New Internationalism

Others, such as Phyllis Bennis of the Washington-based think tank International Policy Studies, says the timing of the operation "strengthens the argument that the air strikes are more of a political than a humanitarian intervention," aimed at helping to "re-establish the French presence in Francophone Africa."

She says the interventions in both Libya and Ivory Coast suggest that powerful forces are once again using the UN as an instrument for their own interests, rather than legitimising it as an institution of international law.

"When you have two sides that are defending territory, seeking to take other territory, this is no longer an uprising of a population against a government. It's -- the country is divided."

"Crucial NATO countries like Turkey, like Germany, and others, as well as countries outside of NATO, simply don't agree with the U.S., the Brits, and the French in exactly what the scope of this military attack should be."

"'It remains to be seen whether Ban Ki-moon will actually function as General Ban, with any influence over real-time military decision-making,'" said Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies.

She said the language of the resolution calls for close coordination by the governments participating in military action in Libya, with the secretary general. 'But it remains quite unclear, both from the actual language of the resolution and from statements of the governments carrying out the military actions in Libya, what, if any, the real role of the secretary-general is to be,' she told IPS.

"Beyond the calls for governments to 'coordinate with each other and the secretary-general' on their military actions, the only specific role assigned to him is to report to the Security Council what implementation is underway, said Bennis, author of 'Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today's U.N.'"

Phyllis Bennis says that the action exceeds the rebels' requests and threatens to impose a global power politics frame on the Arab spring, thereby fostering the scourge of war.

"There’s no question that, although the first actual attacks came from several French jets, it’s been the U.S. cruise missiles, fired from ships off the coast of Libya, that have been the opening salvos. And it still is U.S. commanders that are ordering the attacks.

"There are extraordinary, dangerous parallels here, both to the 2003 invasion of Iraq eight years ago, also to the 1991 U.S. war against Iraq, where you have more of a parallel of the U.S. bribing and threatening and punishing other countries to force a vote in the U.N. Security Council to bring a veneer of legality, even though there was no real legitimacy, just as they did this time.

"The official position of the military is we are there to protect civilians. How that’s going to happen if bombing raids continue on Libyan cities is a very big question."

"Phyllis Bennis of the Institute of Policy Studies in Washington...found that 'the Libyan opposition… has made a legitimate demand for international support.'

"Yet she went on to state that, 'Governments, however, are not people, and do not make strategic decisions for humanitarian reasons. Governments do not use scarce resources and most especially do not deploy military force, to achieve humanitarian goals. So the cold strategic calculations of powerful governments cannot be viewed as a legitimate response to the humanitarian needs of Libya’s people or the humanitarian impulses of international civil society.'”