Thoughts on Libya's "No Fly Zone"
The Middle East is an even more interesting place than usual these days. Uprisings in Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, and Libya. Unrest continues in Iran, Saudi Arabia did some "hand waving" over it's "Day of Rage" (nothing to see here, move along...) and Syria looks as it may join the fray.
My personal opinion, prejudiced and ill-informed as it may be is there are a lot of forces at work here; perhaps some professional agitation by groups focused on installing themselves, lots of unrest by peoples largely being herded, used and abused by their leaders who see them as sheep to shorn (or killed) as needed, and perhaps a third thing.
That third thng is, I believe, that the outcome of the Iraq War has had a subtle, but pervasive influence. Say what you want about how good or bad the reasons were for attacking Iraq in 2003, the fact is that in 2011, a brutal dictator is gone and the Iraqi people have the freedom to work out their own damnation their own way. I'm not declaring Iraq a democratic paradise, but the fact is her factions and tribes all currently have a place at the table. They'll succeed or fail as a result of their collective efforts, not because a brutal Thug and his family have all the marbles.
Personally, I think a whole lot of folks in the Middle East (again, regardless of their opinion about the U.S.) have looked at Iraq, paused, and thought: "Wait a minute...why can't *I* have that?"
This includes the average "Libyan in the street"...to bring this back on topic. Col Qaddafi (my spelling) is doing what dictators and thugs so, to wit; trying to hang on to power with both hands and every rifle at his disposal. As American's, we want to see everyone have a shot at what we have, so we're rooting for the rebels.
Here's what will make you do a double-take: I've argued against the "No Fly Zone."
Not because I'm on Qaddafi's side, the quicker he joins Saddam in Hell, the better. But because NO ONE has really thought this out. By authorizing the "No Fly Zone," we effectively opened a third front in the Middle East.
Problem one: It ain't as simple as billed. We can't park a couple of F-16 (or Mirage Fighters) over the skies of Tripoli and declare victory. If we're going to have aircraft in enemy airspace, we have to do things like suppress enemy air defense systems (mil-speak for blow up shit on the ground that can menace our aircraft). If we we're going to be effective in stopping Qaddafi's air force, it's easier to simply blow up what are probably a very small number of military airfields. Now we're attacking ground targets. Another smart move would be to cripple his military command and control capabilities (mil-speak for blowing up mores hit on the ground, some of it likely "dual-use" assets; e.g., phone-switching nodes). What about downed allied pilots? Search and Rescue means helicopters and some boots on the ground. A couple firefghts in urban areas that will, unfortunately, kill innocent civilians, and our problems escalate.
Problem two: Qaddafi doesn't need his air force to combat the rebels. It provides him some small, tactical advantage, but it's far more psychological than physical. In order to win, he has to send in his troops to take real-estate away from the rebels. You can't win by airpower alone (something some folks in our own AF still haven't figured out).
Problem three: Now, this might sound like a solution (at least partial) to problem number two, but it really isn't. The text of the UN amendment appears to permit "air interdiction" strikes against ground-based military targets. That means targetting militay equipment in the middle of a civilian city in a lot of cases. The bombs and bullets don't only hit the bad guys and their toys. More civilian deaths, we get the blame, and futher fracture things.
All this boils down to: If we (the U.N., which mean the allies, which...given modern history...usually means *us*) are serious about wanting Qaddafi out, then we shouldn't fiddle-fuck around with a "No Fly Zone." We take a in U.N. force, shoot down anything larger than a kid's kite, land at Tripoli, put a bullet in Qaddafi's forehead (and his immediate set of thugs), and hand the "keys" over to the rebels. (Which is another problem...they aren't all that organized...who, exactly, gets to take over?) If no rebel outfit is ready to take over, Libya become another Iraq for a while. And we'll draw the same flack we did in Iraq (and we are in Afghanistan).
That will simply add to the meme in the region that the US secretly desires hegemony over the Middle East and is at war with "Islam. (Both assertions are bullshit, but that doesn't stop it from growing.)
We *really* need to strip ourselves of this myth of "partial involvement." That delusion is dangerous and has killed a lot of people, world-wide. Which is why I think the "No Fly Zone" is just feel-good posturing.
Now, I *really am* on the rebel's side. But I think they either have to do this on their own, or we (the UN/US) have to go in guns blazing. There is no middle ground.
Look no further than the Balkans in the 90's if you doubt this.