on Plan B at the moment. They want all of Libya minus Col Gaddafi and his entire family. This is not veiled at all.

They see a pliant strategic state almost coming and they are not looking back. A Libya with US military bases, spy bases, intelligence assets, Nato and Africom will mean that Africa will fully be under the military radar of the United States.

This is why the so-called Libyan protests are so much hailed in the Western media. There is next to nothing in mainstream Western media when it comes to the Bahrain revolution. The West cannot support a revolution by the Shiites, especially those geographically close to Iran.

We have heard the emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al Thani saying the bombing of Libya was necessary because the Libyan people were being attacked by Col Gaddafi.

It is quite curious that the emir has never expressed the same humanitarian feelings for the perpetually tormented people of Palestine.

Neither has he ever suggested sending his Mirages to protect Palestinians from the ruthless Israeli leadership, or his neighbors in Bahrain from the backward thinking Saudi Arabian leadership. Well, the emir is backward thinking too!

Like the Saudi Kingdom was created and propped by the British Empire, the al-Khalifa dynasty is no more than a bunch of minority Sunni settlers that first came to Bahrain 230 years ago.

The dynasty was heavily strengthened by the British Empire in the 20th century, when they were virtually obliging slaves to the Queen of England.

So, British and indeed Western humanitarianism is today owed more to the al-Khalifa dynasty than to the generality of Bahrainis.

It is very important for the West to protect the Bahrain dynasty from its pro-democracy people.
This is how humanitarian imperialism works.

The people of Bahrain will not be allowed to get the democracy they want, itself admired from Westerners, whose leadership happens to endorse the brutal suppression of Bahrainis with arrogant imperialist pride.

Clearly, Nato is the newly anointed global cop - imposed by mighty fire power where civilian coercive measures fail to get the imperialist targeted goals.

Through Nato, Obama is sending a message that pliant dictatorships will be allowed to flourish unabated, but those that are not in subordination to imperial supremacy will have to watch out.

Nato will descend upon such threats to Western interests and when Nato strikes, there is hardly any regard for the Charter of the UN or for international law.

Even the US Congress can be side-stepped as Obama just did with the Libyan war, and the signing of an assassination order for Gaddafi, well as Obama put it himself, an order to "covertly arm" the Benghazi rebels.

Africa has Nato on its soil right now and this is no feat to celebrate, unless one was like the Al-Qaeda rebels from Benghazi. These are the thugs who ululate at the bombing of their own cities.

If Gaddafi falls and Libya is fully or partially taken over by the West, there is no chance under the sun that Nato will leave Africa and retreat to wherever they came from, if there is in fact such a thing as Nato; from a geographical point of view.

Thanks to South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon, the beloved continent might permanently have the Nato global cops establishing their police camp in Benghazi.

After the civilians of Libya purportedly get the democracy preached by their self-invited saviours from the West, the messianic West will not leave Libya, the same way they will not leave Afghanistan and Iraq.

Africa we are one and together we will overcome. It is homeland or death!

Reason Wafawarova is a political writer and can be contacted on wafawarova@yahoo.co.uk or reason@rwafawarova.com or visit www.rwafawarova.com

©  EsinIslam.Com