On Nato’s Intervention In Libya: Legality&Legitimacy Of Nato’s Air Strikes And Arms Supports

The purpose of this thesis was to assess the legality and legitimacy of the airstrikes against ground targets and the arms supports to the Libyan rebels, carried outby the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), in the2011Libyan civil war, asthe author of this research acknowledged that international laws should always berespected as the legal basis for all interstate affairs, especially military interventioninto a sovereign state.Qualitative analysis was used in this research: legal documents and dictionarieswere utilized to assess the legality and legitimacy of NATO’s air strikes and armssupports, and then evidences from various sources were used to back up theassessments on each subject.In this thesis, the literature review section firstly covered the history ofinternational law regarding the use of force in international relations and found outthat: under international rules today, particularly under the Charter of the UnitedNations, it was illegal to use force in interstate affairs unless either it was for self-defence or the use of force was the collective measure of the United Nations. Theauthor then looked into two opposing ideas regarding the NATO’s militaryintervention in Libya in2011: one claiming that the operation was legal and onecondemning that it is against international law. The pro-intervention idea argued that:because the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSC RES)1973wascarefully crafted to allow the enforcement of the no-fly zone upon Libya, the bombingof the Libyan Armed Forces loyal to Gaddafi was legal. Meanwhile, the anti-intervention idea condemned that NATO air strikes and arms supports to the Libyanrebels were against the UNSC RES1970and UNSC RES1973, therefore NATO’sintervention was illegal under international law. However, the author of this thesisrecognized that: both of the2ideas missed the key point regarding the legality andlegitimacy of the intervention:“civilian protection”, and argued that the answer to thelegality and legitimacy of NATO’s operation lay in the civilian status of the Libyanrebels (were the rebels civilians?) and the protection of civilians (did the air strikesand arms supports protect Libyan civilians?). The second chapter of thesis assessed the legality of NATO’s air strikes againstLibyan ground targets. In this chapter, the author based on the legal documents,dictionaries and evidences collected from various sources to argue that: the Libyanrebels were not civilians but combatants of an armed force. Therefore, NATO’s airstrikes against Gaddafi loyalists could not be considered protecting civilians, butinterfering into the Libyan civil war and siding with one of the party to the conflict.The author concluded that the air strikes were against UNSC RES1973and theCharter of the United Nations, and therefore illegal under international laws.The third chapter assessed the legitimacy of NATO’s air strikes in the Libyancivil war. In this chapter, the author argued that the key to the legitimacy of NATO airstrikes was the effectiveness of the bombing in protecting Libyan civilians fromthreats of attack, as mandated by UNSC RES1973. However, the evidences collectedshowed that: the air strikes were not only failed to protect civilians from the2opposing forces of the Libyan civil war, but also caused severe civilian death tolls.Therefore the author concluded that NATO’s bombing of Libya was illegitimateunder international laws.The forth and last main chapter of the thesis covered both the legality and thelegitimacy of NATO’s arms supports to the Libyan rebels. Regarding the legality ofthe arms transfers, the author argued that because the rebels were not civilian,supporting them with weapons from outside Libya was violating the arms embargoimposed by UNSC RES1970. Though UNSC RES1973allowed measuresnotwithstanding the arms embargo, the arms supports was not for the purpose ofcivilian protection and therefore was violation to both of the Resolutions and theCharter of the United Nations, therefore was illegal under international laws.Regarding the legitimacy of the arms transfers, the author argued that the weaponssupplied to the Libyan rebels were not only ineffective in protecting the civilians butalso could cause more risk to them, therefore the arms supports were illegitimateunder international laws.The conclusion of the thesis was: NATO’s military intervention in Libya in2011was not a humanitarian intervention; NATO’s air strikes against Libyan groundtargets and NATO’s arms supports to the rebels were both illegal and illegitimateunder international laws. The air strikes were illegal because they violated the United Nations Security Council Resolution1973and the Charter of the United Nations. Theair strikes were illegitimate because they not only failed to protect civilians fromthreats of attack but also caused severe civilian casualties. The arms supports wereillegal under international law because they violated United Nations Security CouncilResolution1970and1973, as well as the Charter of the United Nations. The armssupports were illegitimate because they were not only ineffective in civilian protectionbut also could cause more risks to the safety of Libyan civilians.The research was a contribution to the research of military intervention andinternational law. It reversed the common belief that UNSC RES1973was carefullycrafted to legally authorize to air strikes and arms supports, and academicallysupported the claims that NATO’s military intervention into Libya was both illegaland illegitimate. Therefore, this thesis has proved that the military operation in Libyawas not a humanitarian intervention, and must be condemned under international lawin order to prevent an intervention like such from becoming a negative precedence ininternational affairs. The research also called for further research to find out the realreasons for the NATO’s military intervention into Libya in the year2011.