U.S. and Allies Weigh Libya No-Fly Zone

NYtimes

February 27, 2011

By JOHN M. BRODER

WASHINGTON — Obama administration officials held talks on Sunday with European and other allied governments as they readied plans for the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya to prevent further killings of civilians by forces loyal to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.
Further increasing international pressure on Colonel Qaddafi, the Libyan leader, Italy suspended a 2008 treaty with Libya that includes a nonaggression clause, a move that could allow it to take part in future peacekeeping operations in Libya or enable the use of its military bases in any possible intervention.
“We signed the friendship treaty with a state, but when the counterpart no longer exists — in this case the Libyan state — the treaty cannot be applied,” Italy’s foreign minister, Franco Frattini, said Sunday in a television interview.
White House, State Department and Pentagon officials held talks with their European and NATO counterparts about how to proceed in imposing flight restrictions over Libya. A senior administration official said Sunday that no decision had been made, and expressed caution that any decision on a no-fly zone would have to be made in consultations with allies.
A diplomat at the United Nations said that any such action would require further debate among the 15 nations of the Security Council, which was unlikely to act unless there was a significant increase in state-sponsored violence in Libya, including the use of aircraft against civilians.
Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary general, was scheduled to meet with President Obama on Monday afternoon at the White House to discuss the deteriorating situation in Libya.
Obama administration officials said Sunday that they were also discussing whether the American military could disrupt communications to prevent Colonel Qaddafi from broadcasting in Libya. In addition, the administration was looking at whether the military could be used to set up a corridor in neighboring Tunisia or Egypt to assist refugees.
“There hasn’t been discussion that I’m aware of related to military intervention beyond that, and a discussion of that nature would have to begin at the U.N.,” a senior administration official said. But, the official added, “I wouldn’t say we’ve ruled anything out, either.”
Italy’s treaty with Libya, signed by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in August 2008, calls on Italy to pay Libya $5 billion over 20 years in reparations for its colonial past there. In return, Libya pledged to help block the flow of illegal immigrants to Italy and grant favorable treatment for Italian companies seeking to do business in Libya.
But the treaty also contains a nonaggression clause that some analysts said complicated Italy’s position in the event of international military intervention in Libya. In it, Italy pledges not to use “direct or indirect” military force against Libya, or to allow the use of its territory “in any hostile act against Libya.”
There are several United States and NATO bases in Italy that presumably would be staging areas for any action against Libya, including the United States Sixth Fleet base near Naples. After the treaty was signed, Italy had to explain to NATO that it would respect its multilateral international treaties.
An Italian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Maurizio Massari, noted that Italy had suspended the treaty, not revoked it, and would evaluate how to proceed as the conflict in Libya evolved.
At the United Nations, there was no formal discussion about Libya on Sunday, as diplomats weighed possible next steps and digested the Security Council resolutions passed Saturday night that imposed an arms embargo and economic sanctions on Libya.
An American official, who discussed United Nations deliberations on the condition that he not be identified, said the Security Council had moved more quickly on Libya than on almost any issue in recent years. The body is poised to take further steps, if warranted, like “a rapid deterioration, a significant uptick in violence,” he said. “In terms of big ideas like a no-fly zone, if the international community is ready, and there is a need to impose a no-fly zone or authorize use of force, that would require another whole debate and resolution.”