The War for Libya

While watching the reports coming out of Libya last night and this morning I still have this question – “what next?” As the expanded no-fly zone advances to include a no-drive, no mortar, no heavy artillery zone (entirely legal under the wording of the Security Council resolution) what is the coalition going to do if the Colonel decides to back-off and cease military operations? Although highly improbably given his recent bellicose and defiant statements, it is not impossible.


At a press conference last night, Hillary Clinton said that the purpose of the UN resolution was to protect civilians, not regime change. Really? Although it was the politically correct answer, this is not the goal. It is certainly not the goal of the Arab coalition partners and the frequent statements from virtually every European leader as well as President Obama, is that the regime must stand down and leave. This leaves the thorny issue of who is going to effectuate the regime change. Fortunately, the US has taken the position that it will not be the pointiest stick in the bundle for once and will leave the air assault to the French and British. But, unless the regime is decapitated by an air-to-ground missile or an assassination or rebel bullet, who is going to pull Qadaffi and his sons off the thrown?

If a European ground force enters the fray it will surely win but would not look good on TV. Egypt, of course, has an effective, professional army that could, with probably one or two tank brigades, slice through to Tripoli. Given the past enmity between the two countries, that might not be the best of plans. Hillary Clinton also hinted at defections within the Qadaffi camp – a not so subtle reminder that his vaunted, all- female bodyguards may not be particularly effective when the chips are down.

But, aside from the stray missile or bullet (or not so stray), what will happen if he says he wants to talk? The first splits will come with a call by Russia, China and their all too frequent ally, Germany, to stop the air assault and sit and talk. Again, then what? With whom does one talk? The leader that everyone said had to go? His (now) equally barbaric son, Saif? The most absurd statement comes from Sarkozy who said today that once the fighting stops, France was ready to talk. France has already recognized the rebels in Benghazi as the legitimate government of Libya – why would they talk with Qadaffi? The UK does not need to talk to anyone and one wonders what deals they made when their S.A.S. were in Benghazi a few weeks ago.

From the European standpoint – and this is their war until the Arabs come in with something – the best outcome would be continued defiance. France is busily turning the regime’s tanks into scrap and their retreat from the outskirts of Benghazi to Sirte takes them across the desert with nowhere to hide. Expect to see officers and men abandon vehicles, join the rebellion or melt away rather than be target practice for a French Rafale or Mirage. The rebels could be armed and trained a little, and sent off to the west to take Tripoli. France and England could continue to pulverize the tanks and artillery from the air with a few cruise missiles thrown in. But, at this point, aside from the immediate tactical goals, I don’t see a strategy.

One hopes, of course, that the Libyan military will simply say “enough” and quit, thus ending the 42 year old regime and handing the government over to the rebel leaders in Benghazi.

One last question: Is there a bigger buffoon leading a country these days than Hugo Chavez who just came out against the UN authorized attack?

The Other Shoe

Image by Abode of Chaos via Flickr

France has recognized the shadow government formed by the Libyan rebels in Benghazi.  Portuguese Foreign Minister Luis Amado said today he had sent a message to Libyan leader Gadhafi through a Tripoli envoy saying: “The Gadhafi regime is over.".  On Friday in Brussels, it is very likely that a decision will be reached to support the rebellion in Libya.

Then what?

Will France send in its air force? Navy? Send arms to the rebels?  Unless the plan is already in place, all this will take time and it is beginning to look like Gadhafi's tanks have the upper hand.  Tanks without opposition can and do move very, very fast. No fly zones change nothing on the ground and it is there where the battle will be won or lost.

To a large degree, Libya is Europe's issue and very far from US interests which is in the grip of a McCarthy- like demonization of its own Muslim citizenry at the hands of neo-Nazi teabaggers.  The US will be doing nothing substantive.  It's probably a good idea considering Iraq and Afghanistan coupled with domestic witchhunts.

So, what will be next on the agenda  in Brussels or Paris or Rome?  Who will take the first step? And if a fig leaf of a no-fly zone is implemented, who will be piloting the fighters?

International Relations Stupidity

Some examples today of total stupidity in international affairs:

1. The Armenia Genocide Resolution passes by one vote in the US. A grand victory for those comfortable Armenians in California who want to alienate the most powerful, democratic ally of the US in the region and destroy the reconciliation process between Turkey and Armenia in order to recognize an atrocity that happened under a completely different political structure almost a century ago and has nothing to do with Turkey. Maybe the US should now demand that Armenia break its alliance with the Russian Federation and expel its army.

The next resolution should be one that condemns Syria for the genocidal atrocities committed by Ashurbanipal, king of the Assyrian Empire against anyone he cared to roast alive including, in no particular order, Egypt, Iraq (then known as the Babylonian Empire) and Jordan(then part of the Elam Empire right next door that was essentially wiped out).

While we are at it, it was not so long ago that Italy burned Jerusalem and beseiged Masada. Apologies and reperations to Israel are required.

Last, but certainly not least, the US Congress should admit to its genocide of Native Americans. Oh, wait - they don't have a massive lobby or donate hugely to campaigns. Sorry.

2. Germany, that past paragon of virtue and peace, has suggested that Greece sell off its assets - particularly its uninhabited islands - to settle its debts. Let's see - this from a country that killed 400,000 Greeks between 1940 and 1944 and stole most of the money from the Greek banks. I guess Merkel needs a warm place to retire and will buy low, sell high.

3. Hillary Clinton, whom I otherwise support, delivered a remarkable statement in a news conference with Argentine President De Kirchner. The remarks from both to questions are as follows:

QUESTION: (In Spanish.)

And for the Secretary, it’s about the Falklands. The – President Fernandez talked about possible friendly mediation. Would the U.S. be considered – would the U.S. (inaudible) consider some kind of mediation role between the UK and Argentina over the Falklands? Thank you.


SECRETARY CLINTON: ...we want very much to encourage both countries to sit down. Now, we cannot make either one do so, but we think it is the right way to proceed. So we will be saying this publicly, as I have been, and we will continue to encourage exactly the kind of discussion across the table that needs to take place.

Um. Well, no. The UK has said very clearly that they do not intend to discuss the status of the Falklands so there is no possibility of sitting around a table to discuss that. Furthermore, no one living on the islands is interested in becoming Argentinian. There is no reason for the US to become involved and this statement is not helpful in the least and makes it look like a) the US can negotiate a settlement of territorial dispute that one side - a strong ally - has no intention of discussing and b) the US supports the Argentine position. Next time just say the US has no position.

Most Persecuted Person in History

Image via Wikipedia

The law giving Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi immunity from prosecution has been struck down by Italy's Supreme Court. The Prime Minister now feels unjustly put upon since he will need to defend himself from what promises to be an onslaught of criminal charges, including bribery and corruption. OK. Innocent until proven otherwise.

But...these responses as reported in the BBC probably won't help him much:

"In my opinion, and not only mine, I am the best prime minister we can find today."

"I am without doubt the person who's been the most persecuted in the entire history of the world and the history of man..."

and the best -

...explaining that the money had gone on paying "consultants and judges", before correcting himself to say "consultants and lawyers". Freud would be nodding his head.

Stay tuned for a mountain of quotables as the trials loom and lumber forward.