Libyan Conflict

A number of UN-led governments, the world leadership and powerful elite have finally decided to intervene in Libya after days of sitting on the backsides and letting Muammar Gaddafi's forces regain vital ground on the Libyan Revolution of 25 February.

While the calamity that has befallen Japan in the meantime has taken much media attention and sympathy away from the the Libyan struggle, it all seems like help for the North African state might well have come too late for the impetus that had built up three weeks ago. 

The United Nation Council security resolution 1973 was pitched as a No-Fly Zone to appease The Arab Nation and for tip-toe diplomacy. It's only legality is to protect the Libyan people and not to topple any regime. The coalition which includes France, the U.S. and the U.K. and has the rumoured backing of Saudi Arabia, along with the U.A.E. has used military force after Gaddafi's troops broke the agreed ceasefire against the rebel city of Benghazi on Saturday.

Yet despite doing the right thing, world leaders still managed to make a pig's ear out of a silk purse. David Cameron is in chest-beating mood and wants to send in more planes, while Barack Obama is slightly more distant, getting jittery about another Iraq scenario. France too are at it, having helped the UK fly up to 80 sorties over Libyan air space last night. Many of those sorties have been targeting strategic sites that enable Gaddafi's forces to attack by air.

And today saw Russian PM Vladimir Putin and his President, Dmitry Medvedev have a very public tiff after Medvedev rightly rebuked Putin for being critical of the coalition - comparing it to the religious Crusades:

This absolutely reminds me of a medieval call to crusade, where somebody goads others to march into a certain area and free it.

Intevening can only be a good thing for the Libyan people, this much is clear. What is less certain is just how many people in Libyan are pro-revolution and how many are faithful to Gaddafi by fear and coercion, rather than believing he offers the best future and leadership to their country.

What can never be ascertained but after Iraq there will always be the suspicion that this is colonial dabbling and the West are steeling themselves for a great oil carve-up once the shell smoke of civil war settles.

Further evidence of this can be seen currently in the aparthy of UN's security council towards the people of Bahrain and Yemen. While diplomacy involves winning some battles and ignoring or losing others, it's clear hypocrisy of the West to ignore the deomcratic struggles of those in Gaza, Sana'a and Bahrain.

The UN have three options: Topple Gaddafi and help set up Libya as a democratic state while risking the wrath of the Arab Nations; arm and help the rebel forces and push Libya deeper into civil war and huge fatalities; or pull out and let Gaddafi commit murder on an unthinkable scale and keep business partners and dimplomatic relations sweet.

The perfect solution would be of course to arm the Libyan people enough in order to topple their own leader and to create change for themselves. Tunisia and Egypt seem but a sweet and clean revolution compared to the mess that might just unfold in the country which lies geographically between the two.   

This could yet be a can of worms of enormous proportions. The allied forces must have an overall plan and decide what the endgame will be in their quest to help.