It appears that everyone is against partition in Libya.
Michael Singh, who works for the Israel lobby group the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), was on cable television two days ago (I believe MSNBC) and said directly that "the two-state solution" was not a good plan for Libya. Last night on CNN, General Barry McCaffrey echoed the point. He said that "fragmentation" of Libya was in no one's interest, and would foster extremism in the portion controlled by Qaddafy.
Let's talk about Israel and Palestine, where world government called for Partition 64 years ago. While I am sympathetic to the idea of Partition in Israel and Palestine, as a means of separating brutalized peoples, it must be emphasized that: 1, Partition has already demonstrably failed there (only one side got a state or sovereignty, despite the promises; and the powerful side continues to devour and occupy what fragments the other side still holds). 2, The Partition has seemed to foster extremism on both sides, including the "irredentism" that J Street bewails-- Palestinian claims on stolen land, and who can blame em.
Yes Israel/Palestine is an intractable situation. Unlike Libya, which is a walk in the park. But if WINEP is for democracy in tribally-divided Libya, why not in Israel and Palestine too?