"The targeting policy of Nato and the alliance is absolutely clear," he said. "It is in line with UN resolution 1973 and it is about preventing a loss of civilian life by targeting Gaddafi's war-making machine.
"It is about targeting command and control rather than particular individuals."
In other words, he would have us believe, it was just coincidence that at least according to the Libyans he was in that command-and-control centre on Saturday night.
In the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 Tony Blair sought and was given legal advice by Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General. Exposure of the nature of that advice came as a huge embarrassment.
At some point, it is likely we shall be told what advice the Cabinet obtained this time as to the legal position if Col Gaddafi were to be killed.
But it seems unlikely that the outrage that would undoubtedly pour forth from allies such as Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua would lead to appearances before the International Criminal Court.
The truth is that the United Nations resolution was deliberately worded vaguely precisely to allow this outcome: the allies taking any action short of an occupation that they feel can be justified by the catch-all phrase "all necessary measures to protect civilians", and the Russians and the Chinese attacking them for doing so.
On an earlier occasion, Mr Cameron explicitly said that the UN resolution "does not provide legal authority for action to bring about Gaddafi's removal from power by military means".
But if the civilian population will be safe only once Col Gaddafi has gone for good, as much of Nato believes, how upset would they be if he were "collateral damage"?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario