What Happened After the “Good” Intervention in Libya
Who could have guessed this? The U.S. and our European allies are ignoring human rights abuses under the new Libyan regime:
The United States and several European Union states vetoed these proposals as well, eager to prove the Libya military intervention a success, and effectively turned a blind eye to the country’s current serious human rights problems. The Friends of Libya relied on the international Responsibility to Protect to justify intervening in Qaddafi’s crimes against humanity, but now ignore it when those committing the crimes are the militias they supported last year.
Of course, some of the same abuses were going on during the U.S./NATO war in Libya. The intervening governments made sure to ignore the crimes of the people on “our” side just as they ignored the civilian casualties that U.S. and NATO bombings caused. Refugees from the Tuareg rebels armed with Gaddafi’s arsenal have also reported numerous war crimes and abuses against the civilian population in northern Mali. There are few things more dangerous than to be a civilian on the wrong side of a “humanitarian” intervention and its aftermath.
Whitson goes on to detail some of the provisions that will give all militia members blanket immunity for any crimes committed for “the revolution”:
And despite a stated commitment to establishing respect for law and an end to impunity, the NTC has instead delivered Law 38, granting blanket immunity for criminals, if they committed crimes for the good of the revolution, and barring suits against them. Effectively, this means that there will never be any investigation or prosecution of militia members who apparently executed dozens of detained pro-Qaddafi forces and supporters, and drove out entire communities perceived as loyal to him. These are hardly reassuring developments for the rule of law in the new Libya.