Kosovo and Libya: The Intervention Dilemma

Two interventions show why the use of force to protect civilians is so contested. In 1999, as Serbian forces carried out violence and mass expulsions against Kosovo Albanians, NATO bombed Yugoslavia for 78 days without Security Council authorisation, because Russia and China would have vetoed it.

An independent commission later called the intervention 'illegal but legitimate', highlighting a gap between law and morality. In 2011, as Muammar Gaddafi's forces threatened the rebel-held city of Benghazi, the Security Council passed Resolution 1973 authorising 'all necessary measures' to protect civilians, often described as the first military authorisation grounded in R2P principles.

A NATO-led operation followed, and Gaddafi was overthrown and killed. Critics, including Russia, China, Brazil and India, argued that a protection mandate had become regime change; supporters said it prevented a massacre. Libya's later instability and the Council's subsequent paralysis over Syria suggest that how one intervention is conducted can affect the next.