‘We could not stand by as Colonel Gaddafi murdered his own people..…That’s why I said to the Prime Minister that it was right to take part in this international action…backed by the UN mandate…not a mandate for regime change…and that is the basis on which we are acting’ Ed Miliband 2011
Just to back up David on Miliband’s comments on Libya blaming Cameron for deaths of migrants.
Miliband fully backed the UN mandated mission to bomb Libya which was intended to protect the civilians from Gaddafi’s attack…he talked of rebuilding Libya but only of a Libya that was peaceful…not as we find it now in a civil war where reconstruction is all but impossible…does he now back boots on the ground as the only real solution? If not what does he suggest? As he said “The [UN] resolution is about our responsibility to protect the Libyan people—no more, no less…. we cannot afford mission creep” I doubt very much that he backed further military action…in other words if Cameron had wanted to take further military action (and is that just the UK?…impossible) to stabilise Libya post Gaddafi Miliband wouldn’t have backed him….so his position now is hypocritical to say the least.
Guido has checked and Miliband has only mentioned Libya once in a press release since 2013….. ‘It is inconceivable that Miliband’s Blair-booing Labour Party would have voted to put the troops on the ground needed to bolster any post-conflict settlement and restore order. Vague empty words about planning are worthless and Miliband’s blocking of a decisive Western intervention (“standing up to Obama”) in Syria only added to the refugee crisis in the region. Labour’s lack of support for boots on the ground – as advocated by Tony Blair – added to the regional chaos.’
Curious here how there is little outrage from the Left about Miliband’s comments…surely on a scale much more offensive than Fallon’s comment that Miliband had stabbed his brother in the back…..despite everybody knowing and admitting he had.
Listening to the Today programme and the BBC’s Norman Smith gave us the benefit of his thoughts on the matter….rather than a critique of Miliband it turned out to be an attack on the Tories claiming they are opportunistically using this to attack Miliband!…I paraphrase…
This is not about policy but about character…Miliband’s….the Tories are saying this shows Miliband not fit to be Prime Minister.
Miliband’s comments were seized on by the Conservatives…a classic election row…maybe Labour should have worded the accusation more carefully to avoid the charge that Cameron bears some direct responsibility.
Worded it more carefully?…you can bet they fully intended to create the impression that Cameron is responsible for the deaths in the Med….it is quite clear it has been carefully worded to accuse Cameron of failing Libya and hence helping to cause the migration that results in so many deaths:
‘In Libya, Labour supported military action to avoid the slaughter Gaddafi threatened in Benghazi. But since the action, the failure of post conflict planning has become obvious. David Cameron was wrong to assume that Libya’s political culture and institutions could be left to evolve and transform on their own.
What we have seen in Libya is that when tensions over power and resource began to emerge, they simply reinforced deep seated ideological and ethnic fault lines in the country, meaning the hopes of the revolutionary uprisings quickly began to unravel. The tragedy is that this could have been anticipated.
It should have been avoided. And Britain could have played its part in ensuring the international community stood by the people of Libya in practice rather than standing behind the unfounded hopes of potential progress only in principle.’
At least Nick Robinson recognises it for what it is…a Labour smear…a manufactured row..
Remember Gaddafi, when he was alive, warned of the mass migration heading towards Europe…so not something created by Cameron’s (and other’s) intervention in Libya…the problem already existed.
Miliband is getting exactly what he wanted, headlines that smear Cameron….and the BBC is at the forefront of providing him witht that…
Ed Miliband is to accuse David Cameron and other world leaders of failing to “stand by” Libya, contributing in part to the crisis in the Mediterranean.
The Labour leader, who backed UK military action in Libya in 2011, will criticise “failures in post-conflict planning” and say the current refugee situation should have been anticipated.
Note that comment about Miliband backing military action in 2011 in Libya……so what did he then do to ensure Libya didn’t become a failed state? What were his ideas and input on ‘post conflict planning’? Remind me BBC. Why not ask him?
This is what he said in 2011….
