Richard Willis's Blog

First for local news and first for comment

Britain and France Lead on Libya While the USA Dithered

The last 24 hours have been remarkable in international diplomacy. As the forces of “mad dog” Colonel Gaddafi advanced towards rebel held Benghazi, Britain and France (backed by Lebanon) moved a motion in the Security Council of the United Nations to impose a “no-fly zone” over Libya. This is a proposal which has been backed by David Cameron for some weeks now in the face of considerable scepticism (by the fool Peter Hitchins) and outright opposition (from the likes of Labour’s Baroness Ashton). Cameron has sometimes sounded a lonely voice in recent weeks in support of a “no fly zone” but he has continued to press for what he knew to be right.

The decision of the Arab League (represented by Lebanon) to back a “no fly zone” was a significant fillip to Cameron’s argument and seems to have carried considerable weight with the USA and other UN member states. Last night the Security Council passed resolution 1973 which authorised the imposition of a “no-fly zone” to protect civilians but it also went further to reinforce the existing arms embargo and freeze assets of the Libyan regime. Of the five permanent (veto-holding) members of the Security Council, the UK, France and USA voted in favour and China and Russia abstained. Germany also abstained and was joined by Brazil and India. Lebanon, Bosnia, Colombia, Portugal, Nigeria and South Africa voted in favour.

Cameron has undoubtedly shown some steel and gained significant credbility on the world stage by his actions. Even the Labour party have been praising his leadership on the issue. The significant loser in all this has been the reputation of the Obama led USA, which has prevaricated and dithered, even at times attacking Cameron for his suggestion of the “no fly zone”. Very late in the day the USA swung behind Britain and France’s resolution and now looks set to play a part in enforcing it. However, it is likely that the USA will play a small part, with Britain, France and the Arab League providing the bulk of the aircraft, with support frpm other European, NATO nations.

David Cameron has already indicated that the RAF is to play a major role with Tornados, Typhoons, refuelling and surveillance aircraft all involved. Planning for a possible “no fly zone” has been underway for some time and the RAF will be able to respond quickly. We have a significant air base in Cyprus, facilities in Malta, and possible use of Italian airfields.

While the Labour leadership has quickly rowed in behind the Prime Minister’s position, the usual eccentric voices of the left have begun to spring up in opposition to any military action. “The Stop the War” coalition  and George Galloway are already opposing the “no fly zone”. However, the situation is markedly different from the Iraq war and Cameron has learned the lessons from Tony Blair by achieveing a UN Resolution in support.

The Gaddafi regime’s initial response is to publicly declare a ceasefire while at the same time reportedly continuing the ground offensive. If that ceasefire proves to be a reality then David Cameron will have achieved an extraordinary result and saved thousands of lives in Libya. If Gaddafi’s promises prove hollow then the international coalition will have to act to prevent a massacre of rebels and civilians in the east of Libya. Either way David Cameron has shown real leadership and comes out of this situation with his stature enhanced.

The prize has to be the eventua fall of Gaddafi from power and the continued ripple of democracy across the Arab world and wider Middle East.

Advertisements

March 18, 2011 - Posted by | International

10 Comments »

  1. While I agree that the USA have ‘ dithered ‘ the UN have been doing that for years on Burma, Zimbabwe, Sudan just to mention a few.

    The US Sec of Defence Gates seens to have been one of the worst offenders and played into Gadaffi’s hands with his comments on the No Fly Zone when we first proposed it. One must wonder if this was at the behest of Obama and Clinton. Oh to have a Regan or Bush back in the White House

    Comment by Mark Andrew | March 18, 2011 | Reply

  2. Mark……….Quite right , the level of commitment to safeguard the population of any given country would seem to be proportioal to the oil reserves of that country !

    Comment by Howard Thomas | March 19, 2011 | Reply

    • What rubbish! How much oil does Cyprus, Kosovo, or Afghanistan have?!

      Comment by Richard Willis | March 19, 2011 | Reply

  3. Good to see Cameron following Blair’s Chicago Doctrine. I thought Obama played a masterful hand, giving China and Russia no excuse for using their veto.

    Comment by Jonny | March 19, 2011 | Reply

  4. The fact that the French backed this is suspect – clearly they have more pressing concerns than where they can off load their old Mirage jet fighters.

    The UK sending some ancient old Tornados to Libya is simply an alternative to scrapping them – yet.

    Comment by Gideon Mack | March 19, 2011 | Reply

    • Gideon – the Tornados are a very effective ground attack aircraft and with Sidewinders are more than capable of dealing with a no-fly zone over Libya. The brand new Typhoons will add a significant fighter capability. As for the Mirages I have yet to see what France proposes to send.

      Comment by Richard Willis | March 19, 2011 | Reply

  5. They took right decision against Libya

    Comment by Prasad | March 19, 2011 | Reply

  6. So how would you explain UK involvement in Iraq ? All about democratic rights for an oppressed people , I suppose.
    Likewise with Afganistan, its nothing to do with oppressed peoples. As far as I would guess the west is involved there to keep the nutters from the Taliban ever getting their hands on the nukes in Pakistan, and that makes a sensible reason. Its certainly nothing to do with installing a democratic system.
    Kosovo is in Europe, which somewhat alters the reasoning. But if you think that our involvement in these countries is nothing to do with oil resources, why is it that the UK will never intervene in Zimbabwe, which after all has historical ties to the UK ?

    Comment by Howard Thomas | March 19, 2011 | Reply

  7. It’s the Libyans flying the French built Marage 1s – not the French.

    Comment by Gideon Mack | March 21, 2011 | Reply

  8. Or it could just be that Obama isn’t into doing overseas “crusades”, and is more concerned with his own country, rather than selectively interfering abroad.

    Although, credit to the US, when the operation was mounted it was of course almost entirely US foreces in action. They do things properly.

    Comment by Dan | April 3, 2011 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: