Friday, April 8, 2011

Obama's Libyan folly

Humanitarian Interventions are problematic in nature, further still those defined by poor planning rarely succeed [AP]

The NATO led intervention in Libya is hampered by a lack of foresight and clearly defined objectives, scholar argues.
Richard Falk Last Modified: 04 Apr 2011 14:24

The outcome in Libya remains uncertain, but what seems clear beyond reasonable doubt is that military intervention has not saved the day for either the shadowy opposition known as 'the rebels', and certainly not for the people of the country.
It has seemingly plunged Libya into a protracted violent conflict with the domestic balance of forces tipping decisively in favour of the Gaddafi regime despite a major military onslaught managed by the American-led coalition, which in recent days has been supposedly outsourced to NATO.
But since when is NATO not an American dominated alliance? The best that can be hoped for at this stage is a face-saving ceasefire that commits the Libyan leadership to a power-sharing scheme, but leaves the governing process more or less as it is, possibly replacing Gaddafi with his son who offers the West the trappings of liberal modernity.
Article published here

No comments: