المستخلص: |
The management of the Libyan crisis was somehow swift and accompanied by political and security fears of the post- Gaddafi future. NATO played a major role due to diplomatic and military coordination between America and Europe, which has limited military capabilities. There are several strategic motives for the Euro-American intervention in the crisis, such as the country’s geo-political and energy significance as well as the legal factor of the UN resolution 1973. The questions raised here arc: Docs this foreign interference aim to address a marginal issue? Is it management of a crisis in the heart of strategic Euro-American interaction with the Southern Mediterranean area to uncover permanent cross- Atlantic dimensions of the EU Mediterranean security? In conclusion, it seems that the current shift would oblige the Europeans to develop their Euro-Mediterranean policies by putting forward proposals for cooperation. On the other hand, the Americans would have to make a new compromise stage with potential political players. As such powers play a direct part in Libya and possibly in Syria, Washington prefers to be present in these shifts, instead of only watching, or even receiving strategic surprises.
|