Libya: it's the coalition of the willing – but can it hold?

As he strode into the Elysée Palace in a dark blue suit and regally purple tie, David Cameron could rightly take pride in his key role in the formation of a powerful coalition ready and willing to take military action against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s Libyan regime

In the words of a British Government source, the phone lines out of Whitehall were “red hot” for the past fortnight as the Prime Minister and William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, led a diplomatic drive whose prize was the unexpectedly strong and united Resolution 1973, passed by the United Nations Security Council, which authorised “all necessary measures” to protect Libyan citizens.

For the first time in more than a decade, Britain and France were singing from the same diplomatic hymn sheet while the strength of opposition to Gaddafi among Arab nations was crucial in providing the necessary regional support for action.

 

The last piece of the jigsaw to fall into place was the United States. Only on Tuesday night, at the end of an extremely tense meeting of his national security staff, did President Barack Obama finally come down on the side of military intervention. Some 48 hours later, UNSCR 1973 was passed.

It was nearly a month since Libyans had taken to the streets, less than a week since President Nicolas Sarkzoy of France had recognised the authority of the rebel council in Benghazi and a fortnight since Mr Cameron had told the Commons he would seek a no-fly zone against Col Gaddafi’s air force.

Yesterday’s summit in Paris was in the first instance, according to Whitehall sources, about “a public demonstration of resolve” by members of the coalition. However, it also represented the first intriguing opportunity to study how the grouping’s disparate members, each with their own separate political imperatives, would hang together

While British diplomats are relieved that the UK and France – in stark contrast to the lead-up to the Iraq War – are working so closely together, tensions remain.
Some close to Mr Cameron have spoken of a “grandstanding tendency” in the French president which led to his insistence on hosting yesterday’s summit, three years after giving Gaddafi the red-carpet treatment in Paris, while editorials in French newspapers hailed a “tricolor victory”.
It was also pointed out that Mr Sarkozy – like Mr Obama but unlike Mr Cameron – faces a re-election fight next year. A French diplomat said yesterday: “If all goes well it will be a great achievement and show he is the man to have in a crisis.” Mr Cameron is content to play second fiddle, for the moment at least.
The position of Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, is different. Germany’s 20th century history and the make-up of her ruling coalition were the main reasons behind Germany’s abstention from the Security Council vote – a decision which attracted criticism. Mrs Merkel’s party faces three crucial state elections in the coming weeks and British
officials said they had not expected a vote in favour.
“Things will be OK if the Germans remain active on the issues in the European Union,” one source said, “including stressing the appalling nature of Gaddafi’s regime and pointing up the humanitarian crisis he is causing.” However, the same source revealed that the Germans and the Turks were the “slowest moving ships in the convoy” when it came to Nato planning for action on Libya – another source of tension.
Although some in the British Government thought Mrs Merkel would not come to Paris, she did so, joining other leaders in viewing TV footage of the jet downed yesterday morning over the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.
Despite President Obama’s pledge not to put American boots on the ground in Libya, a strong US presence in the coalition, summed up by the enthusiastic greeting offered by Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, to President Sarkozy yesterday, was obviously critical.
Mr Obama, who is trying to recast America’s role as the world’s policeman after the traumas of the President George W Bush era, kept his pistol in his holster until the last moment – as a range of former senators, generals, senior officials and other experts opposed a no-fly zone as a vague, open-ended and burdensome commitment.
Within the administration, Robert Gates, the Defence Secretary, mocked “loose talk” about a no-fly zone. His views were supported by Thomas Donilon, the national security adviser, and others.
However, the top-level figures in favour of action were Vice President Joe Biden and Mrs Clinton. They had been reminded by Bill Clinton of his eternal regret at not saving hundreds of thousands of lives by intervening in Rwanda, and his failure at not policing Serb killers from the air earlier on in Bosnia.
It was that moral argument for liberal interventionism, backed up by urging from Britain and France, that proved decisive for the US President.
When Mr Hague spoke to The Sunday Telegraph last week he said any move towards military action needed three main pillars: it should be broad based, be legally valid and enjoy regional support. Last weekend’s key decision by the Arab League to support the no-fly zone ensured that the third of these criteria would be met.
Yesterday’s Elysée summit was attended by ministers from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates - both of which were understood to be ready to participate in the first wave of military action - as well as Iraq and Morocco. Gaddafi’s long-standing unpopularity among other leaders in the region – one British source described him as “the Billy no-mates of the Arab world” – proved decisive too.
When Resolution 1973 was passed on Thursday night, staff at 10 Downing Street staged a muted celebration with cans of Coca-Cola and takeaway pizza. The Prime Minister told them to get a good night’s sleep with a hectic day ahead.
He rose before dawn on the Friday, having been woken, according to aides, at 5.30am by his youngest child, Florence. The six-month-old spent some moments on the Prime Minister’s lap during his early-morning preparations for his 11am statement to MPs. Before entering the Commons, Mr Cameron and Mr Hague received plaudits at a specially-arranged cabinet meeting around 9am where, nevertheless, Downing Street sources admitted, “a lot of questions” were asked about impending military action.
In contrast to the build up to the war in Iraq, the Paris gathering represented an international community united – at least on the surface – and determined to take action against Gaddafi. All of those present, however, including Mr Cameron, know that the really hard work of removing a tyrant has only just started.



source : www.telegraph.co.uk