Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
549 bytes added ,  15:50, April 22, 2011
Line 180: Line 180:  
{{Cquote|In spite of statements underscoring NATO unity on steps announced to date, the initial planning and operational phases were also marked by significant levels of discord within Europe and [[NATO]] on the aims and future direction of the mission. A key point of contention was reportedly the amount of flexibility that NATO forces would be granted to protect civilians and civilian areas, as called for in paragraph 4 of UNSCR 1973. Reports indicate that French officials insisted on maintaining the ability to strike ground forces that threatened civilian areas, while their [[Turkish]] counterparts vocally opposed any targeting of ground forces. Adding to the strain within NATO, NATO ally [[Germany]] abstained from UNSCR 1973 and, opposed to any potential [[combat]] operation, on March 23, withdrew its naval assets in the [[Mediterranean]] from NATO command. Throughout the first week of operations, other European allies contributing to the mission, including Italy and Norway, expressed increasing frustration with the lack of agreement within NATO, with Norway refusing to deploy its fighter jets unless under they were under NATO command and control.<ref>Operation Odyssey Dawn (Libya):
 
{{Cquote|In spite of statements underscoring NATO unity on steps announced to date, the initial planning and operational phases were also marked by significant levels of discord within Europe and [[NATO]] on the aims and future direction of the mission. A key point of contention was reportedly the amount of flexibility that NATO forces would be granted to protect civilians and civilian areas, as called for in paragraph 4 of UNSCR 1973. Reports indicate that French officials insisted on maintaining the ability to strike ground forces that threatened civilian areas, while their [[Turkish]] counterparts vocally opposed any targeting of ground forces. Adding to the strain within NATO, NATO ally [[Germany]] abstained from UNSCR 1973 and, opposed to any potential [[combat]] operation, on March 23, withdrew its naval assets in the [[Mediterranean]] from NATO command. Throughout the first week of operations, other European allies contributing to the mission, including Italy and Norway, expressed increasing frustration with the lack of agreement within NATO, with Norway refusing to deploy its fighter jets unless under they were under NATO command and control.<ref>Operation Odyssey Dawn (Libya):
 
Background and Issues for Congress, ''Congressional Research Service,'' March 30, 2011, p. 20 pdf.</ref>}}
 
Background and Issues for Congress, ''Congressional Research Service,'' March 30, 2011, p. 20 pdf.</ref>}}
 +
 +
Of NATOs 28 members, only 14 are said to be "actively participating" but only six have provided military support. Of the 22-country [[Arab League]], whose appeal prompted the United Nations to vote on intervention, only [[Qatar]] and the [[United Arab Emirates]] are involved. Of the 192 members of the [[UN General Assembly]], who all have a legal "responsibility to protect" civilians attacked by their own governments, only Sweden has responded.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/19/libya-mission-military-advisory-team</ref>
    
Resolution 1973 authorized strict limitations, according to international law, on  NATO as the organization with  responsibility for the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution. Particularly, it provides only for a naval blockade enforcing the arms embargo, and enforcement of a no-fly zone. On March 29, 2011, it was reported Dmitry Rogozin  commented after a meeting with NATO officials in [[Brussels, Belgium]], that Russia expressed deep concern over the interpretation of the Security Council’s resolution, as some countries have effectively turned it into an approval for ground operations.
 
Resolution 1973 authorized strict limitations, according to international law, on  NATO as the organization with  responsibility for the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution. Particularly, it provides only for a naval blockade enforcing the arms embargo, and enforcement of a no-fly zone. On March 29, 2011, it was reported Dmitry Rogozin  commented after a meeting with NATO officials in [[Brussels, Belgium]], that Russia expressed deep concern over the interpretation of the Security Council’s resolution, as some countries have effectively turned it into an approval for ground operations.
Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,336

edits

Navigation menu