The military intervention in Libya would make a good farce by now. I’ve blogged about the situation a few times (here, and here) and was always against what started off as a supposedly humanitarian effort to save the civilians of Benghazi. This, the allies certainly managed to do. But consider the current situation as reported in the British media over the past few days:
  • Gaddafi, once considered far too dangerous to be allowed to stay in Libya following his defeat at allied hands, is now so well dug-in that our Foreign Secretary, William Hague, is willing for him to remain in the country once he has given up power. I can’t help feeling that this is a monumental climb down on the West’s behalf.
  • There appear to be significant splits within the Libyan rebel forces. Hours after Hague declares that the UK now formally recognises the legitimacy of the rebels as Libya’s government in waiting, one faction within the anti-Gaddafi forces seem to have killed the rebel military leader, General Abdel Fattah Younes. Unsurprisingly, Younes’ tribe aren’t happy about this turn of events further threatening the stability of the Gaddafi opposition.
  • And finally, the British Defence Secretary, Liam Fox, is reported to have said that once Gaddafi loses power and the rebels finally take over the reins of government certain Islamic militant factions within the rebel ranks would have to be ‘marginalised’. He said that it shouldn’t surprise us that such ‘radical elements’ were present among the rebel forces – thus raising the prospect of a conservative Islamic influence within a new Libyan government.
There can be little argument that the world would be better off without Gaddafi running Libya – just as it is without Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the Taleban in Afghanistan. But is it not time that we realised that we’re really crap at getting the job done?


Share