The Chief of the Defence Staff, Gen Sir David Richards, flatly insisted that
seeking to hit the Libyan dictator was not allowed under the terms of United
Nations Security Council resolution 1973.
But after Defence Secretary Liam Fox suggested over the weekend that Col
Gaddafi could be a "legitimate target", No 10 sources insisted it
was legal to target anyone killing Libyan civilians.
The controversy blew up as Col Gaddafi's compound in Tripoli was hit in a
second night of coalition air strikes aimed at suppressing the regime's air
defences and command and control structure.
Following a meeting of the newly formed Libya subcommittee of the National
Security Council, chaired by David Cameron, Gen Richards was adamant that it
was not permitted to target Col Gaddafi.
"Absolutely not. It is not allowed under the UN resolution and it is not
something I want to discuss any further," he said.
At a Ministry of Defence briefing, Gen Richards' spokesman, Major Gen John
Lorimer, stressed that the international military intervention was in
support of the UN no-fly zone.
"It is very clear that, in support of the United Nations Security
Council, we are there to implement and enforce the no-fly zone," he
said.
"The targets we are attacking are command and control facilities and the
integrated air defence system. They are legitimate military targets."
Earlier however, Foreign Secretary William Hague refused to rule out an attack
on the Libyan leader.
"I'm not going to speculate on the targets," he told the BBC Radio
4 Today programme. "That depends on the circumstances at the time."
Dr Fox also discussed the possibility at the weekend, although he stressed the
need to avoid civilian casualties in any attack.
"Well, that would potentially be a possibility but you mention
immediately one of the problems we would have, which is that you would have
to take into account any civilian casualties that might result from that,"
he said.
"And at all times we are very careful to avoid that for its humanitarian
reasons, but also for the propaganda reasons that it would provide for the
regime itself."
He added: "There's a difference between someone being a legitimate target
and whether you would go ahead with targeting."
James Arbuthnot, the Tory chairman of the Commons Defence Committee, said Mr
Cameron had agreed in the House that the aim of protecting Libya's civilians
could not be achieved without the removal of Col Gaddafi.
"We accept that the aim of the resolution is to protect civilians and
not to change the regime," he told BBC Radio 4's The World at One.
"Nevertheless we won't be able to protect the civilians in my opinion –
and obviously the Prime Minister's and that of most leaders of the countries
in the region – while Gaddafi remains in place."
In a statement, a Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "We are not going
to go into operational details on military targets.
"Our clear aim is to implement UNSCR 1973 – that means saving lives and
protecting the civilian population of Libya."
The talk of targeting Col Gaddafi also appeared to alarm the Americans, with
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates warning that it could undermine the
cohesion of the international coalition supporting the no-fly zone.
"If we start adding additional objectives then I think we create a
problem in that respect," he said.
"I also think it is unwise to set as specific goals things that you may
or may not be able to achieve."
Shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said Dr Fox's comment was "irresponsible
in many ways" and could harm efforts to harness Arab opinion in favour
of the military effort.
"I support the Government's decision on Libya but I think Liam Fox's
comments are irresponsible in many ways," he wrote on his blog.
"His view that the aim of our military effort is to bring about regime
change is outside what is a very broad UN resolution.
"It is wrong but also counterproductive at a time when we are trying to
maintain a broad coalition, including Arab opinion, to talk in such a way.
"I agree with US Defence Secretary Robert Gates, who said, 'If we start
adding additional objectives then I think we create a problem'.
"Gaddafi is a tyrant, but it is up to the people of Libya to decide what
happens next in their country and not for any single foreign government.
"Our government needs to have one clear policy on this."
He confirmed that he was the Labour figure who told a Sky News reporter that
Dr Fox should be "put back in his box".
The MoD would not be drawn on a report in London's Evening Standard newspaper
that the cruise missile which hit Gaddafi's compound was fired by a British
Trafalgar-class submarine.
"The MoD will not discuss targeting," a spokesman said.
International journalists, who were taken to the scene of a damaged
administration block in the compound by Libyan officials, reported seeing
smoke rising from the three-storey building and pieces of cruise missile
scattered around the area.
About 300 Gaddafi supporters were said to have been in the compound at the
time, but it is not known if any were hurt. It was not clear where Gaddafi
was at the time of the attack.
Meanwhile, Downing Street published a note on the legal advice given by
Attorney General Dominic Grieve which concluded there was "a clear and
unequivocal legal basis for deployment of UK forces and military assets to
achieve the resolution's objectives".
Coalition commanders were assessing the impact today of a second night of
missile attacks and air strikes on Libyan targets.
RAF Tornado GR4 ground attack aircraft made the 3,000-mile round trip from
their base at Marham, only to pull out of their bombing run at the last
minute after civilians were reported in the target area.
Commanders said the Tornadoes would now be deployed to the Italian airbase of
Gioia del Colle, where the Typhoon fighters are already stationed. Four
Tornadoes were seen taking off from Marham earlier.
Gen Lorimer said: "We are satisfied that our attacks and those of our
partners have been highly effective in degrading the Libyan air defence and
command and control capability."
No comments:
Post a Comment