Arab rulers' 'humanitarian' concerns for Libya

There are certainly legitimate reasons for Western nations which are eager to impose a 'No-Fly Zone' over Libya to be wary of the declared commitment of the Arab League. First , given the massive as well as persistent anti -regime protests in the Arab world in the past several weeks , how respresentative are the regimes vis-a-vis. the streets in terms of public opinion ? How do ascertain for sure that the majority of the people in the Arab world support Western use of force against Libya ?. Second , how to ensure that the rulers in the Arab League do not play the games of 'supporting' Western nations on one hand, and activating their deniable propagandists to churn out and spread anti-Western 'stories' on the other ? Third, what types of concrete and/or specific commitments (like military personnel and assets) regimes in the Arab League are going to give (and at what stage ?) to the cause of 'Responsibility to Protect' operations in Libya ?. Above all, are - or are not. - the 'humanitarian concerns' of Arab regimes for the people in Libya only a strategem to divert Western attention from their own repression and to further weaken Western countries militarily as well as financially in yet another war so that they could gain more time to 'restore order', 'maintain stability' and 'preserve tradition' at homes ? It can be expected that if and when the regime in Tripoli is defeated, Arab elites would be the first ones. to claim credit for the decision or operations; but if and when Gaddafi' s regime somehow survives and regains control of Libya, they would tell people in their countries that they were actually 'duped' or 'forced' by Western nations and 'Zionists'.

US reportedly softens position on ME 'change'