Why an Escalation in
Libya is the Only Rational Course
"NATO needs to set up
protection zones for civilians on the ground and thus demonstrate that they can
at least partially ensure peace. … The U.N. mandate prohibits the occupation of
Libya - but protection zones are not zones of occupation. Protection zones are
battle-free enclaves that would reduce Qaddafi’s freedom of action and above
all, send an unmistakable message: The dictator will not win this war."
Just how will this war end? The
NATO countries are artificially prolonging the Libya conflict, maintaining a
stalemate between Qaddafi and the rebels - for fear of an unpopular result. But
fear is a bad advisor.
When the United Nations
Security Council adopted the Libyan resolution on
March 17, the international community was driven by a fear of a second Srebrenica. There,
in Bosnian Srebrenica in July 1995, blue-helmeted troops, principally from The
Netherlands, looked on as Bosnian Serb soldiers abducted up to 8,000 Muslim men
and boys and massacred them. Srebrenica represents the embodiment of the global
community's anguish over, once more, standing by as a mass murder is committed in
one of the world's conflicts - when it might be able to prevent it.
The Libya resolution stopped Qaddafi’s
troops from advancing into eastern Libya, preventing another Srebrenica in the
country's second largest city, Bengasi. But now the atrocities are taking place
anyway in Libya’s third largest city - Misrata [see video below]. The center of
town, which resembles a lunar landscape, is being bombarded by hundreds of shells and
rockets every day. In a cynical move to play to the whims of the public, Tripoli's
vice minister of foreign affairs announced a retreat, leaving control of affairs
in the hands of local tribes. But the maneuver only served to drag the tribes into the conflict
and actually foment an ethnic war - which so far hasn't materialized. Qaddafi
is distributing guns in Tripoli and seems determined to push a large part of the country into the abyss.
In Libya, it's hard to see
and measure who's doing the fighting, what kind of strength they have, and how
long the blood will continue to flow. One day the insurgents triumph; then the next, Qaddafi
again shows his brutal nature. The Libyan war won't end quickly, because, in reality, neither side is stronger than the other. The rebels are as unlikely to
take Tripoli as Qaddafi is to storm Bengasi. Therefore, in the words of the
American Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen, there is a military
stalemate. How, then, will all of this end?
NATO and many Arab countries
cannot behave as though they are not parties to this war. They have been for some
time now. The heads of government: Cameron, Obama, Sarkozy, and even Angela Merkel
have declared Qaddafi's toppling as the goal. Kuwait is contributing lots of
money to the cause and even Qatar is providing aircraft. A future with Qaddafi
is unimaginable for them and for the rest of the world. Making peace with this
man will not be possible. What his regime is capable of was made clear on
Sunday evening, when his spokesman pledged terrorist acts of revenge. So while
the West has long been a party to this, it is still acting as though it only
pertains to them from a distance. The White House sends drones and in its
analysis, goes so far as to say that this is a "teaching moment": the
European allies should kindly take care of their own backyard - as if overnight,
President Obama could shrink from the decades-long responsibilities his country
has undertaken. Obama is playing fast and loose with America’s responsibilities
and with the hopes of many people.
A good handful of NATO countries
are carrying out air strikes, but only carefully-measured ones. So they maintain an
artificial stalemate - and nothing more. Prolonging the war which, without their intervention, would have
ended long ago; they've decided to do nothing
more, either for themselves or for the insurgents they've intervened on behalf of. What lies behind
this is not a strategy, but rather a fear of an unpopular decision, a little fear
for Libya’s Arab neighbors, and of course, military uncertainty. The result is
a lack of political planning, for which the people of Misrata are paying the price
- often with their lives.
Three possibilities remain:
first, the West could call off the deployment. With that, Qaddafi would stay in
power and the slaughter would escalate. No one can wants this. Second, the war
could continue to simmer for a while. Qaddafi might run out of weapons and the
insurgency could work its way to Tripoli like a cable fire - perhaps or
perhaps not. These conditions could last quite a while; and in this cynical
game of patience, the West will not persevere. The third option is
escalation. NATO needs to set up protection zones for civilians on the ground and
thus demonstrate that they can at least partially ensure peace.
Posted by WORLDMEETS.US
The establishing of
protection zones would send a strong military and political message - precisely
the kind of message Qaddafi’s opponents need in order to obtain credible
security from this unpredictable dictator. The U.N. mandate prohibits the occupation
of Libya - but protection zones are not zones of occupation. Protection zones
are battle-free enclaves that would reduce Qaddafi’s freedom of action and
above all, send an unmistakable message: The dictator will not win this war.
