As pro-Gaddafi forces took control of rebel enclaves in Libya this week, European diplomacy signalled its disarray, writes David Tresilian in Paris Following early hopes that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi would be forced from power as a result of the insurrection that has seen towns and cities across the country fall to rebel forces over recent weeks, pro-Gaddafi forces succeeded in pushing rebel fighters back to enclaves in eastern Libya this week, causing observers to re-evaluate prospects for the regime's survival and increasing European disarray on how best to respond to the crisis. No agreement was reached at a meeting of G8 foreign ministers held in Paris earlier this week to discuss the crisis and French and British proposals for a no-fly zone to be set up in the country. German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said that should Anglo-French plans for intervention go ahead, there was a danger of Europe "getting sucked into a war in North Africa," echoing earlier warnings made by US defense secretary Robert Gates. The foreign ministers' reluctance to support the Anglo- French proposals will have come as a blow to French and British diplomacy, both countries having supported the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya, a key demand of rebel forces targeted by aerial attacks from pro-Gaddafi forces, as well as, in France's case, targeted military strikes. In an editorial commenting on the failure of the G8 meeting to arrive at consensus on policy toward the Libyan crisis, the French newspaper Le Monde said on Tuesday that while Gaddafi's "Ubuesque dictatorship" was judged "illegitimate by the United States, Europe and the Arab League", with even Russian President Dimitri Medvedev announcing that "Gaddafi and his family were persona non grata in Moscow," this had not meant clear support for action against it. Nevertheless, the paper said, French President Nicolas Sarkozy had been right to call for military action against the Libyan regime. "Even a minimal intervention carries enormous risks with it, but the risks of inaction as far as the Libyan population is concerned are even greater. Everyone knows what Gaddafi is capable of, and he has already warned that he is willing to put the country to the sword." This week's disarray among European and western diplomats came in the wake of earlier attempts to find consensus on policy towards the Libyan crisis. At a meeting of NATO defense ministers held in Brussels at the end of last week, there was support for increased monitoring of the situation in Libya, with NATO forces being moved closer to the country's Mediterranean coastline. However, the idea of imposing a no-fly zone over Libya was ruled out in the absence of a clear UN resolution. NATO Secretary-General Andres Fogh Rasmussen said that the organisation had no intention of intervening in the Libyan crisis in the absence of "a clear legal mandate" to do so and "solid support from the region". Both are believed to be crucial, observers said, at least partly in order to avoid any impression that western powers were once again intervening militarily in the Arab world. Following a European summit meeting devoted to the situation in Libya and the wave of insurrections that has been taking place across the Arab world held last Friday in Brussels, European leaders expressed their solidarity with the Libyan people, condemned the repression being carried out by the Libyan regime and called for an immediate end to the violence in the country. "Colonel Khadafi must relinquish power immediately," a statement issued after the meeting read. "His regime has lost all legitimacy and is no longer an interlocutor for the EU. The European Union has adopted restrictive measures against the country's leadership and against entities holding sizeable assets controlled by the regime and stands ready to adopt further sanctions." "The objective is for Libya to rapidly embark on an orderly transition to democracy through a broad-based dialogue. The European Union welcomes and encourages the interim transitional national council based in Benghazi which it considers a political interlocutor." However, on the issue of possible European intervention in the crisis, or the imposition of a no-fly zone across the country, EU leaders said only that European member states would "examine all necessary options" in order to protect the civilian population from aerial attacks, "provided there is a demonstrable need, a clear legal basis and support from the region." While the EU statement seemed to indicate that European governments had no intention of intervening militarily in the Libyan crisis, despite calls from rebel forces for them to do so by imposing a no-fly zone, the statement's diplomatic language again concealed disarray among European countries on how best to respond to the situation. Only hours before the summit had been due to start, French president Nicolas Sarkozy caused unease in Brussels and Paris as a result of his decision to lend diplomatic recognition to the Libyan interim transitional council in the rebel-held eastern city of Benghazi, making France the only European country to do so and cutting all ties with the Gaddafi regime. Embarrassment at the failure of French diplomacy to predict the previous revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, both of which seemed to have caught France on the back foot, may have pushed Sarkozy to take a lead on the Libyan crisis, even to the extent of pushing for French intervention. However, if Sarkozy wanted to be seen as taking a lead on the crisis in the run-up to the Brussels summit, he chose a strange way of doing it. The announcement that France intended to give diplomatic recognition to the Benghazi rebel forces was made not by Sarkozy himself or by French Foreign Minister Alain Juppé, apparently uninformed, but by members of the Libyan opposition themselves. Following a meeting between Sarkozy and representatives of the Libyan opposition held in Paris last Thursday and organised by journalist Bernard-Henri Lévy, Libyan opposition figures Mahmoud Jibril and Ali Essaoui told the press that France "recognised the Libyan interim transitional council as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people" and would be sending an ambassador to Benghazi. According to Lévy, acting in a capacity that left many scratching their heads, Sarkozy had also "declared his support for defensive actions, should the Libyan interim transitional council require them," including "targeted strikes" against airports in the Libyan cities of Sirte and Sebha and Gaddafi's headquarters in the capital Tripoli. Some back-peddling then ensued, with EU leaders distancing themselves from the French position and Le Monde commenting at the weekend that while "Libyan affairs have long had their baroque side," this was not a reason to "improvise" a response and "signal the most anti-Gaddafi position possible" in advance of attempts to find a common European approach to the crisis. "After the sorry tale of the European response to the Balkans conflict in the 1990s, it is only right to expect that the EU would this time be able to find a response to the crisis that has hit the southern side of the Mediterranean. This is an opportunity for the EU to act together and a test of the willingness and capacity of the EU to speak with a single voice on a subject that is of the utmost importance to it," the paper said. Whatever one might think of Lévy, Le Monde said, it should have been up to the country's foreign minister to find a common European position. Meanwhile, the decision by the Arab League, meeting in Cairo at the weekend, to call for the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya strengthened international pressure on the Gaddafi regime, as did similar statements issued earlier by the Gulf Cooperation Council. While such indications of Arab support for a no-fly zone in Libya and for external intervention against the Gaddafi regime in support of the rebel forces were apparently not enough to sway the G8 foreign ministers earlier this week, they go at least some way towards meeting NATO and EU requirements for regional support and a clearer legal basis underpinning any possible military intervention.
