Ann Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)

I welcome this, my first opportunity as a new Dáil Member, to make my contribution to the international debate about our concern for the embattled people of Libya. I thank the people of Carlow-Kilkenny for returning me to the 31st Dáil.

Abraham Lincoln, who is commonly referred to as the father of democracy, once said:

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Libya today.

I welcome the adoption by the United Nations Security Council of Resolution 1973 which demanded the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against and abuse of civilians, and decided to establish a no-fly zone over Libya in order to help protect civilians. We support the implementation of Resolution 1973 in a manner that is proportionate, targeted and avoids civilian casualties.

Colonel Gadaffi has ruled Libya for over 40 years. An uprising against him began last month after the long-time leaders of neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt were toppled. Political stability in the Arab world appears to be progressively breaking up. Over three weeks ago, the people of Libya took to the streets in protest against Colonel Gadaffi and his oppressive regime, asking for new rights and freedoms. There were hopeful signs a better future awaited them, like elsewhere in the free world. Unfortunately, Colonel Gadaffi responded by attacking his own people. He has brought the full might of armed forces to bear on his own people, backed up by mercenaries. Initially, the world watched, but, thankfully, it then moved.

The overthrowing of such regimes by popular uprisings has been welcomed but much more is now required. The vacuum that is opening up could easily be filled by newer forms of oppression instead of new forms of parliamentary democracy. Permitting a Libyan crisis to descend into a massacre by the strongest over the weaker is an anomaly of acceptable international law and a distortion of the basic principles of human rights. I echo the humanitarian thoughts of Irish people in our hope that the peaceful needs of the Libyan people will be quickly met. We support the international community's demands for an end to the violence, access for international human rights monitors and the lifting of restrictions on the media.

The international community should be behind those movements that are seeking to set up democratic institutions. However, we should remember the tragic lesson of the past that a "one size fits all" democracy is not the solution. We must recognise there is not a perfect model of democracy for export, but a form of democracy that has a relevance to the communities that have paid such a high price for their freedom. This time, the UN Security Council has given its formal backing, the Arab League has asked for intervention and the people of Libya are on side. However, the principal strategy given consideration at the level of the Security Council appears to be one with military implications and may not be free from the influence of the economic interests.

It was only a number of years ago that Colonel Gadaffi was supposedly brought in from the cold, with an agreement that he give up weapons of mass destruction. Little was made of the appalling human rights violations against his own people of which he was guilty.

Through the UN Security Council, the West must now ensure that all kinds of humanitarian aid will reach the besieged citizens in the heart of the areas of popular uprising in Tripoli and Benghazi. As part of the UN resolution it was reported that these forces had discussed the progress of the no-fly zone and the protection of civilians during military action with leaders of the transitional national council. On the coalition's fifth day of operations witnesses in the rebel-held city of Misrata said pro-Gadaffi snipers had been firing on a hospital. Nothing is sacred in war. When there is a shift in war from peacekeeping to peacemaking, there is sometimes a very fine line regarding the protection of innocent civilians.

If we, as a nation, really care about international law and the relevance of the United Nations we should press for action now before more lives are lost, on a scale that can be clearly foreseen. When that job is done the military intervention will be over. Any regime change should be for the Libyan people to achieve. The international military intervention in Libya is not about bombing for democracy, or for Colonel Gadaffi's head, rather legally, morally, politically and militarily it has only one justification, namely, protecting the country's people from the kind of murderous harm that Colonel Gadaffi inflicted on unarmed protesters.

My contribution today is not meant to be empty rhetoric. I believe the Government should draw the attention of the United Nations towards addressing the unsettling change of regimes in this region, in the interest of re-establishing stability. As a nation, we should encourage the UN to look now into oppression in Bahrain, Yemen, Palestine, etc., across the Middle East. We should say now is the opportune time to re-establish a Middle East conference in order to seek an agreed resolution for long-term security and peace in that region.

The response to the Libyan crisis by the international community, the EU and Ireland has been swift and decisive. Above all, we must continue to support the Libyan people in their right to be free from the extremely oppressive Gadaffi regime. The solution will not be a military one. What is needed now are commitments to help build a future for the Libyan people that is based on a political framework.

See this speech in context