Libya's Mexican Standoff

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright April 10, 2011
All Rights Reserved.                                         

         Battling pro-reform rebels to a virtual standoff, Libyan President Moammar Kadafi finds himself enduring NATO air strikes, making progress against less armed rebel forces.  While NATO air power has kept Kadafi at bay and prevented him from moving on the Libyan Mediterranean port city of Benghazi, Kadafi’s Khamis Brigade, named after his youngest son Khamis, has made progress retaking previously held rebel territories.  Libyan rebels have begged NATO for more air support, but, more importantly, equipment and ground troops for the march on Tripoli.  Rebel spokesman Col. Hamid Hassy confirmed that NATO air strikes had destroyed at least 24 Libyan tanks, keeping Khamis from retaking Misrata and Ajdabiya, two cities buffering Kadafi’s move on Benghazi.  U.S. and NATO commanders hoped that they could avoid putting boots on the ground.

           Since launching Cruise missiles on Tripoli and other key military positions March 19, the U.S. and NATO has been in a stalemate.  While they’ve slowed Kadafi’s march on Benghazi, NATO hasn’t opened up a seam for rebels on Tripoli.  President Barack Obama and his Defense Secretary Robert Gates have insisted that the U.S. play a subordinate role to NATO, rejecting the idea of ground troops.  Obama’s March 28 national TV address on Libya promoted more confusion and little justification for military intervention.  As the war dragged on, it’s becoming clear that Kadafi has dug in his heels and is prepared to outlast allied forces.  Because NATO air strikes cannot dislodge Kadafi, rebels need more ground equipment and troops to turn the tide on the war.  Without dragging out the mission indefinitely, NATO must reconsider lending ground support.

            Instead of dragging out the nearly month-long war, NATO—with U.S. backing—must commit boots on the ground to push Kadafi into full retreat.  Recent air strikes pushed Kadafi back from the gate of Ajdabiya to about 40 miles in the rear.  Without rebel reinforcements of both weapons and troops, Kadafi will advance again once he regroups along the coastal Mediterranean highway, running east-west along the northern Libyan border.  “If he [Kadafi] controls Ajdjabiya, he makes us feel like we are unsafe because he can move anywhere in the east,” said Hassy, asking NATO to consider adding more heavy equipment and ground forces.  Canadian NATO Commander Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard stressed that his job was to protect civilians not work with rebel forces to topple Kadafi.  NATO and U.S. officials must accept that the biggest threat to Libbyan civilians is Kadafi.     

            Trying to broker a ceasefire, a official from the African Union Kaellaf Brahan offered proposals for an immediate ceasefire, humanitarian aid and talks between rebels and the Kadafi government.  Only the U.S. has yet to catch up with France and Britain insisting on Kadafi’s ouster.  While it’s true that the March 17 U.N. resolution authorized force against the Libyan regime to protect civilians, it’s become abundantly clear that Kadafi is, in fact, the biggest threat to Libya and the region.  “We’ve got to keep in our minds, you know, what is our strategic objective,” said former British Prime Minister Tony Blair on CNN.  “It is to get a different form of government in place in which the  people of Libya decide the future of Libya.  Blair mirrors the British and French position that, above all else, Kadafi must go.  Obama and other U.S, officials must do whatever it takes to get rid of Kadafi.

            Since giving his March 28 Libya speech, Obama’s approval ratings have headed south, due to too much equivocation.  Few U.S. citizens believe protecting Libyan civilians justifies opening up another battlefront.  Barack needed to make a persuasive national security argument on Libyan intervention.  Surely having a known terrorist, like Kadafi, with a vendetta against the U.S. stay in power threatens U.S. national security.  Blair gives Barack solid advice that the key U.S. objective should be getting rid of Kadafi.  When former President George W. Bush went to war against Iraq March 20, 2003, he made Saddam Hussein a threat to national security.  Barack needs to do the same against Kadafi, whose history of terrorism far exceeds the threat posed by the former Iraqi dictator.   Kadafi’s 42-year reign in Libya has been marked by horrific terrorist acts, including the Dec. 21, 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.  

           NATO’s bombing missions and “no fly zone” in Libya have led to the current Mexican standoff.  Nether side can prevail unless they get an upper hand on the ground, requiring an immediate infusion of arms and troops for the rebels on the ground.  While the U.S. has ruled out ground troops, NATO must do what’s necessary to get Kadafi out of power.  If Kadafi sees a major U.S. or NATO ground commitment, he will eventually cave and negotiate an exile deal.  Lending only air support stopped Kadafi from marching on Benghazi but hasn’t forced the dictator to surrender.  U.S. and NATO must recalculate the mission and do what’s needed to get rid of Kadafi.  Only by the strongest show of force on the ground will Kadafi negotiate his own exile.  Seeing only an air attack, Kadafi believes her can outlast the coalition and eventually prevail.  Barack must join the U.K and France to finish the job.

 John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news.  He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com.and author of Dodging the Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.