Richard Falk writes:
The outcome in Libya remains uncertain, but what seems clear beyond reasonable doubt is that military intervention has not saved the day for either the shadowy opposition known as ‘the rebels,’ and certainly not for the people of the country. It has seemingly plunged Libya into a protracted violent conflict with the domestic balance of forces tipping decisively in favor of the Qaddafi regime despite a major military onslaught managed by the American-led coalition, which in recent days has been supposedly outsourced to NATO. But since when is NATO not an American dominated alliance? The best that can be hoped for at this stage is a face-saving ceasefire that commits the Libyan leadership to a vague power-sharing scheme, but leaves the governing process more or less as it is, possibly replacing Qaddafi with his son who may offer the West the cosmetic trappings of liberal modernity, which may exhibit a genuine interest in reform.
Unfortunately, it does not seem like rebels would accept any kind of negotiated deal with the regime. It seems as though Obama has committed himself, the United States and its NATO allies to propping up one side of an un-winnable civil war. Rebels are criticizing Obama and NATO for not attacking Qaddafi enough, imagine what the reaction would be if NATO announced a deal allowing the Qaddafi family to remain in power…
Photo from Politico