Dr. Suhrab Aslam Khan Recognition is due to the fact that in Egypt and Tunisia the popular uprisings have made impressive gains. However, as the Carnegie Endowment reported, the regimes there remain and are seemingly determined to curb the pro-democracy momentum generated so far. A change in the ruling elites and system of governance is still a distant goal. As the vested interests, inclusive of the US, in those and other Arab countries seek to maintain those dual dimensions for self-serving purposes, so the vital issue for these and such other Arab and Islamic states essentially remains to address the problem of ruling elites and system of governance. The victories thus far earned in the Mideastern revolutionary tide may become uncertain, and the progression of Arab Spring may become unpredictable without the timely addressing of these two vital aspects. The Turkish President, Abdullah Gul, in a writing that appeared in The New York Times under the caption The revolutions missing peace on April 21, stated: The US has a long-overdue responsibility to side with international law and fairness. This comment though was originally meant for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, is equally applicable, if not more, to the popular demonstrations in the Middle East. The Carnegie report already cited can be referred in favour of the observation under review. However, in the instance of the ongoing Libyan crisis, the Turkish Presidents observation bears a remarkable cogency. Because the two air strikes upon Gaddafis private residential quarters in Tripoli, since the beginning of US-NATO air invasion of Libya on March 19, aiming at the elimination of the Libyan leader - and perchance missing the actual target - have become a source of prominent international controversy. As it is maintained, the UNSC resolution 1973 of March 17 did not allow the air strikes against the civilians. and Gaddafis private compound belongs to this category. Far more vehement criticism against an attempt at the noted residential buildings is that Gaddafis elimination, as a part of the change of the Libyan regime, is not a component of the UN resolution at all. These episodes - the air strikes on Tripoli as eliminative measures - lend themselves to be a part of the broad interpretation of the Libyan crisis. The motivational factors underlying the extermination attempts against Gaddafi are reminiscent of Maos strategy against the Japanese invasion of China during the 40s, and to some extent Ho Chi Minhs strategy during the Vietnam war against France and later against the US during the post World War II era, of dissolving a sizable part of the regular army into the civilian outfit to mingle with the population at large to resist the external forces. Gaddafi is reported to have adopted a similar strategy, which is also supported by the attendant circumstances, as a counter response in urban warfare. The unanticipated and excessive difficulties in the way of a civil insurgency, which was designed to gain ground rapidly, propped up and aided by some US-led Western powers, have resulted in a desperate demand for an early breakthrough. And to stave off the rebels defeat provides the explanation for the repeated air strikes at the Gaddafis compound in Tripoli recently. Because under the circumstances, a swift elimination of the Libyan leader is viewed to be an efficient way, a much needed shortcut, to the pacification of Libya, notwithstanding the fact that the malevolent attempts are in contravention of the international law. The part of humanity that comprises Islamic civilisation and also Pakistan, wherein the vested interests and ulterior motives of the imperial powers are presently focused, should be acutely interested in comprehending the main reasons underlying the Western encroachment upon present-day Libya. Historically, two cardinal objectives have served as the motivation underlying the colonial intrusion and occupation of other countries. The geostrategic necessity to exercise political control over the target states emerged in the imperial scheme of things. And the financial compulsions motivated imperial states to secure access to the raw materials or natural resources, and to make consumer markets available for their industrial and processed products in the controlled lands. The present state of affairs, with the Libyan crisis in view, is no different; with the slight variation of natural resources being oil and gas, and the geostrategic objective is to seek the domino effect through Libya upon the African continent and Islamic Middle East. This latter dimension of the new, incipient colonial age would tend to place reliance upon national insurgencies and urban warfare. Now the incident of such a warfare in Libya is to be watched with involved attention; for the Arab Spring, as a historical phenomenon, and auguring well for the human civilisation, is in need of its safeguarding from the likely pernicious effects of the urban warfare ignited in Libya, and perhaps also in Syria. The Libyan crisis has its causation not dissimilar from the imperial motives in the past. The Iraq war in 2003 has furnished the illustration for such causation. The false pretext of the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, in the absence of any mandate from the UNSC, and in contrariness to the world opinion - that is, large-scale public demonstrations in Europe and other parts of the world against launching an invasion - Iraqs enormous oil and gas reserves were the temptation. And not surprisingly, France rather bitterly opposed the US-led invasion of Iraq then, because its existing contracts of oil with Saddam were obviously endangered. On the contrary in Libya, France is likely to have reached an understanding with the US and the UK about the strategic hydrocarbon reserves in the country to become an eager participant. From the standpoint of precious assets, Libya exported 1.55 million barrels of crude oil, or 2 percent of world oil production, mostly to Italy, Germany and France that are situated conveniently just across the Mediterranean. Libyan oil is of best quality and least expensive to extract. Since 2006, Gaddafi created the Libyan Investment Authority to invest the sovereign Libyan wealth in the amount of $37 billion. In pursuance of UNSC resolution 1970 of February 27, Libyan foreign assets to the tune of $70 billion are frozen in foreign countries and $35 billion in the US alone. Sitting upon huge Nubian Sandstone Aquifer, an ocean of extremely valuable fresh water, Libya also has been made a part of the crucial water war. In addition, Gaddafi invested $25 billion from the states resources to create a Great Man-made River Project to supply water to the Libyan cities. Above all, Libya does not owe debt money to any institution in the world. The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has stated that if one intervenes in Libya, then intervention in other troubled spots will become unavoidable. Against the backdrop, it is necessary for the Muslim and Arab states to devise index of the Western democratic agenda, or of Western intentions, for their early guidance. The two straightforward parameters for such an index are: one, the frozen Libyan assets under resolution 1970 are put in a trust to be safely and in toto returned to the Libyan people at a later date. And, two, a panel of selected Arab, Muslim and African countries is constituted to supervise the disposal of Libyan natural resources, until the stability of Libyan national rule. As a principle for national guidance particularly suited to these times, the Muslim and African states ought to recognise that a firm determination for the protection of their national rights serves as a prominent part of the mechanism for natural selection. The writer is the Chairman of the Pakistan Ideological Forum Email: suhrabaslam1@hotmail.com