ABSTRACT

Energy security is a fundamental and global commercial priority. Moreover, as industrialization has
expanded across the globe, energy has become a key good, the movement of which ties together the
commercial and economic interests of a significant majority of states. Oil remains the most important
source for global energy production and nearly two-thirds of that resource lies in the Middle East of
which Libya is a part. Preserving the global supply of uninterrupted, affordable energy was an explicit or
implicit foreign policy interest of the United States, a country with historical and presently high levels of
energy consumption. The recent US supported NATO-led intervention against the regime of Muammar
Gaddafi in Libya has been a considerable source of contention among many, scholars and statesmen
alike in the international system, with many openly supporting military action.The application of
Responsibility to Protect (R2P) to Libya has generated an unmatched spike in commentary.This study
examined how the promotion and protection of oil interest implicated the United States government
support for the NATO-led humanitarian intervention on the resolution of the Libyan conflict. The study is guided by three research questions: is the United States Government strategic oil interest implicated in regime change military intervention in Libya?; did the United States Government fail to exercise the R2P United Nations mandate to protect the citizens in the Libyan conflict?; did the United States Government led NATO military intervention violate the United Nations mandate on the resolution of the
Libyan conflict? Using secondary sources and qualitative descriptive method in our data collection and
analysis, we hypothesized that; the United States Government strategic oil interest is implicated in her
regime change military intervention in Libya; the United States Government failed to exercise the R2P
United Nations mandate to protect the citizens in the Libyan conflict; and the United States Government
led NATO military intervention violated the United Nations mandate on the resolution of the Libyan
conflict. Findings based on thepower theory also known as Political Realismrevealed thatWestern
powers led by the US viewed Gaddafi as an obstacle to their imperial strategies for yet another reason:
standing in the way of their age old policies of divide and rule. Also the intervention in Libya reveals
general weaknesses and shortcomings in the international system of collective security, as during the
intervention, the intervening forces constantly moved beyond the strict mandate they had been given
by resolution 1973.Finding equally revealed that the United States capitalized on the phrase “all
necessary means/forces” as an alibi to revert to regime change instead of civilian protection which was
their main reason of intervening in the first instance. The study recommended among other things
that,the US and the rest of the world should be careful about where and when they intervene militarily,
but dictators should also be on notice as “all necessary measures” in a United Nations Security Council
resolution likely means military intervention and regime change. Also The United Nations should equally
rise up to the challenges of international security so as not to give room for some Western countries
who hide under the pretext of implementing UN resolutions, to pursue their private and most times
selfish economic and political interests

You either get what you want or your money back. T&C Apply

Talk to us right now: (+234)906-451-7926 (Call/WhatsApp)

---