I'm writing this diary mainly as a response to the comments of the rec list one also on this topic. In my opinion, people are jumping to conclusions too quickly and accepting Gaddafi's comments at face value.
In case you have not heard yet, the big news story tonight is that at a press conference, Saif al-Arab was claimed to be killed (along with 3 of Gaddafi's grandchildren) in a NATO air strike. As people seem to be jumping to conclusions regarding this, I'm writing this to attempt to clear up some facts (or my perception of them, at least)
Firstly, several commentators have compared this to the 1986 bombing attack on Libya, in which it is part of the common understanding today that Gaddafi's adopted daughter was killed in the attack. In retribution, they said, Gaddafi ordered the Lockerbie bombing.
There is one problem with this: The dead infant girl (Hanna) was posthumously adopted by Gaddafi. She had no connection to him at all prior to the bombing (see der Spiegel's Libya summary, for instance) However, the posthumous part was left out in most reporting, hence winning Gaddafi considerable international sympathy.
Hence, Gaddafi is not the most reliable of sources regarding his family. In addition, it's a bit hard for me to believe that the airstrike conveniently hit Gaddafi's most low-profile child and grandchildren, while missing all the high-profile people. Not to mention what they would be doing in Gaddafi's house in the first place.
Especially, it's a bit unclear what Saif al-Arab would be doing in Tripoli in the first place, as he was previously believed to have joined the anti-Gaddafi rebellion
Saif al-Arab, who was sent by his father to help the Libyan security forces with the widespread crackdown on pro-democracy agitators in the eastern parts of Libya, joined the demonstrators in the eastern city of Benghazi Thursday.
...
Saif al-Arab is said to have had the backing of combat troops and had military equipment that was dispatched to the eastern parts of the country. The move comes as many intelligence and military officials in the third largest city, Al Bayda, have stepped down, while a major general in the eastern city of Tobruk has castigated Gaddafi's regime for its heavy-handed assault on protesters.
(Various sources such as
here,
,here,,
here,
here,
here)
Perhaps in vein of these reports, the UN Security Council instituted a travel ban on Saif al-Arab, but did not implement an asset freeze, unlike the rest of his immediate family.
Though these reports were never confirmed, Gaddafi never issued any statements on them either (as he did regarding claims that his son Khamis had been killed, that certain government officials had defected, etc.) And that's pretty much the only coverage Saif al-Arab has received during the civil war, up until now. I don't think he's joined the rebels, but it would be quite plausible for him to, for instance, have been killed in the initial fighting causing the rumor mill to begin as to his whereabouts.
Overall, I would be very wary before taking Gaddafi's word at face value. It's true that it's perfectly possible that his son was really killed in the attack. But at the same time, it's also quite possible and plausible that this is simply a ploy to receive international sympathy and media attention.
Per Al Jazeera
What exactly happened in the compound tonight we don't know. What the Gaddafi family seems to be saying is that this was an assassination attempt. I'm not sure NATO would want to be caught trying to do something like that.
On the other hand, mistakes have been made, on the other hand, there are clearly many agendas working in this conflict and what the international alliance say they want and what they actually might actually be prepared to do could be two different things.
-
Linky
My two cents, at any rate.