We have seen from the UN a coordinated, decisive and most importantly unanimous damning of Gaddafi’s regime. The speed at which universal approval for criticism was reached is unprecedented and its potency should not be underrated.
Gaddafi has only appeared before the UN once. His theatrics, in 2009, included tearing pages out of its founding Charter. In renaming the Security Council, he replaced the word security with terror. In his speech, Gaddafi told assembled delegates that “superpowers have interests and they use the power of the United Nations to protect their interests.”
For a country with significant oil reserves, it is important any fledgling democratic movement in Libya is not seen to be a puppet of the west or paid for by western governments. This would take the emphasis away from an internal fight for freedom and an attempt to overthrow a dictator and leave the Libyan revolution open to the charge that it was part of a western race to secure oil. UN Resolution 1970 has the power to influence Libya, its enemies and allies without direct intervention, which could potentially compromise the integrity of a Libyan revolution.
In Resolution 1970, the Security Council has called for state sponsored killers to be held to account. Further steps include an asset freeze, a travel ban, an arms embargo and the threat of prosecution for war crimes. The Security Council has, for the first time, unanimously referred a case of state terror to the International Criminal Court. Aside from the pressure this puts on Libya, this sets an important precedent and illustrates a return of power and influence the UN after it’s emasculation during the run up to the Iraq war. Extraordinarily, this UN show of force is even supported by the Chinese and the Russians, both often so keen to scupper the efforts of the British, French and Americans.
Good arguments have been made for a no-fly zone and possible military involvement but it was crucial, with events developing so quickly, that a resolution was passed without delay and that any quagmire caused by UN infighting over more a interventionist resolution was avoided.
“We want a decisive, rapid and courageous resolution” said Libya’s ambassador to the UN, who has defected from the Gaddafi regime. This is what has been achieved. Decisive, the resolution was agreed unanimously; rapid, drafted and passed in a matter of days; courageous, referring incidents to the ICC in concord with countries not even signatories of the Statute of Rome, which established the Court.
The steps taken by the UN will almost certainly not influence Gaddafi and his increasingly desperate and delusional family. Crucially, however, his associates and fellow governors, military generals and friends in business may well be persuaded that the time has come to change sides if they see that the game is up. As Saif al-Islam, Gadaffi’s son and the ever optimistic Comical Ali of the whole affair, said, if people see the whole rotten lot is sinking, they’ll jump ship. They have the chance to build a new Libya and if they’re lucky, any murky past associations will be forgotten, any 10 per cent cuts to themselves or their family will be left alone and any murderous dealings over the last few decades will be excused.
The resolution will not stop the killing in Libya. For a man who detests the UN, it will make no difference to the beleaguered leader. But for those fighting for democracy it will show the world stands beside them and is taking their plight seriously. For those more concerned with self interest, it will encourage the continuing abandonment of the old regime and the support of a swiftly established new system of government. For the UN it could spell a new chapter in how it reacts to international crises and its ongoing response to the evolving situation in Libya has the potential to define its role in international engagement for years to come.