Critics of our intervention in Libya said that Colonel Gaddafi’s treatment of his people was not Britain’s direct concern.
Critics of our intervention in Libya said that Colonel Gaddafi’s treatment of his people was not Britain’s direct concern. They argued that a prime minister’s job is to defend the national interest, not the rebels in Benghazi. When David Cameron called for a no-fly zone, he was ridiculed at home and outvoted in Brussels. Why interfere in a civil war? Why lose ourselves in another maze of Islamic tribal conflict?
The Prime Minister saw it in more simple terms. The West had the means to prevent a massacre, and very little time to do so. It needed to act straight away, and worry about an exit strategy later.
There was nothing inevitable about the Nato campaign. Had Cameron not pushed Barack Obama so hard for intervention, it is unlikely that the mercurial Nicolas Sarkozy could have convinced the United Nations on his own.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in