United nations

Goldstone recants

From our UK edition

Judge Richard Goldstone has changed his mind. Writing in the Washington Post, he admits that his "fact-finding mission had no evidence" for key allegations made in the UN report into the Gaza war that bears his name, including the claim that Israel intentionally targeted civilians "as a matter of policy." Wow! That's the only possible reaction. The Goldstone report, released on September 15, 2009, concluded that both Israel and Hamas had committed war crimes by intentionally targeting civilians. The committee did not receive information from Israel that would have contradicted these conclusions because the Israeli government refused to cooperate with members of the fact-finding mission.

The Audacity of Hypocrisy: Obama’s Lovely Little Libyan Adventure

From our UK edition

Hypocrisy is a necessary condition of leadership in a large, modern democracy. Not just there either, now that I think of it. That's often obviously the case in foreign affairs and clearly so in our present Libyan adventure. It is quite a remarkable undertaking, based on the most remarkable set of circumstances and thanks to a quite remarkable coalition that has given the mission its tepid blessing. Consider... Earlier this week President Obama said he "refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action." Consider that for a moment. It's an interesting choice of words making it clear that this is an Al-Jazeera War. No Al-Jazeera cameras* or pictures of any kind from Libya; no war. Such is the power of the camera.

Rebel setbacks create an almighty headache for NATO

From our UK edition

The Auk and the Desert Fox ride again. As in 1941-2, the military position along on Libya’s northern coastal road is extremely fluid. After the celebrated rebel gains over the weekend, Gaddafi has counter-attacked without remorse. Skirmishes escalated yesterday and now the rebels are in full retreat (£) from the strategically vital oil town of Ras Lanuf, running from Gaddafi’s superior onslaught. It's apparent that the rebels need heavy arms to secure their gains, let alone beat Gaddafi. As Pete noted yesterday, the west is (rightly) wary of such a move and there’s nothing to suggest that Arab states are any less reluctant.

Libya: next steps

From our UK edition

The Libya intervention goes on, with as many question marks hanging over the operation as airplanes in the sky. What is the aim? Who will run it? Can the United States, Britain and France keep allies such as Turkey on board? Behind the scenes, officials are said to be looking at various options, including if and how to support the rebels. But the hand-wringing is now even audible across St James Park. Realistically, the UK should in the first instance work towards establishing a stalemate between loyalists and rebels. From such a stalemate a political process can then begin, which, though it may take many years and continue during the fighting, can help create the foundations for a new Libya.

The Commons votes to support the intervention in Libya

From our UK edition

The House of Commons has just voted by 557 to 13 to support Britain’s participation in the enforcement of UN Security Council Resolution 1973. This came at the end of six and a half hours of respectful debate rounded off by a speech from the Foreign Secretary that reminded us why he was for so long regarded as the best parliamentary performer on either side of the House. Hague offered an assurance that if the mission changes, the government will return to the House. This was widely understood to mean that no ground troops would be committed without the support of the House. He also confirmed that the costs of the operation would be met from the reserve. Having watched much of the debate, I would say that the mood of the House was not quite as the vote suggests.

Regime Change is the Issue in Libya. Why Doesn’t Obama Understand That?

From our UK edition

Further to this item noting the differences between what David Cameron and Barack Obama are saying, a White House spokesman emails Ben Smith to say there's no contradiction between the American insistence that this is not about regime change and Cameron's suspicion that it's hard to see how Gaddafi can remain in power: This is very easily explained. We still believe that Qaddafi has lost his legitimacy to lead and must go. However the goal of this resolution is not regime change. Rather it authorizes the use of force with an explicit commitment to pursue all necessary measures to stop the killing. Those two things aren’t contradictory. Fine, the resolution may not authorise regime change but the logic of the policy surely insists upon it?

