At the beginning of the year, few would have predicted that Britain and the United States would be involved in another military intervention. Britain, the United States and European nations were – and still are- cutting their defence budgets.

Smart bombs, clandestine special forces operations, high-profile defections and, now, the arrival in London of a high-ranking Libyan envoy sent by Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the Libyan dictator’s son, to negotiate the possibility of the family fleeing into exile.

'The Western bombardment of Gaddafi's forces in Libya has become an opportunistic public relations ploy for the US Africa Command and a new inroad for US military stronghold on the continent,' writes Horace Campbell

Today's London meeting on Libya showed the "soft power" side of the international operation. Arab, European, and US leaders offered a raft of humanitarian arguments and a collective suasion to push for Muammar Qaddafi's ouster.

Just 41 percent of American voters say the U.S. is doing the right thing by using military force in Libya right now, while 47 percent believe that the U.S. should not be involved in the North African nation. Among independents, that support slips to 38 percent, with 51 percent saying the U.S. should not be involved.

President Obama said Monday that the military operations in Libya have succeeded in averting a humanitarian catastrophe, but he pledged that the United States would continue to scale back its involvement in the conflict over the coming days.

Qatar became the first Arab country on Monday to recognize Libya's rebels as the people's sole legitimate representative, in a move that may presage similar moves from other Gulf states.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates acknowledged Sunday that the unrest in Libya did not pose an immediate threat to the United States. Even so, he and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the Obama administration was justified in taking military action.