Four reasons why NATO's actions in Libya aren't a modern 'crusade'

In the run-up to military operations over Libya, and since, NATO and the West have been criticized for acting immorally, if not illegally, with an eye to seizing control of Libya’s oil riches. The following four points show that nothing could be farther from the truth.

4. NATO’s actions are not just morally justifiable, but legal.

The last time NATO intervened from the air to protect suffering Muslim populations from atrocities – in 1999 over Kosovo – the actions were morally justifiable. As then UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated at the time, “It is indeed tragic that diplomacy has failed, but there are times when the use of force may be legitimate for the pursuit of peace.”

This time around, NATO’s actions are both legitimate and unequivocally legal. They are undertaken for a humanitarian cause with no ounce of association with the Christian crusading of a bygone era. Critics of NATO’s intervention would do well to think again.

Dr. Brooke Smith-Windsor is Canada’s Senior National Representative at the NATO Defense College in Rome. The views expressed are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of the Government of Canada or NATO.

4 of 4
You've read 3 of 3 free articles. Subscribe to continue.
CSM logo

Why is Christian Science in our name?

Our name is about honesty. The Monitor is owned by The Christian Science Church, and we’ve always been transparent about that.

The Church publishes the Monitor because it sees good journalism as vital to progress in the world. Since 1908, we’ve aimed “to injure no man, but to bless all mankind,” as our founder, Mary Baker Eddy, put it.

Here, you’ll find award-winning journalism not driven by commercial influences – a news organization that takes seriously its mission to uplift the world by seeking solutions and finding reasons for credible hope.

Explore values journalism About us