There are various causes of conflict. Conflict refers to a situation of misunderstanding between different parties resulting in disagreement and sometimes confrontation (Koh 2015). When such a case arises, there is a need for intervention to solve the conflict and forge a new way forward preventing the occurrence of the same situation in the future. When a conflict occurs in a nation, for instance, the Libya conflict of 2011, humanitarian intervention was a tool that made efforts to restore peace in Libya by applying humanitarian intervention strategies to deal with the Libya conflict.
Humanitarian intervention in Libya 2011
On 15 February 2011, revolution activities started in Benghazi and spread fast to the neighboring regions. The uprising came after the arrest of Faith Terbil who was a dissident and attorney. Protests pushing for the end of Gaddafi regime spread to many cities across Libya backed up by police crackdown and support from neighbor states of Egypt and Tunisia. Gaddafi regime responded harshly to the protestors including, subjecting civilians to aircraft attack. The Harsh response gave direct orders to the armed forces to brutally kill civilians who were opposing Gaddafi’s regime. The harsh response led to death of many civilians and as a result, top-ranked officials in the government resigned and distanced their involvement in the actions of killing civilians.
On 19 March 2011, a NATO-Led coalition made up of several states including USA, Germany, UK, and France among other states, launched a military intervention in Libya with the primary aim to restore peace in the country by ending Gaddafi’s regime to bring an end to the killing of civilians. In the attempt to stop the attack against civilians, NATO took control of the situation and what followed were military activities against Gaddafi’s government, and the fight finally came to a stop on October because of the death of Muammar Gaddafi. A new government took control effectively. On 27 October, Security Council voted and decided to bring to a halt NATO’s control over military activities in Libya on 31st October.
Actions during the humanitarian intervention
During the 2011 humanitarian intervention and community development initiatives in Libya, different involved sides responded differently to the efforts. For instance, Libya as a state responded to the actions of humanitarian differently. Majority of the citizens were in favor of humanitarian interventions since they had hopes that the response would bring an end the dictatorship of Gaddafi’s regime. The civilians were in support of ending the current administration since the administration was responsible for the killings of many innocent civilians. Some citizens, however, were not in favor of humanitarian intervention since the NATO activities were likely to lead to the murder of more innocent civilians. They would prefer talks rather than confrontation.
The actions of other sectors, for instance, neighboring states of Tunisia and Egypt had vital importance in the efforts of community development initiatives during the humanitarian intervention. Tunisia, for example, gave a hand to the NATO coalition by hosting the refugees who fled from Libya during the war against Gaddafi’s regime. Egypt gave NATO operational bases where it made plans on how to conduct the attacks against Gaddafi forces. There were delegates from neighboring western Africa state which made efforts to hold dialogues between the protestors and the ruling Gaddafi regime. The provision of refugee programs in Tunisia made it easy for NATO forces to evacuate civilians from volatile areas in Libya hence providing a chance to confront Gaddafi’s forces with no fear of killing innocent citizens.
The business community also made some actions during humanitarian intervention in Libya. The decision of the United Nations Security Council on imposing sanctions on Libya had adverse effects in Libya’s economy. There was a negative economic growth which led to the closure of many businesses in the country. Closure of businesses led to unemployment and poor living conditions. For that reason, when NATO started its operations in Libya, the entire business community was in support of ending the Gaddafi regime. The community gave its support by providing relevant information to the NATO and sponsoring community development programs.
Needs-based program
In events that lead to peace-making and peace-building, it is of great importance to come up with a strategy that will effectively realize the desired goals of restoring peace (Paris 2015). A needs-based program aiming to make or build peace will require the involvement of interventions to bring to an end the state of conflict. First, the program will require the identification of the actual conflict, the causes of the conflict and the most suitable strategy that upon its application will result in peace restoration. It becomes very challenging to handle a problem that only little about it is known (Pallister 2015). In that light, it is therefore essential to first gather all the information on the conflict situation.
For effective peace restoration, it is essential to identify the required institutions that will work towards the goal of conflict solving (Adler & Pouliot. 2014). Besides, the peacekeeping program involves the realization of the affected parties by the conflict. It is only after knowing the victims of the conflict that peacemakers decide on peacemaking strategies to implement (Hashmi 2017). Finally, the peace-building program needs the identification of consequences of proposed interventions in the attempt to restore peace (Thakur 2016). Evens that are likely to worsen the situation should not take place.
Conclusion
Humanitarian intervention plays a crucial role in solving conflicts and restoring peace. However, in some cases, the intervention leads to more conflict and ends up worsening the situation (Kuperman 2015). The aim of humanitarian intervention is to end violence and restore peace. While restoring order, there are collateral damages that may include the death of innocent civilians. For that reason, the peacemakers should consider using strategies that pose the minimum possibility of killing innocent citizens (Averre & Davies. 2015). From previous peacemaking programs, lessons can be learned that will help in improving the future peacemaking efforts to perfection.

x

Hi!
I'm Katy

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out