The territorial battle in Libya continued all week with Muamma Gadd-afi’s troops making some gains over rebel-held areas and the international community determined as ever to rid Libya of its long-serving dictator.
Nato took control of the whole military operation in Libya under UN Security Council Resolution 1973 and the Libyan regime
suffered a major defection while some media reports said Gaddafi was looking for an exit strategy.
Nato and its coalition partners deserve credit for moving swiftly and decisively to enforce the no-fly zone called for in the UN resolution and for taking measures to protect civilians from attack.
The alliance’s Libya approach fits in well with its new strategy which it formulated at its Lisbon summit last November. Nato promised to promote and cultivate “a wide network of partner relationships with countries and organisations around the globe” and to “seek more intertwined operating relationships with the UN and the EU.”
It is crucial, however, that the alliance remains resolute in its Libyan campaign and does not allow Gaddafi to regain lost ground. I am sure that both CIA operatives and UK Special Forces are helping the rebel forces on the ground in Libya, and that is how it should be, but the time has come for individual coalition members to covertly arm the rebels. Yes, there are risks here, because it is possible that such arms might fall into the wrong hands, but no strategy is 100 per cent risk proof.
Although there is no easy solution to this conflict, there can be no doubt at all that the military attacks against the Libyan regime are fully justified, have substantially weakened the Libyan leader and prevented a bloodbath taking place in Benghazi. Furthermore, the pressure on Gaddafi is clearly increasing, diplomatically, militarily and economically.
Last week’s defection to Britain of Libyan Foreign Minister Mussa Kussa was a huge blow to Gaddafi and indicates that his regime is crumbling. Perhaps others will now follow suit, mindful of the fact that they could be answerable to the International Criminal Court when the war ends.
Mussa’s defection is a huge victory for the coalition because he has been closely associated with Gaddafi for over 30 years and spent 15 years as head of Libyan intelligence.
He can also provide a lot of information about Libya’s murky past, such as the Lockerbie bombing, the downing of a French airliner over Niger as well as Gaddafi’s support for international terrorism, such as the IRA.
Of course, when making a deal with Mussa, one will have to balance the need for intelligence on Libya – which could help the coalition get rid of Gaddafi – with the possibility of having Mussa hurled before the International Criminal Court for his very close links to the Gaddafi regime, or indeed before a Scottish court in connection with Lockerbie.
The British government has said that Mussa has not been granted diplomatic immunity, but if he can really provide valuable information on the Libyan regime, then some sort of deal will probably have to be made. Worse deals have been made in past conflicts which resulted in a positive outcome.
There have also been media reports that the British government has been in contact with senior Libyan intelligence officials and that a Libyan government envoy, Mohammed Ismail – a senior aide to Gaddafi’s son, Saif al-Islam – visited London last week for talks with the British authorities.
The UK Foreign Office refused to confirm any such contacts, saying it was “not going to provide a running commentary on our contacts with Libyan officials, but that in any contact that we do have we make it clear that Gaddafi has to go.”
It is feasible, therefore, that Libyan officials are exploring possible exit strategies for the Libyan leader and his family, although Gaddafi has publicly remained defiant. The fact is, however, that economically the Libyan regime has been strangled, it is diplomatically isolated and its military capabilities have been severely curtailed.
I would not be surprised if Britain and the other coalition partners are working on an exit strategy for Gaddafi. One British diplomat was recently quoted in the Financial Times as having said: “We don’t want a cornered rat. We want a rat with somewhere to run to.”
US President Barack Obama, meanwhile, explained his Libya strategy in a televised address to the nation last Monday, and said the US would continue to offer its “unique capabilities” in multilateral interventions.
He emphasised that on such occasions the US should not be asked to act alone, and he is right. The US cannot act as the world’s policeman, but as the leader of the free world with the most powerful military machine, it also has a moral responsibility to intervene to prevent genocide whenever possible.
Efforts to isolate Gaddafi further, on all fronts, must continue. More countries, especially Arab ones, should be persuaded to join the coalition to enforce UN Resolution 1973.
Furthermore economic sanctions on the Libyan regime must be considered, and the Benghazi-based transitional council should be recognised as the legitimate government of Libya by the UN.