If NATOs mission in Libya was to protect civilians why did they ignore boats load of refugees from Libya?

Question

During the Libya conflict taken by a UN resolution of a No fly zone and Whatever means to protect civilians( effectively used by NATO for regime change and bombing some civilians to do this) there were some African migrants in Libya who fought with the Libyan army and were trapped as the rebels took over. Since the rebels known for their brutality and revenge tactics the Africans tried to flee Libya in boats in panic with very little water or food

This was a time a whole fleet of armada of NATO war ships ( including Aircraft carriers, Battle ships, Cruisers were blocking the libyan coast with their big guns and big fire power and Libya was being bombed round the clock by Nato planes.The Naval Blockade did allow some rebel ships to bring guns and ammunition to rebels but with their permission

One refugee ship with 62 refugees that left Tripoli were spotted by NATO ship and aircraft while at see and despite aking for help no help was given to this ship. The refugees starved to death till only 12 were left and came back to the Libyan coast (to be arrested by the victorious rebels and ...?)

Human rights Rights asked the question from NATO why they didnt help? They tried to avoid the question and finally said said they didn't know

Is this correct? The way the Naval and Air blockade was enforced with all of NATOs modern technology (Satellite images, electronic surveillance, Air surveillance etc) even a fish couldn't have got through from the Libyan coast at that time without NATO knowing.

Keir · Accepted Answer

from what i know of this case it seems to be a bureaucratic error. NATO dropped food supplies over the refugees once but for some reason never went back for them.

read the guardian

Meow Meow · Answer

Every time I see people who are confused about these kinds of situation in which our governments refuse to help people when they are actually in a humanitarian intervention, I feel really sad. Please don't get offended by this but it is a little naive and innocent to believe that the reason why NATO got involved in Libya was actually to help the civilians...well the thing is that they probably don't give a rat's *** about these civilians. I'm really sorry to tell you that, unfortunately, there is no such thing as altruism in international relations. Countries never help each other simply out of sympathy or justice, they "help" each other because they are motivated by national interest. Even these aids, donations, and other kinds of assistance are all driven by interests. Consider the case of Rwanda, why didn't the US and its NATO allies react? Clinton himself stated that the US will not intervene because there is no benefit for the US in Rwanda. Consider the case of Darfur, in Sudan. The security council failed to pass a resolution to intervene because China and Russia had interest in Sudan. There are sooooo many other cases similar to this, and the operation in Libya is just the tip of the iceberg.
Forgive me but I think as long as you know that NATO is not a humanitarian organization, I don't even think it is necessary to tell you its motivations behind its operation in Libya, it is anything but to free the Libyans from their terror regime. You are a nice person who think that international organization has the responsibility to help people in need, but unfortunately our world does not work that way...Sorry.

? · Answer

It seems really stupid in retrospect,  but the NATO ships may not have been equipped to take on civilians. I can't say i agree with the decision as Nato was morally obligated to help those civilians in need, especially if they were starving.

Trending News

If NATOs mission in Libya was to protect civilians why did they ignore boats load of refugees from Libya?

3 Answers