The so-called Arab spring saw unprecedented protest actions sweep across North Africa and the Middle East. Most notably, it brought about changes in governments in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. The Libyan case being the most brutal
The Responsibility to Protect
It may be argued that the level of violence that was present in Libya necessitated outside involvement. However, it also begs the question of whether or not a state’s sovereignty should be breached when it's essentially at war with itself. In the ever-expanding lexicon of security concepts in the last decade, terms like the responsibility to protect (R2P) have come to the fore.
What the R2P essentially means is that a country that fails to protect its citizens from crimes against humanity, i.e. war crimes and genocide, has to be assisted by the international community. The assistance can take the form of mediation and capacity building. It may also take the form of more coercive methods including the use of military force. R2P is based on the notion that sovereignty is not divorced from responsibility towards a country’s citizens.
The Libyan Case of R2P
In March 2011 the United Nations Security Council approved resolution 1973 which authorized the use of force in Libya. This resolution gave power to NATO to take military action in Libya to halt the alleged atrocities of the incumbent regime and to provide assistance to the rebels. The actions by NATO have not been without critics particularly as the body count among civilians increased.
Eight months after the Libyan uprising, insurgents killed the deposed Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, under very suspicious circumstances.
Questions still to be answered.
The Libyan case is a remarkable one when examining the extreme application of the responsibility to protect. This is because, on the surface, it met the criteria for intervention. Does this mean that there would be blanket intervention in all cases? For instance, it is alleged that Syria is committing atrocities against its own people. Who represents the will of the international community? Were all avenues exhausted, in Libya’s case, before military intervention was instituted?
Unfortunately, Gaddaffi was not brought in front of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to face charges of ordering the mass murder of civilians. This would have perhaps created a different international norm; the respect for international law. However, the cases currently before the ICC, such as that of Charles Taylor, have been dragging on for years and arguably weaken the relevancy of this institution.
As Libyans toddle into a new political order, analysts have to start looking for lessons out of this ordeal not only for the region but for the world. We are moving to an era that is uncharted with regards to power-relationships in the region. These new relationships, and new international norms, have implications for the rest of the world.
Odilile Ayodele - Odilile Ayodele is a self-starter, strategic thinker with a Master of Arts degree in International Relations from the University of the ...
Join the Conversation