Monday 7 March 2011

liberal intervention in Libya

Until recently it had all gone rather quiet on the liberal intervention front. True, our gallant lads were still coming home in body bags from Afghanistan, but the issue of what we're doing there hasn't cropped up in any saloon bar conversation I've heard; Iraq rumbles on with occasional reports of a car bombing here, a victory for democracy there; Kosovo has gone quiet; can anyone remember exactly what we did in Somalia? Was it Somalia?

But now comes the Jasmine Revolution. In North Africa, governments have been swept from power in Tunisia and Egypt, and rebels in Libya have decided that they might as well have a go too. Of course in Tunisia and Egypt it was easy for the West - those in charge had just enough grip on reality to realise the game was up. Not so in Libya however, where Gaddafi is clearly mad enough (and then some) to imagine that the people against him are drug fiends or Al Qaeda stooges. Gaddafi is fighting back. So what should the West do?

I am posting this at a time when it's far from clear what the outcome will be (it seems more honourable than waiting to see who wins, and then deciding what you think). It's been fascinating to read the British papers in the last couple of weeks. The Left, adhering to its view that intervention in Iraq was a disaster, is on the whole against it in Libya, but is enjoying a bit of hand-wringing over what Gaddafi will do to his opponents if the coup fails. The Right has never had much time for arabs, and is sceptical about the equation arabs + islam + democracy = happiness. Moreover, they say, we couldn't afford to do anything even if we wanted to - we don't have the money, and defence cuts together with our other commitments (see Afghanistan above) mean that we don't have the manpower or materiel. Best let Johnny Foreigner get on with it.

A plague on both their houses. There is something we could do, if not on our own then with other nations. We could enforce a no-fly zone over the east of Libya, which would prevent Gaddafi's air force bombing his own citizens, or bombing the ammunition dumps which might provide his citizens with the means of overcoming him. We could even, if we wanted, bomb the living daylights out of Gaddafi's bits of Tripoli. After all, it worked with Slobodan Milosevic. We could in other words decide that this is the tipping point for Gaddafi, and with one or two firm shoves consign him to the dustbin of history.

But we probably won't. Why? Firstly, because the Americans don't want to get involved: President Obama talks the talk of freedom, but is less interested in walking the walk required to get there. Secondly, because getting involved would require competence and resolve from Messrs. Cameron and Hague, who have, on the contrary exhibited all the resolution of Hamlet's jellyfish siblings. They floated the idea of a no-fly zone in public, but were firmly slapped down by the US and have gone quiet since. Thirdly, the UN would never sanction it.

As well as the financial, legal and diplomatic considerations, there's something else. After Bush and Blair sanctioned the invasion of Iraq, they faced a tsunami of criticism, ranging from electoral hostility to threats of war crimes prosecution via serial public inquiries, criticism from people who were less interested in the opportunity for democracy the invasion presented to Iraqis and more interested in getting after political leaders they disliked. If you were leader of a Western country now, would you want that kind of hassle? 24 hour police guard? Indefinite trip to the Hague ten years down the line? I know I wouldn't.

So if Western countries are physically exhausted by the financial, legal and diplomatic fall-out from Iraq, they are also facing a kind of moral exhaustion. Our politicians would rather do nothing than get involved; and that is because we too are happy for them to do nothing. I hope Col Gaddafi doesn't win. But I fear he might.

PS The BBC's lunchtime news reported that rebels have retreated from the town of Bin Jawad and have fallen back on the oil terminal of Ras Lanuf. John Simpson has reported that "There has been quite a lot of bombardment here over the past couple of hours". Good old Libyan air force. The BBC's website now reports that rebels are now "fleeing" Ras Lanuf as well.

PPS Events have rather moved on since I wrote this post, and having made the schoolboy error of predicting what was going to happen in excessively concrete terms, I am now going to wait until the dust settles a bit before writing about how wrong I was.