The international Contact Group on Libya, which acts as the political guide to the Nato-led military and humanitarian operation in Libya, meets in Qatar this Wednesday to take stock of the situation and hopefully come up with a new strategy to stop the onslaught by the Gaddafi regime against the Libyan people.
While the Nato air strikes have definitely put Gaddafi under tremendous pressure, reduced the regime’s military capabilities and prevented genocide from taking place in Benghazi, Gaddafi’s forces are still able to attack rebel-held cities and inflict terrible suffering on civilians.
A de facto stalemate has now emerged, with the Libyan regime more or less in control of the west – except for Misurata, which has been continuously pounded by Libyan army artillery and attacked by snipers for days – and the National Transitional Council (the rebels) in control of the east.
I have always stressed that getting rid of Gaddafi won’t be easy. He has no close friends and allies who could convince him to step down, he leads one of the nastiest and most repressive regimes in the Middle East, he is a dictator along the lines of Saddam Hussein and most of his militias and secret police have remained loyal to him.
Just as Saddam Hussein enjoyed the loyalty of a strong minority of Sunnis in Iraq, Gaddafi also has the support of a determined minority of Libyans, for ideological and tribal reasons, and this obviously makes it harder for him to be overthrown.
However, the fact remains that since Nato took command of all operations in Libya, the conflict has developed into a deadlock. US General Carter Ham, who led the air campaign in Libya before handing over to Nato, was asked at a Senate hearing last week if he thought there was an emerging stalemate. He replied: “I would agree with that at present, on the ground.”
Furthermore, General Abdul Fatah Younis, the rebel forces chief, has criticised Nato for its slow response in attacking Gaddafi regime targets, especially its failure to break the siege of Misurata. Besides being bombarded by Gaddafi’s forces, the situation in Misurata has in fact reached near breaking point and the city’s water and electricity supplies have been cut off by the regime.
The dire state of affairs in Misurata was also amply described by Libya’s former Energy Minister Omar Fathi bin Shatwan, who fled to Malta from that city nine days ago. Mr Shatwan, who criticised Nato’s slow response in this crisis, said many members of Gaddafi’s inner circle want to defect, but are too scared to do so.
The status quo in Libya of course, is in nobody’s interest, and there needs to be a review of Nato’s strategy in Libya. First of all, Nato and its partners must decide if there is a reasonable chance that Gaddafi’s forces will be repelled and the rebels able to make considerable gains through increased air strikes. If so, then Nato must do just that.
If air strikes are not enough, then the rebels should be armed, even on a bilateral basis, should there be problems due to the UN arms embargo.
The situation on the ground, of course, poses many challenges for Nato. For example, Libyan government forces are shifting increasingly to non-conventional tactics, such as blending in with road traffic and using civilian life as a shield for their advance, and this something which cannot be overlooked.
In addition, Nato mistakenly bombed rebel troops near the oil town of Brega, resulting in several deaths because it did not realise the rebels had tanks. Even though this was a genuine mistake, Nato should apologise for such a blunder.
Europe has a particular responsibility in this conflict, now that the US has decided to cease enforcing the no-fly zone. Although one hopes the US will pull its weight should this becomes absolutely necessary, Washington’s decision to withdraw its aircraft is understandable, considering its commitments elsewhere.
Although I am a firm believer in the US playing a leading role in global affairs, it cannot be expected to take the lead everywhere and in all conflicts.
Britain and France are playing a leading role in enforcing the UN resolutions on Libya, but other major European countries need to do more. After all, Libya is in Europe’s neighbourhood and the EU has always said that it wants to strengthen its security and defence multilateral co-operation.
Arab countries, too, must be encouraged to play a more direct role in Libya. Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are participating, in a modest way, in enforcing the no-fly zone, but surely a country like Egypt should play its part?
On the diplomatic front there seems to be little that can be achieved. The US rebuffed a personal appeal from Gaddafi to President Barack Obama for Nato to stop its operations in Libya. Gaddafi also sent his deputy foreign minister Abdelati Obeidi (who has since been appointed Foreign Minister) to Greece, Turkey and Malta last week to explore the possibility of a settlement but he was met by scepticism, understandably so, in all three countries.
The only possible diplomatic solution I can envisage, and this looks rather unlikely, is if countries such as Turkey, Greece and Malta could help Gaddafi formulate an exit route for himself and his family.
I would be very surprised if Gaddafi agreed to such a move, but additional Nato strikes and the arming of the opposition might help persuade him to go along this route.