South African Ambassador: NATO Making Things Worse In Libya

NATO’s military campaign in Libya has worsened the plight of the civilian population and has yet to provide a longterm solution to the crisis, says South Africa’s Ambassador to the United Nations.

In a Security Council briefing earlier today, Ambassador Baso Sangqu argued that NATO has done little to stabilize the current situation in Libya and that the mission had in fact led to an increase in civilian casualties.

“This meeting takes place exactly one hundred days after the start of the NATO aerial bombardment in Libya. Despite this military action, there has not been a solution to the Libyan crisis, and the situation has in fact deteriorated with more loss of civilian lives and massive destruction of infrastructure.”

Sangqu says the NATO mission has gone well beyond the mandate of the Security Council Resolution 1973, which called for the implementation of a no fly zone and allowed for air strikes against Gaddafi forces.

“When South Africa voted in favor of Resolution 1973, our intention was to ensure the protection of civilians as well as unhindered access to humanitarian aid to those who desperately need it.” said Sanggu, “a political, rather than a military, solution is the only way in which peace can be achieved in Libya.”

South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma last week accused NATO of using Resolution 1973 to encourage regime change at the expense of civilian protection. “We have spoken out against the misuse of the good intentions in Resolution 1973,” he said. “We strongly believe that the resolution is being abused for regime change, political assassinations and foreign military occupation.”

In a meeting yesterday in Pretoria, African Union officials reiterated their concern over the continued the NATO-led airstrikes, and once again called on Gaddafi and rebel forces to implement an immediate ceasefire. 

AU officials released a statement arguing only a political solution could “sustainably settle the current conflict.”

Earlier today, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam, and a top military intelligence official.

It is unclear what effect the warrants will have on attempts at negotiating a political solution to the conflict. The ICC decision was welcomed by top NATO officials, and seems to indicate the organization continues to be determined to remove Gaddafi from power. 

The end of regime change

According to Stephanie Kaplan, Ph.D candidate at the Department of Political Science at the M.I.T. and public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center, the election of Obama signals the end of regime change as a counter terrorism approach. In its absence two options have arisen in the liberal foreign policy community: modernization and constrainment.

Kaplan described modernization as an approach that would work to combat terrorism at it's source by mending broken societies on an economic, political, and social level. This would include eradicating poverty and updating the educational system through much of the Middle East through a wide U.S. led program similar to Truman's Marshall Plan.

Constrainment, not to be confused with the Cold War grand strategy of containment, is based on the belief that jihadists are on a path towards self-defeat and constraining the terrorist movement on an operational and ideational level will hasten this defeat. Kaplan says that this can be done by confronting terrorism both on an international and local level to drive wedges between the jihadist community and by shifting the narrative in favor of the U.S.

"The U.S. and it's allies and any of the surrogates that we appoint most often can't credibly counter the jihadist narrative and promote the narrative that we want...but what we can do is create facts on the ground so that credible actors can advocate on our behalf," said Kaplan

Of the two options, Kaplan stated that constrainment will hold the greatest chance of success. She explained that there is very little evidence that modernization will work, and points to modernization's failure to transform Indonesian society following the U.S.'s post-tsunami relief effort. In addition, Kaplan said that there is evidence that terrorism is actually spurred by modernization and that attempts to pursue further modernization carries a risk.

"Modernizers take the approach of a sledge hammer whereas constrainers prefer a scalpel. Just as it's hard to imagine that we can go to war enough that 19 people wont try to harm the United States, it's hard to imagine that the United States and its allies can reform the Middle East enough so that a few dozen people wont try to harm us again," Kaplan concluded.