Allies’ statement on Libya demands more of Gaddafi than just a cease-fire

From our UK edition

A statement has just been issued by the sponsors of last night’s Security Council resolution, it reads: “Resolution 1973 lays out very clear conditions that must be met. The UK, US, France and Arab States agree that a cease fire must be implemented immediately. That means all attacks against civilians must stop. Gaddafi must stop his troops from advancing on Benghazi, pull back his troops from Ajdabiyah, Misratah, and Zawiyah, and re-establish water, electricity and gas supplies to all areas. Humanitarian assistance must be allowed to reach the people of Libya. These terms are not negotiable. If Gaddafi does not comply with the Resolution, the international community will impose consequences, and this Resolution will be enforced through military action.

Does Sarko deserve more credit than Cameron?

From our UK edition

Just as the British press is venerating David Cameron in the aftermath of last night’s UN resolution, so too the French press is praising President Sarkozy. In fact, the whole administration is basking in his reflected glory. Le Figaro describes Sarkozy’s and Prime Minister François Fillon’s roles in obtaining the UN Resolution and preparing the French military for action; the Defence minister also receives a hearty appraisal. Even the Presidency’s determined adversaries have expressed more than grudging respect. The left-wing newspaper Libération applauds Foreign Minister (and grand old man of Gaullism) Alain Juppé’s success in bringing the fractious United Nations to resolution.

The way to cease fire

From our UK edition

Colonel Ghadaffi wants a cease fire. Fine, but Western governments should insist that the no-fly zone still comes into force; that a new UN resolution is drafted to specify cantoment areas for his forces; and that a UN-mandated Arab Leage but NATO-enabled interpositional force is deployed to ensure the ceasefire holds, perhaps with an Egyptian officer as the head working in tandem with the UN and EU envoys to kickstart a political process. Finally, the West should lend massive support to the "free republic" of Benghazi - economic, military and so on. That is the kind of ceasefire the West can accept. Not a ploy that aims to pick the weakest link of the coalition, the United States, away from the policy, but robust action that sees David Cameron's strategy through to the end.

Hillary the hawk

From our UK edition

Intervention it is then. Cue lots of politicians walking around with rousing West Wing music in their minds' ears. This is the part where they get to play the good guys. Until something goes wrong, and they are bungling idiots again. Of course, it's good for everyone to feel that a bombing campaign in Libya is a multi-lateral, UN decision – not an Iraq. But if this turns into a long campaign, American airpower will be expected to do the vast majority of the work. And while Obama may be reluctant to engage on a third front, there are plenty of enthusiasts in Washington – none more so than Hillary Rodham Clinton. It is becoming increasingly obvious that Clinton has been using Obama's indecision over Libya to promote herself.

Libya declares a ceasefire

From our UK edition

What to make of Libya’s declaration of a ceasefire and acceptance of the UN resolution Seen most cynically, it could just be seen as the Gaddafi regime playing for time, using the extra hours to make it more difficult in both military and political terms for action to be taken. Or, it could indicate a division within the regime, with more pragmatic elements trying to temper Gaddafi’s threats and avoid anything that brings the situation to a head.

Learning from recent history

From our UK edition

With a UN resolution now passed, Prime Minister David Cameron has displayed diplomatic skills his critics believed he did not possess. As NATO is planning to enforce an expansive no-fly zone over Libya, it is worth pausing for a moment to consider such a mission's aims and to learn the lessons from recent wars. The strategic aim of the mission cannot only be to protect Libyan civilians. Framed in this way, the international community will face the same problems it did Bosnia: for instance, the Srebrenica massacre happened while a no-fly zone was already in place. A no-fly zone will not force Colonel Ghadaffi from power.

A Leap into the Libyan Unknown

From our UK edition

So we're going to war again. This may be David Cameron's first conflict but it's the seventh time in just 21 years that a British Prime Minister has committed Her Majesty's forces to military action. Are we doing the right thing? I don't know and I'm mildly suspicious of those who seem too certain about anything Libyan right now, rehardless of which side of the argument their certainties lie. Now that it is beginning, however, let it at least be done properly and let us hope that, somehow or other, Gaddafi capitulates. But if he does not do not be fooled into thinking that this will be over soon. Like it or not we are now in it for the long-haul. The history of UN-mandated missions does not support the notion that this will be a quick or easy campaign.

