For weeks now arrive daily dramatic news from Libya. In a script known as the winds and the unofficial official language, it sketches out the information and the counter, you brush up on old ideological paraphernalia to justify a possible military action or condemn it a priori as an imperialist war. While discussing "no fly zone", "no drive zone", the senior executives of the NATO begin to study plans, diplomats will embark on consultations and feverish attempts. There is first given the humanitarian rhetoric, the "genocide", the parallels with Kosovo or Rwanda, the non-existent mass graves, or carpet bombing against civilians. A barrage required to prepare public opinion to use weapons. Those of Aavaz then unleashed their forces up to 600 thousand telematics send email to the United Nations calling for the imposition of "no fly zone." Mica a joke, as it also acknowledges the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, to impose it should bomb Libyan anti-aircraft artillery. And then if you start with the "no fly zone" does not go where it ends, most likely in a new quagmire of Afghanistan, if anything, the "no fly zone" had never been intended to protect civilians. to unsuspecting cyberattivisti Perhaps this is not known. While international diplomacy, the press and the public is engaged with the dramatic events of Libya, Côte d'Ivoire is taking another war - which makes us wonder again about the risks and dilemmas of humanitarian intervention - and that France had already used the military force ("raid targeted" included). E its President Sarkozy, after unilaterally recognized the provisional government of Benghazi, proposes "targeted strikes." Dall'Eliseo warm up the muscles in an attempt to play, after the failure of creature of the French president - the 'Mediterranean Union, the role of playmaker in the region, bypassing the EU, whose foreign ministers were bringing together within hours of its announcement in Brussels. This declaration, made in parallel with the recognition of the rebel government, in fact the center of gravity shifts from the hypothetical defense of civilian populations, the deployment is near one of the conflicting parties in a civil war. What is sold as a humanitarian intervention can be turned into support for a regime change, thus precluding any potential role of mediation by the person who draws close to one of the warring parties. In this turbulent and confusing picture, however, be stressed that many have denied the possibility to act without UN backing, but nothing more. Yet even a think-tank certainly not pacifist or "Left" like the International Crisis Group has changed its mind: it offers over the "no fly zone", but is now seeking a bilateral ceasefire and a negotiated international . Apart from the proposal for international mediation of Chavez, that of the president of the Maldives to a peacekeeping force of UN peacekeepers, and the adoption - with some year or so too late - of economic sanctions and arms embargo, no other step, however, was done to avoid giving the word as a last resort to arms. why it is urgent to launch a proposal for a possible peaceful and diplomatic solution, which could take over the country two Mediterranean shores, with the dispatch of a mission of independent mediators, the UN could be activated by a resolution of the Security Council or directly through the General Assembly, using the Uniting for Peace resolution. Aims to empower the international mediation and send a contingent of UN peacekeepers to monitor the cease-fire, humanitarian assistance, investigate the crimes committed in the conflict, if necessary by armed police. In short, rather than yield to the suggestion of force, to support or not use, would be obligatory to discuss how to bring peace to Libya through adherence to legality, international law and diplomacy. The only possible way.
