The rapid movement of the United Nations diplomacy machinery in response to the brutal suppression of protest movements in Libya, by Gaddafi loyalist forces, seemed to set a precedent in international diplomacy. Of course there were obvious restrictions to this, the permanent members of the Security Council will never be likely to take up action against Saudi Arabia, with its lion’s share of the world’s petroleum supplies, and, despite the growing protest movements amongst their own populations, Russia and China are protected from any Security Council resolutions by their veto as permanent members.
Tag Archives: regime change
After the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, and the subsequent occupation of both of these countries by ‘international’ – but mainly anglophone – states, the notions of regime change, of political interference, and of military interventionism sent half the world reeling in disgust. There were abundant arguments emanating from both sides of the political spectrum who felt – and still feel – that the presence of these states as occupation forces in these two predominantly Islamic countries is abhorrent. The right wingers, gagging for a good war but only if it brings in enough profit, started to reason that the losses – both in human life (though only those of the troops they sent) and financially – were causing more problems than they were returns. The left wingers, ranging from absolute pacifist to people who simply didn’t want to aggravate two already volatile political situations, weren’t inclined to get involved in a war that would hurt more people than it would help, and felt queasy at the mention of oil reserves – or indeed George W. Bush.
The London Conference on Libya hit its stride today, with speeches by William Hague of the UK and Hilary Clinton of the US starting to push boundaries less than two weeks after UN Resolution 1973 was passed by the Security Council. Clinton, in a speech at the conference today, indicated that the UN resolution relaxed the stringent rules of the arms embargo against the country by overriding the previous position. Whilst it is still unclear whether they will or even intend to, this declaration points to a possible arming of the liberation forces by the United States, or even their NATO Allies.