London, March 23: A majority of UK lawmakers are increasingly worried about the scale of Britain’s involvement in the Libyan invasion despite overwhelmingly backing Britain’s role.
Cabinet ministers are facing mounting pressure to set out limits of UK’s involvement and explain their eventual exit strategy.
But, Nick Harvey, the Armed Forces minister poured cold water on the initial backing given to the invasion strategy at the House of Commons, saying “we don’t know how long this is going to go on for.”
He was responding to the question of how long Britain would be involved in the military intervention in the North African country, three days into the invasion.
MPs are increasingly worried that the UK would be “sucked in” to a prolonged conflict.
The sense of uncertainty was enhanced after it was emerged that Britain and France were split over a plan for a NATO military alliance to take over command of military operations when the US reduces its involvement.
Furthermore, a war of words has erupted between military commanders and politicians over whether Libyan despotic ruler Muammar Qaddafi could be targeted directly by chance.
Qaddafi, himself, defiantly appeared on state television yesterday, addressing supporters from a compound in Tripoli that had been bombed by the Western alliance’s war machine.
“We will not surrender … we will defeat them,” he told the crowds. “We are ready for the fight, whether it will be a short or a long one.”
Qaddafi’s defiant speech appeared to undermine the West’s propaganda campaign by which it claimed air strikes were having “very real effect” on the Libya regime and that a no-fly zone was being maintained.
Meanwhile, the head of US troops said Qaddafi loyalists were continuing to attack what he described as “rebels and civilians”, especially in and around the city of Misurata.
In Britain, reports had it that that patrolling the no-fly zone is costing the taxpayer about £3.2 million a day, before a weapon is fired.
Rory Stewart, a conservative MP and former diplomat, said that ministers should ensure that Britain’s involvement was strictly limited to enforcing a no-fly zone, and avoid being dragged into the country’s internal conflict.
“We have not declared war on Qaddafi and we should not declare war on Qaddafi,” he said. “Do not get sucked into Libya.”
Mark Lancaster, a Tory MP, said ministers should push for a new United Nations agreement on Libya’s future. “I fear that we have no clear exit at the moment in Libya,” he said. “That is no reason not to go in, but I fear that we will need further UN resolutions before we see the end to the situation.”
John Baron, another Tory backbencher, told the BBC that ministers had not explained how the mission would unfold.
“What is the exit strategy?” he said. “If this is not known, we risk being drawn into an ill-defined mission whilst civilian causalities rise. If there is a stalemate on the ground, are we simply going to walk away? These are questions that are not being answered at the moment, and I think they should be.”
However, government sources said it was impossible to put a precise timetable on Britain’s involvement, but insisted that Cameron was clear that British Forces would not become entangled in years of operations as they were in Iraq and Afghanistan.
——–Agencies