With the continuing military intervention in Libya, it has long become clear that the actions of the coalition are not only instigating and maintaining a no fly zone, but directly aiding the Transitional National Council. While this wasn’t the intention of the original UN resolution – Russia would have vetoed such an explicit interference in internal affairs, even if UN security rules allowed it – it was certainly so broadly worded that almost any action could be allowed. So it is legal, but is it the right thing to do?

There’s certainly precedent to such an action. The Kosovo war would be the most obvious example. After several horrible massacres of ethnic Albanians by Yugoslav forces, crimes which later came to trial at the Hague, NATO intervened. They provided both strategic bombing and close air support for the KLA, as well as supplying them with intelligence and arms. The NATO campaign lasted 2 months and eventually caused the president of Yugoslavia, Slobodan Milosevic, to offer peace.

The campaign certainly helped prevent further massacres by the Yugoslav army, and eventually resulted in Kosovo becoming an autonomous state in Yugoslavia. But the NATO bombing campaign resulted in the deaths of up to 1500 civilians as well as the destruction of massive swathes of the Yugoslav economy. Several members of the KLA were later indicted by the ICC, with their leader Ramush Haradinaj currently facing a retrial for war crimes, after his first trial was marred with witness intimidation.

It may well be too much to expect that the opposition in Libya would be paragons of virtue, but already they have shown a dark side. There have been reports, which have been confirmed by both rebel figures and independent journalists, that many suspected Gaddafi supporters have been summarily executed by the rebels. Whilst you could argue that in the situation it may be justified, these people have not been afforded a trial. Instead, they have been executed purely on an accusation of a political belief – the very crime for which they rightly rally against Gaddafi.

Even if these fears, which have not been helped by reports of atrocities against sub-Saharan Africans, are unfounded, there is still a major problem to be addressed. The Council currently seems completely incapable of overthrowing Gaddafi, a man who is universally despised and is being bombed by the best that the West has to offer. How will they maintain control after they have been installed in power?

In democracies, stability comes directly from the civil society. The groups that people form in order to further a common goal, such as trade unions, are the very foundations that support democracy. Gaddafi has followed the dictator handbook in ensuring that all possible groups are banned, declaring that all such groups are unnecessary under his people’s committees.

If a democracy is imposed without it, it can lead one of two ways. With direct foreign backing, it can lead to the situation we see in Iraq. Lacking groups of mutual interest, parties and factions instead form around religious or ethnic commonalities, leading to violence and eventually war or a power vacuum. Without it, the government is forced to impose itself to maintain unity and prevent violence. This leads to a growth in the security forces and eventually, a dictatorship, as in most of post-colonial Africa.

We should stop picking sides and enforce the neutral no-fly zone. We must bring together both parties, as well as other well-respected and well-qualified Libyans, to the table, leading to a referendum and a smooth transition to democracy. If we continue this intervention, we will prevent the people of Libya from forming the stable democracy they want and need. The people of Libya have the power to choose their own destiny. They must be allowed to.