Libya & the No-Fly Zone

My article from the Spectator magazine at Portland State University. Download the entire April issue here: Download the issue.

Photo from AFP 

Why Libya? Why Now?

April 3rd, 2011 in All Stories / Opinion

Skip to comments (0) ↓

As long-time rulers stepped down in Egypt, the masses in Libya began to assemble. It took only few weeks to escalate from street protests, to General Muammar Gaddafi and his sons threatening to take Libya back, “house by house” and “inch by inch” from rebel forces.

Erica Charves

The nation is sandwiched between Tunisia and Egypt, home of the last two deposed long-term Arab dictators. Is the U.S. involvement necessary, and will exit be swift or will another conflict be added to tax payers’ pocketbooks? Why Libya, when there are other nations oppressing their populace in Syria, Bahrain, Yemen, the Ivory Coast and other African nations.

The U.S. military complex is larger than any other in the world, and its might was brought from a distance to bear on Gaddafi. After two weeks of discussion, a U.N. resolution to enforce a no-fly zone resulted in French planes firing the first shot, while U.S. naval ships launched 120 tomahawk missiles. Enforcement lasted more than a week including Arab nations, and other U.S. allies claiming to support opposition and prevent a mass killing in Eastern Libya.

How did the situation escalate so quickly from absence of protests in January, to siege of rebel strongholds and threats of mass killing? Initially, Gaddafi attempted to dissuade opponents and reassure the public—when the protests began, he claimed al-Qaida was responsible.

Cities as far west as 120 miles from Tripoli saw protests of citizens in early March, including young women and families. After Gaddafi sent out troops to squash the protests, people were shot down in streets and hospitals filled with the injured.

As the military dictator marched on Benghazi, a rebel stronghold, international forces intervened to stop a civilian massacre. President Barack Obama said he would not stand by waiting to see “mass images of slaughter” appear as they did in the Bosnia 1995 Srebrenica genocide.

U.S. as World Police or Humanitarian Security?

With nations like Bahrain enforcing military rule to jettison demonstrators, along with increasing crackdowns in Yemen, Jordan, Syria and other Middle Eastern nations, why did the U.S. and the UN decide to jump into Libya’s conflict?

Bahrain and Syria differ because of sectarian interests between Sunni and Shia Muslims. The majority of citizens in Bahrain are followers of the Shiite branch of Islam, while the ruling family are followers of Sunni Islam.

Yemen is home to the Middle Eastern branch of al-Qaida, and direct involvement there could inflame the same branch of terror which bombed the USS Cole, and trained the underwear bomber.

North Korea, another repressive regime on America’s watch list, has taken this opportunity to remind the world of the reason they have nuclear capabilities. Ruler Kim Jung Il stated recently that the Libyan intervention would not have transpired if they had nuclear weapons. Gaddafi agreed to part with his chemical and nuclear weapons in 2004.

International Aid or Punishing Gaddafi?

Gaddafi is not like previous leaders who fell in Egypt and Tunisia—he has proven this through actions such as purposeful targeting of civilians back in the 1980s. President Ronald Reagan, in fact, famously called Gaddafi the “mad dog of the Middle East” at a time when the Libyan leader was inciting people across the region to kill Americans and Westerners. He remained at odds with the U.S.; eventually, 
Reagan sought Congressional input and bombed Libya from air and sea in response to his bombing a disco in Germany where American soldiers died.

Obama has taken a different approach by leading the charge militarily, by relying on resolutions supported by the U.N. Security Council and the Arab League. With support of Arab nations, Obama has reinforced the multilateral and coalition style response to Gaddafi.

On March 28, Obama spoke to the American people about U.S. involvement in Libya. Obviously, people are wary, with military enforcement in Iraq and Afghanistan still underway. The last thing the U.S. needs is another military engagement in the Middle East. The president attempted to allay fears by declaring the no-fly zone was necessary for humanitarian reasons.

Republicans and Democrats alike worry about the cost, and financial investment may already be high as each tomahawk missile costs $1 million. If Obama keeps his word, and there are no U.S. “boots on the ground” perhaps the cost is a worthwhile investment in order to avoid a slaughter of civilians as promised by Gaddafi. The most important part of an exit strategy is the leadership of no-fly zone enforcement transferring to NATO with nations like UAE, Qatar, and Libyans themselves to oversee their advance.

The time to ask “Is it right?” has passed. Libyan airfields have been bombed, and coalition planes patrol the skies. America should now step back and play the supporting role.