(8 of 11)
As late as Monday, many European leaders apparently believed they might still have time to talk the U.S. out of an attack. Meeting in emergency session in the Hague only hours before the strike, foreign ministers of the twelve European Community nations went further than they ever had before toward meeting U.S. requests for collective action. They pledged to reduce the number of Libyan diplomats allowed into their countries, to limit their freedom of movement and to keep them under close surveillance. That move has some importance: Libyan "diplomats" are believed often to pass instructions, money and weapons to terrorists.
But besides coming too late, the move fell short of meeting Washington's urging that the Europeans shut down the Libyan people's bureaus entirely. Meeting again on Thursday, two full days after the attack, the twelve tried to come up with some further move that might satisfy the U.S. but could agree only to wait for a committee report due this week.
It is possible that this attitude will change. While opposing the attack, some European leaders also criticized their own failure to propose any alternative antiterrorist program. Said West Germany's Kohl: "Too frequently, the Europeans have been too satisfied with mere declarations which have been politically ineffectual while leaving the U.S. alone in its struggle against international terrorism . . . If we Europeans do not want to follow the Americans for reasons of our own, we must develop political initiatives."
Public opinion in Europe, while predominantly against the raid, was hardly monolithic. Polls showed an odd pattern. In Britain, Market & Opinion Research International surveyed 1,051 people for the London Times. Two-thirds were against the air strike, and 71% disapproved of Thatcher's permission for British bases to be used. But in France, which refused to participate, a survey taken within 48 hours of the raid turned up only 49% against vs. 39% who were in favor of it. In France also, one notable political figure, former President Valery Giscard d'Estaing, stated flatly, "I approve of the American action in Libya." French-speaking Swiss polled by the Lausanne newspaper Le Matin registerd an astonishing 67.8% majority for the attack. Opinion seemed vehemently opposed in Spain. A crowd in Barcelona smashed windows of a McDonald's restaurant, and El Pais, the leading daily in Madrid, published a cartoon of the U.S. flag with skulls for stars and bones for stripes.
Very privately, the U.S. picked up some support in the Arab world. Radical Arab states condemned the military strike in shrill, vehement and threatening terms, conservative nations in ritualistic tones. But their confidential comments differed markedly from their public ones. Said one Arab government minister: "Gaddafi has done more harm to us (by fomenting terrorism) than to the Americans. The only problem with the attack on Libya is that you didn't get him."