Changes

== Libyan uprising 2011 ==

== Libyan uprising 2011 ==

[[File:Libya Rebels Gaining Momentum.jpg|thumb||Anti-Gaddafi forces gaining momentum in March, 2011 (Photo:Reuters).]]

[[File:Libya Rebels Gaining Momentum.jpg|thumb|Anti-Gaddafi forces gaining momentum in March, 2011 (Photo:Reuters).]]

The unrest in Libya started as a series of protests following uprisings in [[Tunisia]] and [[Egypt]]. The scale of the violence contrasts markedly with North Africa's largely peaceful uprisings. The uprising is trying to reclaim Libya from the world's longest-ruling leader. Eastern Libya has fallen to the uprising, which began on 16 February in the wake of revolutions which toppled the long-serving leaders of neighboring Tunisia and Egypt. The [[Islamist]] terror group [[Al-Qaeda]] in North Africa has vowed to do everything in its power to help an uprising against the Libyan [[secular]] strongman leader Moamer Gaddafi, according to a statement posted by the SITE monitoring group. <ref> [http://www.dawn.com/2011/02/24/al-qaeda-in-n-africa-backs-libya-uprising-site.html Al Qaeda in N. Africa backs Libya uprising: SITE] </ref>

The unrest in Libya started as a series of protests following uprisings in [[Tunisia]] and [[Egypt]]. The scale of the violence contrasts markedly with North Africa's largely peaceful uprisings. The uprising is trying to reclaim Libya from the world's longest-ruling leader. Eastern Libya has fallen to the uprising, which began on 16 February in the wake of revolutions which toppled the long-serving leaders of neighboring Tunisia and Egypt. The [[Islamist]] terror group [[Al-Qaeda]] in North Africa has vowed to do everything in its power to help an uprising against the Libyan [[secular]] strongman leader Moamer Gaddafi, according to a statement posted by the SITE monitoring group. <ref> [http://www.dawn.com/2011/02/24/al-qaeda-in-n-africa-backs-libya-uprising-site.html Al Qaeda in N. Africa backs Libya uprising: SITE] </ref>

On March 21, 2011, President Obama announced that U.S. military forces had already commenced operations in Libya on March 19 "to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe" citing UN Resolutions as the authority to do so.  However, the Charter of the [[United Nations]], in Article 2(4), prohibits the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence” of a member state under most circumstances, and many practitioners and observers have wondered whether the establishment of a no-fly zone would constitute a violation of this prohibition. The Congressional Research Services advised if a no-fly zone were to be imposed against a state that has not carried out an armed attack against its neighbors, that state may consider the imposition of a no-fly zone as an “armed attack.” CRS warned that even if the no-fly zone operations in a given state do not constitute an “armed attack,

On March 21, 2011, President Obama announced that U.S. military forces had already commenced operations in Libya on March 19 "to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe" citing UN Resolutions as the authority to do so.  However, the Charter of the [[United Nations]], in Article 2(4), prohibits the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence” of a member state under most circumstances, and many practitioners and observers have wondered whether the establishment of a no-fly zone would constitute a violation of this prohibition. The Congressional Research Services advised if a no-fly zone were to be imposed against a state that has not carried out an armed attack against its neighbors, that state may consider the imposition of a no-fly zone as an “armed attack.” CRS warned that even if the no-fly zone operations in a given state do not constitute an “armed attack,

{{Cquotethat state, and other members of the international community, might consider them a violation of the prohibition of the “threat or use of force,” as well as of the customary duty of non-intervention in the affairs of other sovereign states.}}

{{Cquote|that state, and other members of the international community, might consider them a violation of the prohibition of the “threat or use of force,” as well as of the customary duty of non-intervention in the affairs of other sovereign states.}}

A hearing conducted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee two days earler revealed differences of opinion between Senators and the administration about intervention, the need for Congressional authorization for use of force, and the likelihood  [[al Qaeda]] and other violent Islamists could take advantage of the situation.

A hearing conducted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee two days earler revealed differences of opinion between Senators and the administration about intervention, the need for Congressional authorization for use of force, and the likelihood  [[al Qaeda]] and other violent Islamists could take advantage of the situation.