Libya

Sunday

James Forsyth

The Gaddafi family should be regarded as legitimate targets

David Cameron became most animated on the Andrew Marr show this morning when the subject of Libya came up. It was clear that he remains passionately convinced that the course he has taken is the right thing to have done. The Prime Minister refused to comment on the Gaddafi regime’s claim that one of Gaddafi’s children had been killed in a Nato airstrike and wouldn’t be drawn on the question of whether the government considers the Gaddafi family legitimate targets. But given that, as Cameron himself noted, the Gaddafi family is running the military operation and ordering moves against civilians then they surely are legitimate targets. Also if the allied

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

An honest plea? Or a cynical gambit?

I was planning on collating today’s sunny newspaper covers for Coffee House — but Tim Montgomerie has beaten me to it. So let’s, instead, turn our attention away from the Royal Wedding, and on to Libya. A striking thing has happened there this morning: Gaddafi has called for a ceasefire, and for negotiations between his regime and NATO. Although the murderous leader’s television address was shot through with the usual defiant rhetoric — “No one can force me to leave my country and no one can tell me not to fight for my country,” he bellowed — it also included some concessionary passages. “Let us negotiate,” was one of them.

Thursday

David Blackburn

The government has a problem with lawyers

The government’s strained relationship with the Civil Service is a recurring story at the moment. Much of the disquiet seems to be the normal tit for tat exchanges immortalised in Yes Minister. In the main, ministers and their advisors express high regard for their officials. But there are some resilient bones of contention between the government and its lawyers. Again, this is not unusual. When Gordon Brown was Chancellor, parliamentary counsel were exasperated by his inability to take decisions. Brown’s budgetary machinations were finalised in a predictably mad rush, which incensed those who had to amend the bill hours before it was put to parliament. However, the growing volume of

Tuesday

Alex Massie

Obama’s Love of Cake

Ryan Lizza’s New Yorker article on the development of Barack Obama’s approach to foreign policy is, as always, full of interestig stuff even if, perhaps unavoidably, I suspect it depends a little too heavily upon the Slaughter-Power approach. Nevertheless, Ryan gets to the heart of Obama’s presidency – or at least the style of it – here: Obama’s instinct was to try to have it both ways. He wanted to position the United States on the side of the protesters: it’s always a good idea, politically, to support brave young men and women risking their lives for freedom, especially when their opponent is an eighty-two-year-old dictator with Swiss bank accounts.

Peter Hoskin

The Arab League backs the protestors against al-Assad

William Hague has chimed in on the situation in Syria, unsurprisingly condemning the horror and bloodshed being perpetrated by al-Assad’s regime. But considerably more significant is the statement that has today been released by the Arab League. Although the text doesn’t mention al-Assad by name, it clearly has the Syrian autocrat in mind when it calls on “Arab regimes and governments to commit to and speed up reforms, [and to] immediately stop using force against demonstrators and spare their citizens bloodshed.” And it goes further, too, in defending the political — and moral — legitimacy of the protests, saying that the unrest blazing across the Middle East heralds “a new

Saturday

David Blackburn

Another one goes

The scent of jasmine has just grown a little stronger in Arabia. The Yemeni President, Ali Abdullah Saleh, has agreed to stand down within 30 days, the Wall Street Journal reports. Saleh and his family will receive immunity in exchange for his momentous gesture. Saleh has been under growing pressure in recent months, as his government was attacked simultaneously by a pro-democracy movement and al-Qaeda sponsored terrorism. It is not clear if the groundswell of popular dissent that has forced his hand is inspired by jihad, but the speculation doesn’t seem unreasonable and western governments fear that they may lose a vital ally in the war on terror. Global attention

Friday

Daniel Korski

Reasons for optimism in the Middle East | 22 April 2011

As the Libya crisis drags out, and Bashar al-Assad orders a crackdown in Syria, many have begun to doubt whether the changes seen in Tunisia and Egypt will actually spread to the rest of the Middle East. One former British ambassador recently suggested that perhaps the peoples of the Middle East preferred a mixture of authoritarianism and democracy — and that Britain should accept this; not impose its values and views.   But there is plenty of reason for optimism. The first is to look at the countries that have transformed themselves over the course of the last fifty years. Powerhouses like India and Brazil, but also smaller countries such

