The US and its European allies launched attacks on pro-Gaddafi Libyan forces and military installations this week, risking unpredictable consequences should things go wrong, writes David Tresilian in Paris Within hours of last weekend's Paris summit, which brought European and other leaders together in the French capital to hammer out a common position on the Libyan crisis, French planes began military action in Libya designed to enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1973, swiftly followed by days of strikes by US and British forces. Wave upon wave of air-strikes by US, French and British forces, part of an operation named Odyssey Dawn, were carried out from the weekend onwards from bases in France, Britain and the Mediterranean against pro-Gaddafi forces and military installations in Libya. They came in the wake of last week's Security Council Resolution that authorised the establishment of a no-fly zone to protect civilians in rebel-held areas of the country. Introduced by Lebanon and supported by France and Britain, the Resolution was voted for by 10 members of the Council, with Brazil, China, Germany, India and the Russian Federation abstaining. The Resolution authorises "all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of the Libyan territory." On its passage last week, the Resolution was seen as a significant victory for French and British diplomacy, both countries having pressed for military action against the regime of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in the face of perceived reluctance on the part of the United States and some other European countries, among them Germany. A summit meeting organised by French president Nicolas Sarkozy followed the Resolution, the final communiqué of which condemned the Libyan regime's "brutal crackdown, using weapons of war against its own people and perpetrating against them grave and massive violations of humanitarian law." "While contributing in differentiated ways to the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, we are determined to act collectively and resolutely to give full effect to its decisions," the communiqué read, signed by European governments, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and representatives from Qatar, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Morocco and secretary-general of the Arab League Amr Moussa. Last week's vote at the United Nations followed by the Paris summit and the air-strikes against Libyan regime forces were hailed this week as evidence of a new assertiveness on the part of French diplomacy in the wake of what had been widely perceived as a failure to react appropriately to movements for change in the Arab world, notably in Tunisia and Egypt. However, despite efforts to emphasise the success of the strikes in halting the advance of pro-Gaddafi forces on the rebel-held city of Benghazi and establishing a no-fly zone across the country, opinion in France has been cautious about the role played by Sarkozy in appearing to put himself at the head of coalition action against the Libyan regime. The French president had earlier caused unease as a result of his decision to lend diplomatic recognition to the Libyan interim transitional council in the rebel-held city of Benghazi, making France the first country to do so and cutting all ties with the Gaddafi regime. There are now possibilities that the coalition intervention to implement Resolution 1973 may escalate in unpredictable ways, possibly with troops being sent to Libya to assist the rebels more directly or even the prospect of foreign occupation of the country. Observers have expressed concerns about the aims of the coalition action, which under the terms of the UN Resolution do not include bringing down the Gaddafi regime, and the apparent lack of a clear line of command uniting US, British and French forces involved in military actions in Libya. Writers in the French newspaper Le Monde emphasised what they called the "unadmitted objective" behind coalition actions earlier this week, which was to bring about a change in the Libyan regime, the paper itself supporting the institution of a no-fly zone in Libya and the associated UN Resolution. While participants at the Paris summit had assured the Libyan people "of our determination to be at their side to help them realise their aspirations and build their future and institutions within a democratic framework," one writer noted, "the difficulty lies in knowing how to do so and how far the coalition should now go in its actions." Coalition hopes, the article concluded, would now focus on the rebels being able to bring about the collapse of the regime or by this happening as a result of internal defections and the isolation of Gaddafi. "Bombs alone are not enough to protect civilians, least of all in urban contexts, and they are not enough to bring down a regime." In addition to questions over the extent and aims of the coalition actions, there have also been concerns at apparently evaporating support for it among Arab allies, as well as the hostility of China, Russia and the African Union, all of which have criticised coalition military activities in Libya for allegedly going beyond the terms of the original UN Resolution. Remarks made by Amr Moussa, secretary-general of the Arab League, on Sunday apparently distancing the organisation from coalition actions and the conclusions of Saturday's meeting in Paris, were also widely reported in France, as was the hostility of Russia and China to coalition actions. "What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians," Moussa told reporters in response to coalition air attacks on pro-Gaddafi Libyan forces and installations. While the three African countries currently members of the UN Security Council, South Africa, Gabon and Nigeria, all voted for Resolution 1973, the African Union's high-level ad hoc committee on Libya, meeting in Mauritania at the weekend, called for the "immediate cessation of all hostilities" and "an African solution to the grave crisis affecting a brotherly country." There have also been concerns in France at US attempts to place coalition military activities in Libya under NATO leadership, with a meeting on the subject held in Brussels on Monday being suspended when agreement could not be found. France refused to place its forces under unified NATO command at the meeting, with Norway and Italy threatening to withdraw their forces if they were not. However, perhaps the most striking example of European disarray on the management of the Libyan crisis has come in the venom directed at the government of German chancellor Angela Merkel for abstaining in last week's UN vote authorising the no-fly zone in Libya and refusing to contribute to the coalition's intervention. In an editorial, Le Monde commented that Germany's desire to be given a permanent seat on the UN Security Council had not been helped by the country's failure to demonstrate the "necessary level of responsibility" in abstaining on last week's UN Resolution. The newspaper said that "German non-engagement in the Libyan affair reveals a hesitation that could be perceived by its partners as revealing a lack of solidarity or even maturity," implying that this should be taken into account when considering Germany's application to join the permanent members of the Security Council, among them France. Such evidence of disarray among European governments and opinion regarding the now on-going intervention in Libya, as well as fears as to how this will play out, reiterates the earlier lack of agreement between France and Britain and their European and US allies on how far to support anti-Gaddafi rebel forces in Libya. At a meeting of G8 foreign ministers held in Paris earlier this month, German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle warned of "getting sucked into a war in North Africa," echoing earlier comments made by US defense secretary Robert Gates. While the US, in voting for the UN Resolution and then leading the assault on Libya's military installations at the weekend, seems to have changed its mind on the wisdom of intervening in Libya, concerns remain about how the Libyan crisis will now play out. France and Britain in particular have placed themselves on the front line in intervening in what has taken on many of the features of a civil war in Libya, dragging a sometimes less-than-enthusiastic Europe in their wake.
