Reaction 2011 military intervention in Libya

1 reaction

1.1 responsibility protect
1.2 criticism
1.3 blowback

reaction

since start of campaign, there have been allegations of violating limits imposed upon intervention resolution 1973 , law. @ end of may 2011, western troops captured on film in libya, despite resolution 1973 forbidding foreign occupation force of form on part of libyan territory . in article however, reports armed westerners not western troops on ground.

on 10 june, secretary of defense robert gates criticized of nato member nations efforts, or lack thereof, participate in intervention in libya. gates singled out germany, poland, spain, turkey, , netherlands criticism. praised canada, norway , denmark, saying although 3 countries had provided twelve percent of aircraft operation, aircraft had conducted one-third of strikes.

on june 24, house voted against joint resolution 68, have authorized continued military involvement in nato campaign 1 year. majority of republicans voted against resolution, questioning interests in libya , others criticizing white house overstepping authority conducting military expedition without congressional backing. house democrats split on issue, 115 voting in favor of , 70 voting against. despite failure of president receive legal authorization congress, obama administration continued military campaign, carrying out bulk of nato s operations until overthrow of gadaffi in october.

on 9 august, head of unesco, irina bokova deplored nato strike on libyan state tv, al-jamahiriya, killed 3 journalists , wounded others. bokova declared media outlets should not target of military activities. on 11 august, after nato airstrike on majer (on 9 august) allegedly killed 85 civilians, un secretary-general ban ki-moon called on sides as possible avoid killing innocent people.

responsibility protect

the military intervention in libya has been cited council on foreign relations example of responsibility protect policy adopted un @ 2005 world summit. according gareth evans, [t]he international military intervention (smh) in libya not bombing democracy or muammar gaddafi s head. legally, morally, politically, , militarily has 1 justification: protecting country s people. however, council noted policy had been used in libya, , not in countries such côte d ivoire, undergoing political crisis @ time, or in response protests in yemen. cfr expert, stewert patrick, said there bound selectivity , inconsistency in application of responsibility protect norm given complexity of national interests @ stake in...the calculations of other major powers involved in these situations. in january 2012, arab organization human rights, palestinian centre human rights , international legal assistance consortium published report describing alleged human rights violations , accusing nato of war crimes.

criticism

protest in belgrade, serbia on march 26, 2011 against military intervention in libya



protest in minneapolis, united states on april 2, 2011 against military intervention in libya

some critics of western military intervention suggested resources—not democratic or humanitarian concerns—were real impetus intervention, among them journalist of london arab nationalist newspaper al-quds al-arabi, russian tv network rt , (then-)leaders of venezuela , zimbabwe, hugo chávez , robert mugabe. gaddafi s libya, despite relatively small population, known possess vast resources, particularly in form of oil reserves , financial capital. libya member of opec , 1 of world s largest oil producers. producing 1.6 million barrels day before war, 70 percent of them through state-owned national oil corporation. additionally, country s sovereign wealth fund, libyan investment authority, 1 of largest in world, controlling assets worth approximately us$56 billion, including on 100 tons of gold reserves in central bank of libya.

accusations of imperialism on part of nato , west voiced many leaders of states had traditionally aligned communist bloc , subsequently russia, including: iran s supreme leader ayatollah khamenei (who said supported rebels not western intervention), venezuelan president hugo chávez (who referred gaddafi martyr ), , president of zimbabwe robert mugabe (who referred western nations vampires ), governments of raúl castro in cuba, daniel ortega in nicaragua, kim jong-il in north korea, hifikepunye pohamba in namibia, , others. gaddafi himself referred intervention colonial crusade ... capable of unleashing full scale war , sentiment echoed russian prime minister vladimir putin: [unsc resolution 1973] defective , flawed...it allows everything. resembles medieval calls crusades. president hu jintao of people s republic of china said, dialogue , other peaceful means ultimate solutions problems, , added, if military action brings disaster civilians , causes humanitarian crisis, runs counter purpose of un resolution. indian prime minister manmohan singh critical of intervention well, rebuking coalition in speech @ un in september 2011. italian prime minister silvio berlusconi, despite substantial role country played in nato mission, spoke out against getting involved: had hands tied vote of parliament of country. against , against intervention end in way no-one knows , added wasn t popular uprising because gaddafi loved people, able see when went libya.

russia s foreign broadcasting service, rt, has postulated nato intervention may have been motivated gaddafi s attempts establish unified federation of african states use gold dinar currency , demand foreign importers of african oil pay in gold. despite stated opposition nato intervention, russia abstained voting on resolution 1973 instead of exercising veto power permanent member of security council; 4 other powerful nations abstained vote—india, china, germany, , brazil—but of group china has same veto power.

moreover, criticisms have been made on way operation led. according michael kometer , stephen wright, outcome of libyan intervention reached default rather design. appears there important lack of consistent political guidance caused particularly vagueness of un mandate , ambiguous consensus among nato-led coalition. lack of clear political guidance translated incoherent military planning on operational level. such gap may impact future nato s operations face trust issues.

in 2015 through 2016 british parliament s foreign affairs select committee conducted extensive , highly critical inquiry british involvement in civil war. concluded threat civilians had been overstated , significant islamist element in rebel forces had not been recognised, due intelligence failure. summer 2011 initial limited intervention protect libyan civilians had become policy of regime change. new policy did not include proper support , new government, leading political , economic collapse in libya , growth of isil in north africa. foreign affairs select committee saw no evidence uk government carried out proper analysis of nature of rebellion in libya , selectively took elements of muammar gaddafi’s rhetoric @ face value; , failed identify militant islamist extremist element in rebellion. uk strategy founded on erroneous assumptions , incomplete understanding of evidence . former prime minister david cameron responsible british policy failure.

blowback

the blowback interventionist policies carried out in name of human rights , civilian protection , massive consequence contributing 2017 manchester arena bombing. perpetrator, salman ramadan abedi, 22-year-old british sunni muslim of libyan ancestry. born in manchester on 31 december 1994 salafi family of libyan-born refugees had settled in south manchester after fleeing uk escape government of muammar gaddafi. had 2 brothers , sister. grew in whalley range area , lived in fallowfield.