Latest News:  
Beijing   Cloudy/Overcast    24 / 15   City Forecast


New-edition humanitarian intervention

By Hua Liming (Jiefang Daily)

15:51, September 05, 2011

Edited and Translated by People's Daily Online

The smoke of gunpowder has not fully dispersed in Tripoli, but the destiny of Muammar Qaddafi has been determined and the Libyan crisis has been fundamentally settled. It makes people recall Belgrade in 1999 and Baghdad in 2003.

In March 1999, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), led by the United States, bombed the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, destroyed the government of Slobodan Milosevic, and sent Milosevic to the International Court of Justice at the Hague. In March 2003, troops sent by the Untied States took Iraq and captured Saddam Hussein alive. The result of the bombing carried out by NATO on Libya is almost same as the results of those two wars.

The political lives of the Middle East's strongmen are coming to an end, and the Arabian people are protesting strongly. But big Western countries raised their banner of humanitarian intervention once again, attacked the administrations that they do not like and threatened the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of developing countries and the world peace. It needs people to heighten their vigilance.

After the Cold War, the Untied States believed the disintegration of the Soviet Union marked the end of history and thereafter shifted its sights on the "rogue," "axis of evil" and "outpost of tyranny" countries. Holding the banner of humanitarian intervention high, it adopted every means, be they sanctions or military strikes, to change the administrations of these countries.

The two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have completely exhausted the Untied States, and therefore, after Barack Obama took office in the White House, he has repeated again and again that the international communities have entered an era characterized by a new form of intervention, and the United States must use its smart power.

Then, the 2011 Libyan civil war became the first proving ground for the Obama doctrine. After the Libyan opposition captured Tripoli, a top White House official said proudly that the toppling of the Qaddafi regime in Libya shows that the Obama administration's "multilateral and light-footprint approach" to regime change is more effective than the "troop-heavy occupation-style approach" used by the George W. Bush administration in Iraq and Afghanistan, The official believes that the fact that it is Libyans marching into Tripoli provides a basis of legitimacy for the regime change.

The U.S. media have summed up four characteristics of the new model of humanitarian intervention in Libya: first, a "local group" that was willing to fight and die for regime change; second, "locally recognized legitimacy" in the form of the Arab League's request for intervention; third, "international legitimacy" in the form of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973; fourth, "genuine burden sharing" with allies.

The United States has indeed created a new model of humanitarian intervention. Under the new model, it does not need to direct every military operation but can act as the mastermind behind humanitarian intervention. Some key features of the new model include legitimacy, efficiency and low cost.

The Libyan people's revolt against Qaddafi has no causal relationship with NATO's wanton bombing. Once the latter oversteps the former, the "humanitarian intervention" cannot stand legally. Intervening in the internal affairs of other countries is against the Charter of the United Nations, and even if the action is disguised as humanitarian intervention, it is still illegal.

In addition, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 did not authorize any country to conduct military actions against Libya. Therefore, the global affair can only be solved through the negotiations by all the countries together. The new "humanitarian intervention" is just old wine in a new bottle. If this kind of intervention prevails, it would destroy the international relationships and plunge the whole world into chaos.

When the victory of Libyan rebels came from Tripoli, it seems the Obama's government may open the champagne and give a toast. But they should realize that the victory of Libyan rebels cannot be copied. As we all know, a country's own people should solve the internal affairs of any country.

The affairs of any area should be solved together by all the countries in that area, and world affairs should be solved through negotiations by all the countries. Although each country has its own problems and faces with kinds of difficulties, the era of great power intervention is over.


Leave your comment1 comments

  1. Name

Canada at 2011-09-0670.36.49.*
Yes. I’ve closely followed NATO’s war in Libya & the horror is seared on my mind. Libya has lost its sovereignty & its independence. Major decisions will be made in Washington, London & Paris. Drones will be used to murder those that stand in their way. Gaddafi and supporters will be disenfranchised from political life so no democracy. The death toll is high, thousands of refugees, rebel racism abounds resulting in mistreatment, torture & murder of black migrant workers accused of being mercenaries, much of the country’s infrastructure & housing destroyed, electricity & water supplies damaged by NATO bombing. Libyan oil & gas wealth will be siphoned off by Western corporations, exorbitant rates charged by Western corporations for reconstruction. Thousands of women lost their husbands, children lost their fathers & grandfathers. The terror & fear the population experienced during the bombing. Women’s rights will be lost. Libya will likely be occupied by Western military forces. Gaddafi loyalists didn’t put up such a brave fight just to save their personal perks and power, but rather to defend the country’s sovereignty & prevent it from being occupied. The civil war will likely go on for years unless NATO countries permanently vacate Libya as throughout history the occupied fight to get rid of occupiers. A humanitarian tragedy caused by NATO using rebels as pawns inciting Libyan to kill Libyan. No genuine revolutionary would have anything to do with NATO, the CIA, MI6, British SAS, etc. Is there any difference between Bush & Obama??

Selections for you

  1. A Mid-Autumn reunion in prison

  2. Scene of Sino-Russian border river emergency drill

  3. Egrets fight for food in Xinkai River estuary in Qinhuangdao

  4. Fine Art Asia 2011 to be held in HK

Most Popular


  1. Springtime for Libya?
  2. China firmly opposes US sales of F-16s to Taiwan
  3. Mastering the art of public speaking
  4. Arms traders fumbled contact with Gaddafi
  5. More effort needed to "go global"
  6. Cross-border RMB settlement developing rapidly
  7. Chinese FDI wrongly seen as harbinger of doom
  8. The unlearnt lessons of 9/11 today
  9. Opinion: China's economy has landed, safely
  10. Success in Libya cannot pull Europe out of crisis

What's happening in China

Ex-leader's new book already a hot seller

  1. Huaxi Village completes controversial skyscraper
  2. New insurance law covers foreign employees
  3. Volunteers help Tibetan antelope hit the road
  4. All 12 trapped miners confirmed dead
  5. School stole teachers' identities

PD Online Data

  1. Water-Splashing Festival of Dai
  2. The Uyghur Muqam of Xinjiang
  3. Traditional Folk Long Song
  4. The Guqin and its Music
  5. Grand Songs of Dong