‘We could not stand by as Colonel Gaddafi murdered his own people..…That’s why I said to the PM that it was right to take part in this international action…backed by the UN mandate…not a mandate for regime change…and that is the basis on which we are acting’
It seems he had little to say about reconstruction in Libya in 2011 even as Cameron spoke of Libyan reconstruction….
“If we had not acted, we would have been spending recent months not talking about the progress of our action in Libya but wringing our hands over the slaughter in Benghazi, as we did after Bosnia,” he said.
This is what Cameron said at the time..
David Cameron told Parliament that the UK’s “full diplomatic presence” was moving back to the capital, but he also sounded a note of caution.
The prime minister said it was vital that Libya was re-constructed by its own people, rather than foreign governments and agencies taking charge.
Libya is “fully capable of paying for its own reconstruction”, Mr Cameron told the House of Commons.
“Of course there is a role for foreign advice, help and support. But we don’t want to see an army of foreign consultants driving around in 4x4s giving the impression this is something done to the Libyans, rather than done by them.”
Following the unfreezing of Libyan assets, he also confirmed that RAF aircraft had flown in “hundreds of millions of dinars of Libyan banknotes” to the country.
Last week, a summit in Paris agreed to release £9bn ($15bn) in withheld assets to help the country’s economy to function properly.
Miliband was absolutely behind Cameron, or rather the UN, and fully discussed the issues with him concerning this UN mission…
Edward Miliband: The right hon. and learned Gentleman has huge expertise in this area and he makes an important point. This is a very important moment for multilateralism because a UN resolution has been passed without opposition at the Security Council. This is a real test of the international community and its ability to carry through not just our intentions but the intentions and values of the United Nations. He is completely right about that.
I was talking about proportionality, which is the third test of the responsibility to protect. It is right to say that our targeting strategy and that of our allies—this is something that the Prime Minister and I have discussed.
It is hard to define success at this point, except to say that we have a clear UN resolution before us on the protection of the Libyan people, and that we must seek to implement that resolution. That is the best criterion for success that we have, for now. No doubt the Government will want to build on that as the campaign unfolds.
That takes me on to the third part of my speech, which is about not just defining the mission but ensuring that there is clarity as it moves forward. There are a number of questions and challenges that the Government must seek to answer in the days ahead. In particular, there are four areas that require clarity: clarity about the forces and command structure involved; clarity about the mandate; clarity about our role in it and the limits; and most difficult of all, clarity about the endgame.
We must be clear about the mandate of the UN resolution. We all want to see Colonel Gaddafi gone, and the Prime Minister repeated that today. None of us, however, should be under any illusions or in any doubt about the terms of what was agreed. The resolution is about our responsibility to protect the Libyan people—no more, no less.
The House should be clear about the degree of difficulty of what we are attempting in securing a coalition from beyond western powers to support intervention in another, north African, state, so we cannot afford mission creep, and that includes in our public pronouncements.
As the Prime Minister said, in principle it must be for the Libyan people to determine the shape of their future.
The resolution is clear that this is not about an army of occupation. The Prime Minister said on Friday that it was not about boots on the ground.
The argument that we do not know the precise sequence of events that will unfold is not a good argument for inaction.
It is essential that both we and multilateral institutions prepare for the peace, whatever form that might take. Indeed, alongside the responsibility to protect is the responsibility to rebuild. I am sure that is something that the Government will be urgently undertaking. It is imperative that they do.
So what since that speech in 2011 did Miliband do to ensure that the government helped to rebuild Libya after having backed so assiduously the bombing campaign and having said…’As the Prime Minister said, in principle it must be for the Libyan people to determine the shape of their future.’
Miliband of course had no idea that Libya would turn in on itself and make reconstruction almost impossible, and so why does he now insist Cameron should have been blessed with this particular insight?…so when he talks of rebuilding Libya it has to be seen in the context that he meant a ‘peaceful’ Libya….has he since made any statements about how to deal with the violence in Libya or how to rebuild Libya whilst it is going in? Does he support boots on the ground which is the only real solution?
Let’s hear it…let’s hear the BBC ask the question.
Nicola Sturgeon 
