Allied assault - The prize is black gold, not peace

MORALLY speaking, it is beyond question that the assault by allied forces on Libya is a just cause.

From a humanitarian perspective, no civilised organisation or country could stand idly by in light of the chilling threat from Muammar Gaddafi that citizens opposed to his monstrous regime would be crushed without mercy.

Going on his track record, the spectre of a bloody massacre was looming over the city of Benghazi. The predicament of a rebel government, poorly equipped and consisting largely of intellectuals, was extremely precarious when the allies finally launched Saturday night’s missile strike aimed at disabling Gaddafi’s air defences and targeting Libyan ground forces.

His supporters had already entered the western suburbs of Benghazi under cover of a duplicitous ceasefire. In the event, missiles and jets proved decisive and rebel forces have now regained areas occupied by Gaddafi’s army.

Given the tinder-box scenario in the Middle East, with ongoing tensions in Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia and Bahrain, the vote of the Arab League in favour of allied intervention was the decisive factor behind the UN resolution. Effectively, it cleared the way for the US, France, Britain, Denmark, Norway, Canada and others to use all necessary means, while excluding a foreign occupation force, in the defence of Libyan civilians from attack by their own government.

Leaving moral considerations aside, however, from the perspective of the international economy there is little doubt that the allied forces would never have intervened were it not for the rich oil reserves beneath the Libyan sands. Undoubtedly, the primary aim of the allied assault is to guarantee future supplies of oil from a country that steadily exported 1.3 million barrels a day.

Globally, there have been other instances of appalling atrocities by dictatorial regimes where UN intervention was not deemed necessary apart from issuing verbal condemnation. In Libya the prize is black gold. Strategically, when one considers that an estimated 20% of Ireland’s oil comes from Libya, we also have a vested interest in toppling Gaddafi.

However, major questions remain to be resolved. What endgame, for instance, is envisioned by the international community? Does it seek total regime change, an end to Gaddafi once and for all? Or will the UN be satisfied with the partition of Libya along east-west, religious-tribal lines, a prospect that conjures up the ominous possibility of long-term war?

For 40 years or more, Gaddafi has demonstrated an uncanny ability to cling onto power despite being involved in fostering international terrorism, which included training IRA terrorists. His capacity to sow the seeds of confusion is legendary and observers believe he is playing that game by going to ground in the aftermath of the attack by allied missiles.

It is a moot point whether he can survive a concerted allied assault. But having vowed to fight a prolonged war, he is already issuing arms to more than a million supporters. When the chips are down and the tanks destroyed, the crucial question is whether his supporters will rally behind him — with all that implies. The coalition forces have taken a calculated risk.