[Peace-discuss] The UN Security Council Has Not Authorized Regime Change in Libya

[Robert Naiman]

http://my.firedoglake.com/robertnaiman/2011/03/18/the-un-security-council-has-not-authorized-regime-change-in-libya/

  The UN Security Council Has Not Authorized Regime Change in
Libya<http://my.firedoglake.com/robertnaiman/2011/03/18/the-un-security-council-has-not-authorized-regime-change-in-libya/>
By: Robert
Naiman <http://my.firedoglake.com/members/robertnaiman/> Friday March 18,
2011 10:30 am

[image: Tweet]Tweet<http://my.firedoglake.com/robertnaiman/2011/03/18/the-un-security-council-has-not-authorized-regime-change-in-libya/#>

 [image: digg]<http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmy.firedoglake.com%2Frobertnaiman%2F2011%2F03%2F18%2Fthe-un-security-council-has-not-authorized-regime-change-in-libya%2F&title=The+UN+Security+Council+Has+Not+Authorized+Regime+Change+in+Libya>
 [image: stumbleupon]<http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmy.firedoglake.com%2Frobertnaiman%2F2011%2F03%2F18%2Fthe-un-security-council-has-not-authorized-regime-change-in-libya%2F&title=The+UN+Security+Council+Has+Not+Authorized+Regime+Change+in+Libya>

It’s a great thing that the Obama Administration has resisted calls for
unilateral U.S. military action in Libya, and instead is working through the
United Nations Security Council, as it is required to do by the United
Nations Charter.

Now, the Administration needs to follow through on this commitment to
international law by ensuring that foreign military intervention remains
within the four corners of what the UN Security Council has approved. If it
does not, and instead Western powers take the view that we now have a blank
check to do whatever we want, the certain consequence will be that it will
be much more difficult to achieve Security Council action in a similar
situation in the future, and those who complain that the Security Council is
too cautious will have only themselves to blame.

Some of the reporting on the Security Council resolution has been
misleading. The Security Council has not authorized military action for any
purpose. The Security Council has authorized *military action necessary to
protect civilians*. It has not authorized military action to overthrow the
Libyan government. Clearly, some people do want foreign military action to
assist in the overthrow of the Libyan government, but such action has not
been approved by the Security Council.

The text of the UN Security Council resolution can be found
here<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/17/un-security-council-resolution>
.

Here is the first action item:

 1. Demands the immediate establishment of a cease-fire and a complete end
to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;

The Libyan government has announced a
cease-fire<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/world/africa/19libya.html>.
It is certainly true, as Western leaders have noted, that announcing a
cease-fire is not at all the same thing as implementing one. But before
Western military forces start bombing Libya, efforts to achieve a cease-fire
must be exhausted. To do otherwise would be to make a mockery of the
Security Council.

It is crucial that the goal of protecting civilians, which the Security
Council has endorsed, and the goal of overthrowing the Libyan government,
which it has most certainly not endorsed, be kept distinct. There is a clear
effort by some actors – especially the French government – to conflate these
goals <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/world/africa/19libya.html>:

 Earlier François Baroin, a French government spokesman, told RTL radio that
action would come “rapidly,” perhaps within hours, after the United Nations
resolution authorized “all necessary measures” to protect civilians.

But he insisted the military action was “not an occupation of Libyan
territory.” *Rather, he said, it was intended to protect the Libyan people
and “allow them to go all the way in their drive, which means bringing down
the Qaddafi regime.”* [my emphasis].

There is no doubt that some actors want a foreign military intervention to
assist in the overthrow of the Libyan government. But there should also be
no doubt that this goal has never been endorsed by the United Nations
Security Council. Any foreign military action beyond what is necessary to
protect civilians would be a military action that was not approved by the
Security Council, and therefore, would be a military action that violates
the United Nations Charter. Any foreign military action outside the
framework of the UN resolution – in particular, any action that kills
civilians – will be prosecutable as a war crime.

*Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign
Policy<http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/>
.*

-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20110318/8d6a983c/attachment-0001.html>