The United Nations finally responded to the ferment in the Middle East this week, writes Graham Usher at the UN On Wednesday the United Nations Security Council met in emergency session to condemn attacks by forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi against civilian protestors and call for those responsible to be held accountable. It urged an immediate end to the violence and "steps to address the legitimate demands of the population, including through national dialogue," said the Council press statement. Libya's deputy ambassador to the UN, Ibrahim Dabbashi, said the statement was "not strong enough" but was still "a good message to the regime in Libya about stopping the bloodshed." Wednesday's meeting was the first time the Security Council has responded to the wave of anti-government protests that have toppled presidents in Tunisia and Egypt and rocked regimes from Yemen to Morocco. In all those cases countries like Russia and China opposed Council involvement, insisting that revolutions, uprisings and demonstrations were the internal affairs of sovereign states. Libya proved the exception -- unsurprisingly so. In less than a week the country has gone from being one among several national crises to a regime in an advanced state of collapse sending tremors across the region and beyond. Much of the east of the country is now lost to the regime. Militia, mercenaries and military loyal to Gaddafi have used savage force to quell the uprising, with Libyan authorities admitting 300 dead but local and international rights groups fearing a higher toll. Oil prices have soared. And there is a real fear - especially in Europe - that the violence could trigger a human flight across Libya's borders and over the sea. Tunisia says it has already received more than 4,000 Libyan refugees. The UN refugee agency is preparing for more washing up on Europe's southern coast. The crisis "has regional and international implications", said Peter Wittig, Germany's UN ambassador, on Wednesday. "That is why the Security Council should act with a swift and clear message." Making matters worse is the crazed behavior of Gaddafi. In a long, delusional speech to his people on Wednesday he called those opposing his rule "cowards, traitors and cockroaches," inciting his supporters to "cleanse Libya (of them) house by house." He also vowed to fight to his "last drop of blood." It may not have simply been ranting. In the wake of Gaddafi's speech loyalist army units began "attacking all the people in cities in western Libya", said Dabbashi. "Certainly the people have no arms. I think genocide started now in Libya." He added he hoped he was wrong. Dabbashi requested the emergency session after breaking with Gaddafi on 21 February, one of several domino-like defections of Libyan diplomats in the last week. He accused his erstwhile leader of genocide, called for his overthrow and urged the UN to impose an Iraq-like No-Fly-Zone across Libya to stop the movement of mercenaries and arms. He no longer represented the regime, he said, but "the people." But he didn't represent Libya's UN ambassador, Abdurrahman Shalgham, who appeared before the Security Council after being absent for three days. While agreeing that the bloodshed in his country should end, he did not agree his leader of 41 years should be ousted. "I am Gaddafi's man," he shrugged. In a closed-door briefing to the Council he said a "tragedy" was unfolding in Libya and that reform was needed. He had hoped that Gaddafi's speech would announce it. He left the Council chamber alone and with a face like ash. By the glacial standards of the UN the Security Council had moved quickly. Western countries were pleased they had managed to craft a "strong, unified" statement, without the usual dissension from countries like Russia and China. They were bolstered in the search for a consensus by the lunacy of Gaddafi's speech and by an unusually strong statement condemning the Libyan regime issued by the Arab League the same day. "All were on board," said one source. "And all agreed that a message should be sent to the Libyan authorities telling them that the world is watching you." Others were less sanguine. The New York based Human Rights Watch organization said while the Security Council press statement was a "positive first step," it fell short of the firm action needed "to prevent large-scale atrocities" in Libya. In particular it called on the Council to support the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay's pleas for an independent international investigation into what she described as "widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population that (may) amount to crimes against humanity." The Council balked at that. It said only it would remain seized of the situation in Libya and raise any violations at the UN Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva next week. In the best case, say analysts, western countries are banking for Gaddafi's swift demise and a relatively peaceful transition to a new order, akin to those hoped for in Egypt and Tunisia. In the worst the fear is Gaddafi will hang on -- and as the deaths, migrations and disintegration mount -- pressure will return to the Security Council to issue something a little more substantive than a press statement.