Cameron’s persistent leadership on Libya was key to tonight’s resolution

From our UK edition

David Cameron deserves huge credit for tonight’s Security Council vote. He has kept plugging away for a no fly zone and has succeeded in moving the Obama administration’s position. Cameron’s decision to have Britain table with the French and the Lebanese a Security Council resolution without the support of the Americans or even having talked to the president was a bold move that has turned out to be a game changer. The Prime Minister has proved himself an effective and courageous actor on the world stage. The question now is how quickly and effectively military force can be deployed and how Gaddafi is to be ousted. It, obviously, would have been better if the no fly zone had been imposed when the rebels had the military momentum.

The UN decides to take “all necessary measures” against Gaddafi

From our UK edition

"There will be no mercy. Our troops will be coming to Benghazi tonight." Perhaps it was the murderous threat contained within Gaddafi's latest radio message that shocked the United Nations into action today — because shocked into action they have been. After sweating and toiling over the precise formulation of a resolution on Libya, the UN Security Council finally reached the voting stage this evening. And it has now voted 10-0 in favour of member states taking "all necessary measures … to protect civilian and populated areas, including Benghazi, while excluding an occupation force." Brazil, India, China, Russia and — staggeringly — Germany all abstained. What this means, in practice, is a no-fly zone — and more.

Zelikow’s case for a no-drive zone

From our UK edition

Philip Zelikow, who served on the 9/11 Commission and in both Bush administrations, has a persuasive piece in today’s FT arguing that a no drive zone on the highway from Tripoli to eastern Libya could be as effective as a no fly zone and easier to implement. He says that it could be enforced from off-shore with the use of precision weapons. Legally, there would be issue with this scheme—as there would be with any intervention in Libya that is not based on a full Security Council resolution  under chapter 7. But there simply will not be enough time now to get full UN authorization before Gaddafi has reasserted full control. The Obama administration, though, seems content to let the clock run down.

UN Security Council Resolution proposing a no fly zone over Libya is tabled

From our UK edition

Britain, France and Lebanon’s decision to table a UN Security Council resolution proposing a no fly zone and a bar on flights in and out of Gaddafi’s Libya is an honourable effort to push the international community to move before the window for action closes entirely. Yet as the French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe acknowledged yesterday,  "If we had used military force last week to neutralize some airstrips and the several dozen planes that they have, perhaps the reversal taking place to the detriment of the opposition wouldn't have happened," Juppe told Europe-1 radio. "But that's the past." "What is happening today shows us that we may have let slip by a chance," he added.

To strike or not to strike?

From our UK edition

The situation in Libya is still uncertain, but the fog of war is clearing to expose a depressing picture. Forces loyal to the Gaddafi regime are conducting a successful offensive. The Times’ Deborah Haynes confirms reports (£) that Zawiya has fallen and rebels have been forced from the oil town of Ras Lanuf. William Hague has spoken to Mahmoud Jabril, Special Envoy of the Libyan Transitional Council. The Foreign Office has issued a communiqué on the conversation and some of Jabril’s emotional concern escapes the bland text. In the words of the Foreign Office, he wants ‘the West to act to hinder Qadhafi's ability to inflict further violence on the Libyan people, including through a no fly zone.

UN or not UN?

From our UK edition

The garbled horror stories just keep on rolling out of Libya. According to the latest reports, Gaddafi's troops have attacked the rebels in Zawiyah with redoubled violence and force. Aircraft, tanks, bombs, mortars – all have been used against the city and its people, with what one assumes are bloody results. As one resident puts it to Reuters, "Zawiyah as you knew it no longer exists." It is unclear whether the rebels have now lost control there, but that is a strong possibility. Unsurprising, then, that the West is positioning itself to act. David Cameron, we are told, has been speaking with Barack Obama about the full spread of options before them.