PPI - Radically Pragmatic
  • Donate
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Locations
    • Careers
  • People
  • Projects
  • Our Work
  • Events
  • Donate

Our Work

The Atlantic: It’s Time for a New United Nations

  • September 17, 2013
  • Jim Arkedis

In March of 2011 and just hours before the United Nations Security Council vote, Libyan dictator Muammar Ghaddafi promised citizens of Benghazi–his own countrymen–that he was “coming tonight” and that would show them “no mercy and no pity.” Gaddafi’s brazen statement telegraphed an impending attack with a high possibility massive civilian casualties.

In the Security Council immediately following Gaddafi’s threats, Russia and China–two permanent members with noted authoritarian governments themselves–abstained from voting on resolution 1973, which authorized “all necessary measures to protect civilians… including Benghazi.” (Germany, Brazil, and India, then-rotating members of the Security Council, abstained as well for their own reasons.)

In hindsight, Russia seems to have regretted its abstention. In January 2012, speaking about the growing civil war in Syria, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Australian TV that “the international community unfortunately did take sides in Libya and we would never allow the Security Council to authorize anything similar to what happened in Libya” in Syria.

That seems odd, because “what happened in Libya” was, on balance, a good thing: A sustained NATO air campaign unquestionably protected many more innocent civilians than it harmed and weakened Gaddafi’s forces en route to his downfall. What’s more, the Libya operation served as validation for those supporting the “responsibility to protect,” a 2006 Security Council mandate that called on parties involved in armed conflict to bear primary responsibility to protect civilians, approved by a unanimous 15-0 vote.

Continue reading at the Atlantic.

Related Work

In the News  |  May 19, 2026

Marshall and Kahlenberg in The New York Times: Is There a Door No. 3 for Democrats?

  • Will Marshall Richard D. Kahlenberg
Op-Ed  |  May 13, 2026

Kahlenberg for The Atlantic: The Democrats Can’t Let Go of Racial Preferences

  • Richard D. Kahlenberg
In the News  |  May 12, 2026

Ainsley in IPS Journal: ‘Britain is moving into a multi-party era’

  • Claire Ainsley
In the News  |  May 12, 2026

Ainsley on ABC Australia’s Radio National Breakfast: More than 80 Labour MPs are now calling for the British Prime Minister to resign

  • Claire Ainsley
Op-Ed  |  May 8, 2026

Marshall for The Hill: America at 250: Battling over National Identity

  • Will Marshall
Op-Ed  |  May 7, 2026

Jacoby for Washington Monthly: Trump Leaves Ukraine’s Future to Europe

  • Tamar Jacoby
  • Never miss an update:

  • Subscribe to our newsletter
PPI Logo
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Donate
  • Careers
  • © 2026 Progressive Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.
  • |
  • Privacy Policy
  • |
  • Privacy Settings