Gaddafi declared ceasefire. However this could have two meanings:

1) He wants to play the political card of obeying to the UN resolution so to demand a stop of the raids.

2) Agreeing in a ceasefire, has in the past been used in conflicts, as a means to advance your positions-resupply-regroup, before braking the ceasefire again and carry on an offensive when you ‘re ready again.

I think it would be wise for Gaddafi to try to play no.1, but given also his statements about “long war”, it could be no.2 too.

Ironically the ‘no fly zone’ now means that the best chance for pro-Qaddaffi forces to stay alive would be to keep pushing into the rebels relentlessly. If they pull back, they will be slaughtered. If Gaddaffi’s propaganda people are even half competent, they will be reminding their soldiers what happened on the ‘highway of death’ when a defeated army last tried to flee western air power.

Yes and there’s another factor too. Pushing into the rebels relentlessly is probably the best strategy. The question is, what will happen if the coalition successfully manages to cut the supply route to front line Gaddafi’s troops. Soldiers with empty belly and under continuous pounding and getting short on ammunition don’t tend to be relentless. 😀 At this point the morale of Gaddafi’s Benghazi troops will be severely tested.

A lot of his support is predicated on belief in him being in charge when it’s all over. If that belief goes, his support could crumble.

The rebels have never controlled most of the country. They got up to about half.

Yes, but the whole situation is very uncertain IMHO. What will the people’s reaction be if “collateral damage” from coalition bombing occurs? Will they rally behind him or rise against him? I don’t know well enough the society to answer. The other factors are the way he will play politically with the resolution and also how badly will the coalition keep it together? Germany is out of this. Italy is pretty much forced to give bases, but really didn’t have any problem with Ghaddafi. The US surely doesn’t want a new long commitment. The UK would also probably have better use for the money. The most committed politically seems Sarkozy.

It is too late for a ceasefire attempt from Gadaffi. In the eyes of the Coalition up against him he has shown that he is unfit to govern Libya. The political niceties will go out the window in his case. With the naval blockade commencing it is game over for his regime. We could go on debating it, but IMHO Gaddafi will not remain in power and no deals will be done with him.

TJ

It’s possible, but i ‘d expect a new UN resolution before he falls. Because, while true that the coalition at this point would like him gone, still, a shroud of “legitimacy” is still needed in the event that Ghaddafi decides to play the “good boy” and starts protesting “i have obeyed the UN resolution, why do you keep bombing”…

Aspis wrote.

I can’t see that at all. His days are numbered and nobody will be making deals with him.

TJ

With a new UN resolution maybe. With the current resolution, if he does agree on a ceasefire, on what grounds will the coalition continue bombing?

Yep, the USN has launched Tomahawks against Libyan air defences east of Tripoli according to both Fox and Reuters.

David Cameron has also, just now, stated ‘Tonight, British forces are in action over Libya’.

I wonder, wouldn’t it be more productive, to start with the Benghazi front? If the rebels that have retreated there, continue to be decimated by heavy ground fire from Gadaffi’s forces, then there won’t be much to “defend” in Libya…

T
I suppose it all depends on what is going on behind the scenes with Cyprus? Is the Republic of Cyprus dragging their heels on use or agreement on warplanes?

TJ

My understanding is that the Cypriot gov can’t stop Britain from using the bases. According to Cypriot press, the two goverments are in contact. The Cypriot gov spokesman said that the British gov has not yet taken a decision about whether or not use Akrotiri as base. The president of the Cypriot parliament (for the little it’s worth) is against the use of Akrotiri as base for bombings, but that’s all…
http://www.philenews.com/main/320,1,4995,0,62784-.aspx (in greek)

In 1974, the UK through NATO channels had warned Greece not to fly over the british bases, or the greek aircrafts would be shot down. This should give you a hint about what kind of objection the Cypriot goverment could have on what the UK makes of her bases.

Anyway, news say that a Tornado squadron, 1 C-130 and 2 civillian aircrafts have landed at Akrotiri.

– In Greece:

1) 8 or 6 (sources disagree) F16s from Belgium are in Araxos AB (western Peloponnese) and 6 more Dutch F16 are expected to arrive.

2) The French goverment asked the greek goverment to let land 6 Qatari M2000 at Souda AB in Crete.

3) The greek involvement is IMHO still a bit unclear, as there is protest by opposition, but according to what all military magazines wrote yesterday, it is supposed to be (i am holding my reservations for political reasons):

4 F16s to fly CAP for encorcement of the NFZ (but no bombing), 1 Erieye, 2 Super Puma helicopters on standby for SAR and 2 frigates that are already patroling.

Souda AB would be given for use, but according to what the vice-minister of Defence said, for “support” of operation, not as base for raid missions.

http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18404&Itemid=40

However today we see Araxos being used too, it is unclear yet on the type of use.

Anyway, Gaddafi has earned tactical victory. By making quick gains, he has assured that he stays in power, at least, with this UN resolution… And frankly i think it will come down to a political deal with him and he will continue to rule Libya like before. Unless the French have some plan to partition the eastern Libya, but it would be very hard to achieve only by air.

I totally agree with what you have put. I didn’t mean to imply that the ‘tech’ was the cause, but rather a catalyst for the changes that we’re seeing. I’ve always believed that there are two types of future we could have, namely the Bladerunner version, or the Star Trek one. I know which one I’d rather have;)

I agree, technology plays a role. But i see technology more like a coordination tool and means of information for the middle-upper class. I don’t know how much of the population in Tunisia for example is tech-savvy, but you don’t need to be tech-savvy or have access to internet to see that you can’t buy food. When the ingredients are there, it takes a sparkle to set fire.

I think the future is more towards the more “big brotheresque” version of Blade Runner… The Star Trek “no money, no war” version will probably remain science fiction.