Thursday

Daniel Korski

The Libyan intervention needs to be stepped up

The government is rightly proud of the Libya intervention. Not only did it save thousands of lives in Benghazi but it was conducted in way that learnt the lessons of the past. The Foreign Secretary took pains to get a UN resolution, making the mission legal, and kept the shape-shifting Arab League committed throughout. But unless the government is now  willing to unlearn the lessons of the past, and act both more unilaterally and even illegally, its multilateral, UN-sanctioned action may have been for nothing. For Misrata is now getting the punishment that had been planned for Benghazi. The town is being destroyed in a seige that looks like the

Tuesday

David Blackburn

Hague: advisors on the ground is not boots on the ground

William Hague let the cat out of the bag on Sky News earlier, arguing that military advisors sent to aid the rebels in Libya did not constitute ‘British boots on the ground’. He said: “This is an expansion of the diplomatic presence we have in Benghazi…It’s not boots on the ground. I stress it’s not training fighting forces…it is to help them organise themselves to protect civilian life.” The reaction is fevered, with the sagacious Sir Menzies Campbell helpfully reminding everyone that Vietnam began when a President sent military advisors. But, one braided colonel does not an invasion make. This move was to be expected: at the weekend, Cameron implied

Daniel Korski

Is Syria next?

I used to think that Syria was some way off a revolution. The protests were geographically limited; Bashar al-Assad was willing to use Libyan-style violence against them and the West seemed uncharacteristically mute. What’s more, demands for the Syrian president to go were limited. And then there’s the real fear that Syria, made up of so many different sectarian groups, would collapse into a vortex of internecine violence akin to the Lebanese civil war. But these arguments may be losing their weight. The current unrest is the most serious challenge facing Bashar al-Assad and his Alawite regime. And nothing the Syrian dictator has done so far has made a difference.

Sunday

David Blackburn

Cameron: we’re looking at doing more for the Libyan rebels

As James Kirkup says, David Cameron’s appearance on Sky News this morning was intriguing. In addition to trying to reassure the massing media doubters that the coalition “remains strong” despite its differences, the PM was keen to discuss the military mission in Libya. The letter that he authored with Sarkozy and Obama on Friday asserted that regime change was a necessity for peace. Since then, both Whitehall and the Elysee have insisted that Gaddafi cannot remain. How then might he go? Plainly, Gaddafi will not abdicate of his own volition. On the other hand, Cameron is adamant that there can be no ‘invasion or occupation’, and he reiterated the point

Saturday

Daniel Korski

Should the West negotiate with Gaddafi?

This week, former Foreign Secretary David Miliband gave a speech in the United States about Afghanistan, proposing the hand over of responsibility for building a political solution to the UN, headed by a Muslim mediator capable of negotiating with the Taliban as well as partners throughout the region. Last week, also saw former US negotiator Daniel Serwer make an interesting parallel to his time negotiating peace in Bosnia: ‘In my experience, there is nothing like staring a military commander in the face, asking him what his war objective is, and discussing alternative means to achieve it.  I asked the commander of the Bosnian Army that question in 1995, having been

Friday

James Forsyth

The government should recall parliament

Today’s declaration (£) by Barack Obama, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy that Nato’s operation in Libya will continue until Gaddafi leaves power marks a shift in their rhetoric and makes explicit that regime change is the war aim. This has led to calls to recall parliament, most notably from David Davis on the World at One, to debate this change. Parliament merely voted to enforce the UN resolution which was not a mandate for regime change. The government would be well advised to heed these requests. It would be the best way of maintaining the necessary political support for the mission. Now that regime change is the explicit war aim,

