Libya lessons for Cameron

That said, the extent to which Gaddafi’s opponents have taken control in Tripoli is a vindication of coalition policy. The Arab Spring matters here, as Nick Clegg explains on the following page.

As Tripoli slips from the dictator’s grasp, the gradual uprising endorses the decision by David Cameron to build a Nato-led alliance when Gaddafi loyalists were on the brink of carrying out mass genoicde in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi five months ago.

Those who oppose the UK’s continuing involvement in Libya should ask themselves this question: could they have lived with their conscience if Gaddafi’s henchmen had been allowed to slaughter thousands of innocent civilians in Benghazi?

While the continuing violence is regrettable, the consequences would be even more serious if the West had not built an alliance which afforded some protection to the Libyan people – even if the objectives were limited.

By involving the African Union and Arab League, Britain – and others – have at least demonstrated that they have learned some lessons from the aftermath of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.

The latest events also justify Mr Cameron’s refusal to broker a deal with Gaddafi’s odious regime when the civil war appeared intractable.

Yet, assuming Gaddafi’s tyranny ends shortly, Mr Cameron and other leaders cannot just walk away and congratulate themselves for their intervention.

In many respects, their work is only just beginning. For, as Egypt is discovering, the removal of a dictator leaves a power vaccum that some will exploit. New democracies are not formed overnight, despite Britain’s backing for Libya’s National Transitional Council when this body was in its embryonic stage. This takes time. And, in the meantime, the questions pile up: How should Muammar Gaddafi be brought to justice for crimes against humanity? And what should be the fate of the Lockerbie bomber who, frankly, should never have been extradicted back to Libya on health grounds that look even more spurious by the day?