US Says Arming Rebels Is Legal, Deferred Answer on Visas of
April 14 -- While at its April 14 briefing the US State
Department on Libya
was primarily asked why it is not arming or
funding the rebels, giving more planes or even “whacking”
Gaddafi, described as “fist pumping” in a convertible in Tripoli,
Inner City Press ask State Department spokesman Mark Toner if
allowing funds to the rebels might not result in violations of the
arms embargo in UN Security Council resolution 1970.
the idea is
that arming the rebels would require another resolution, beyond 1973,
Toner replied that arming the rebels is legal. See transcript:
We believe that – our understanding of the sanctions and
what was prohibited, that this was – this action was legal, that it
Press: How about the arms embargo? How does – I mean, if this
– both revenue streams, do you feel that the arms embargo under
Resolution 1970, which is a total arms embargo on the country, is
this something that you would be discussing with (inaudible)? Do you
think – you keep saying that the revenue stream is only for the
operation of the government.
We’ve talked about this before, and what we’ve said is
that 1970 – taken in totality, 1970 and 1973 – that it is
permissible to get arms to the opposition, and that’s something
that remains on the table, certainly. We’ve never taken that option
Press: And could I ask you about visas, too? So also on Libya,
there – I’ve tried to ask this to the mission in New York --
Press: -- but there was – there were stories saying that Ali
Treki, who is the former foreign minister of Libya, was denied a U.S.
visa, more recent stories saying that D’Escoto
Brockmann, who was
named to represent Libya, couldn’t get a visa. Is that true? And
what’s the visa status of the two diplomats who left?
D’Escoto Brockmann is the Nicaraguan?
Press: Nicaraguan. Absolutely.
D'escoto Brockmann previously at UN, US visa not shown
Okay. Yeah. I’m trying to remember, but this is a couple
weeks ago, I believe, when this was in the news. But we had very real
concerns about his status, and I believe we were looking into it, but
at the same time, obviously, complying with our obligations as a host
nation for the UN. But we felt that he had – we had concerns –
there were concerns about his status here that needed to be
addressed. I don’t know what the exact status is today of that,
though. I’d have to check.
Press: (Inaudible) the Nicaraguan? His --
Yes, the Nicaraguan. As far as the Libyan --
Press: The representatives – yeah, Shalgam and Dabbashi.
-- representative – I’m not sure what the status of that
is. I’ll have to check for you.
Press: : Okay. Yeah, thanks.
there still was no answered. And while an official of the US Mission
to the UN, which has rebuffed Press questions about visas for some
time, told Inner City Press that on Libya the legality of UN envoy al
Khatib also being paid by Jordan would be publicly addressed this
week, it hasn't been. We'll see -- watch this site.
* * *