David Blackburn

Oh what a lovely war

The triumvirate of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy have presented a united front to NATO and the Arab League and said there will be no respite in Libya. Writing to the Times (£), they say: ‘Britain, France and the United States will not rest until the United Nations Security Council resolutions have been implemented and the Libyan people can choose their own future.’ They also add that to leave Gaddafi in power would be an ‘unconscionable betrayal’, a marked shift in emphasis. It’s rousing stuff, designed to twist reluctant arms at the NATO summit in Berlin. However, as former ambassador to Tripoli Oliver Miles suggests, this letter is unlikely to be

Thursday

David Blackburn

Cameron can make common cause to solve Europe’s immigration concerns

Vince, it seems, is Vince. But Britain is not alone in struggling to arrest immigration. A mass of displaced North Africans is descending on Malta and Italy. The United Nations estimate that more than 20,000 people have already landed this year and many more expected. Neither Malta nor Italy can cope alone. On Monday, Malta called for the EU to invoke a 2001 directive that grants migrants temporary protection in cases of ‘mass influx’. Italy also petitioned Brussels to spread the physical burden. The EU did not acquiesce in either case, which especially outraged the Italian government: both Berlusconi and immigration minister Maroni said that the European Union stands and

Wednesday

David Blackburn

Saif Gaddafi: victim of circumstance…

There’s truth in the cliché that actions speak louder than words. Benjamin Barber, once a board member of the Saif Gaddafi Foundation, has defended his former patron in today’s Guardian. He declares: ‘I still believe that among the conflicting voices that vie for Saif’s tortured soul there is the voice of a genuine democrat and a Libyan patriot.’        Barber condemns Saif’s ‘abominable actions in the current crisis’, but remains convinced that his dalliance with democracy was genuine. Oblivious of the attendant irony, Barber cites Saif’s book, Manifesto, where the man who would later vow to fight to the death through rivers of Libyan blood wrote: ‘I believe it is

Daniel Korski

Hague’s return

William Hague has had a good war. He began poorly, as the FCO struggled to evacuate Britons from Libya. But since then, the Foreign Secretary has showed deft diplomatic skill and leadership. The FCO has been focused on Libya and every able-bodied person has been drafted into duty, with diplomats now running the operation in No 10, and the Cabinet Office. On the Today programme, the Foreign Secretary batted away the idea, much loved by realists and pessimists, that because Britain did not know, with forensic detail, how exactly the intervention would end, it should not have become involved. There are many mountains still to climb. European governments need to

Monday

Daniel Korski

Can Nato cope in Libya?

Just because Nicolas Sarkozy believes something does not make it untrue. The French president was adamant that Nato shouldn’t take over the Libya campaign. He preferred to run an ad hoc coalition of the willing. Britain, however, was keen for the alliance to take control of a mission that seemed too loosely-organised. Once the United States decided to fade into the background of the military operation, the impetus for a switch to Nato grew. A few weeks into the transfer, people are beginning to wonder whether President Sarkozy was right in the first place. According to yesterday’s Sunday Times, Nato is doing what it did in Bosnia: blocking the rebels

Friday

David Blackburn

How might the MoD get round its spending settlement?

The Ministry of Defence is Whitehall’s last monolith. Charged with the nation’s defence, it is powerful enough to challenge the Treasury. As Pete notes, there are signs that it’s trying to defer (if not avoid) the cuts laid out the punishing strategic defence and security review. It has many ways of doing this. Obviously it can use political pressure because troops are deployed in Afghanistan and Libya. But there’s also a neat accounting step that allows the MoD can transfer costs directly to the Treasury. You may recall that the Budget contained a £700m increase for ‘single use military expenditure’ (SUME) in 2011-2012. SUME does not appear as capital spending

Daniel Korski

Libya: winning the stalemate

Author Alison Pargeter picks up the debate about Libya and al Qaeda in this morning’s Times (£), dismissing the idea that a new “jihadist hotspot” is being created. As I wrote some time ago, it is difficult even for people who have travelled in eastern Libya to know anything for sure. I hear from sources in Benghazi that the Islamists number among some of the better troops – having had training and experience in fighting. They offer what one person called “small unit cohesion”, in contrast to poorly-organised rebel force. But they do not seem to run or even hold sway over the movement. The bigger question in Libya right