Aljazeera: Responsibility to protect or right to meddle?

[pampango]

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/03/2011324121253913547.html

The week-old bombing campaign in Libya has prompted a debate over what's known as "responsibility to protect," or R2P, the convention that the world has a responsibility to prevent war crimes and protect vulnerable populations.

Supporters of the no-fly zone over Libya like to call it a humanitarian operation, and argue that days of sorties - mostly by American, British and French planes - have prevented wider civilian casualties. Refugees International, for example, praised the no-fly zone as "international intervention to protect the people of Libya."

Critics have reached exactly the opposite conclusion: The Chinese government said on Tuesday that the no-fly zone would lead to a "humanitarian disaster," and warned against "causing even more civilian casualties through the use of armed force." (China was one of five UN Security Council members to abstain from voting on resolution 1973, which authorised the no-fly zone and bombing campaign.)

Gaddafi's offensive against the rebels in eastern Libya has undoubtedly killed civilians - and he has vowed to go "house to house," killing protesters - but critics say Libya's civil war is ultimately a Libyan issue, and that the "responsibility to protect" goes too far in giving powerful countries a mandate to intervene in the affairs of others.