| Fair&Balanced |
03-31-2011 04:05 PM |
NATO has a good time line of how events in Libya unfolded:
Quote:
Following the popular uprising which began in Benghazi on 17 February 2011, the United Nations (UN) Security Council adopted Resolution 1970. This institutes an arms embargo, freezes the personal assets of Libya’s leaders and imposes a travel ban on senior figures.
On 8 March, with international concern over the Libyan crisis growing, NATO stepped up its surveillance operations in the Central Mediterranean, deploying AWACS aircraft to provide round-the-clock observation. These “eyes in the sky” give NATO detailed information of movements in Libyan airspace.
On 10 March, NATO Defence Ministers supported SACEUR’s decision to have alliance ships move to the same area to boost the monitoring effort.
On 17 March, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1973, authorising member states and regional organisations to, inter alia, take “all necessary measures” to protect civilians in Libya.
On 22 March, NATO responded to the UN call by launching an operation to enforce the arms embargo against Libya. On 23 March, NATO’s arms embargo operation started.
NATO ships and aircraft are operating in the Central Mediterranean to make sure that the flow of weapons to Libya by sea is cut off. They have the right to stop and search any vessel they suspect of carrying arms or mercenaries.
The NATO ships will not enter Libyan territorial waters. NATO has no intention of deploying land forces anywhere in Libyan territory.
On 24 March, NATO decided to enforce the UN-mandated no-fly zone over Libya. The UN resolution called for a ban on all flights, except those for humanitarian and aid purposes, in Libyan airspace, to make sure that civilians and civilian populated areas cannot be subjected to air attack.
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_71652.htm?
|
This does include the first (and only) unilateral action of the US to-date, a week after the uprising began, which was to freeze $30+ billion of Libyan assets – the largest seizure of foreign assets in US history.
I think by most objective standards, the above actions were deliberative and measured.
There was no over-reaction with a display of overwhelming force right from the start nor an under-reaction by doing nothing when the threat to civilians was far greater than Egypt (where the military sided with the protesters), Tunesia, etc..
Neither NATO nor the US are arming the rebels. The majority of NATO (not the US) has stated that the UN mandate does not allow it and there is no suggestion at any level of NATO ground forces being deployed. US assets on the ground, covert CIA actions, are performing the logical task of gathering intel to have a better understanding of the make-up of the rebel forces.
The actions to-date and the cost to the US in money and lives has been minimal, more like Bosnia than Iraq or Afghanistan.
I support it as it has played out. Even with the outcome as uncertain as it still remains, I think it is reasonable to believe that a mass slaughter of civilians has been prevented so far. I wont support US ground troops under any circumstances.
Others can disagree, but I would hope they would keep it in perspective and not make it a left-right argument, given that there is support and opposition on both the left and right. |
