The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Is It Too Late For Libya?

Text Size

Is It Too Late For Libya?

By John Tabin on 3.16.11 @ 10:32PM

Max Boot says no, but I'm not so sure anymore. On a no-fly zone, which I endorsed a month ago, I'm on the same page as Hussein Ibish:

Call me born-again cautious, but after several weeks of calling for an international no-fly zone over Libya - and as an international consensus for one continues to grow - I find myself wondering if the most important benefits from such an intervention are still actually available. In such matters "if it were done when ‘tis done, then ‘twere well it were done quickly" (to borrow from Macbeth), and in some important ways it may already be too late.

Read the whole thing for a depressing and persuasive rundown of all the benefits of a no-fly zone that have disappeared as the weeks have gone by.

Boot concedes that a no-fly zone by itself "might not be enough to topple Gadhafi" (I think we can delete the "might" at this point), and goes on to argue that perhaps what's needed is a Kosovo-style air war, complete with Special Forces on the ground to aid the rebellion. But it might even be too late for that. As French foreign minister Alain Juppé said yesterday, "If we had used military force last week to neutralize some airstrips and the several dozen planes that they have, perhaps the reversal taking place to the detriment of the opposition wouldn't have happened. But that's the past. What is happening today shows us that we may have let slip by a chance." Are we sure we can still turn the tide? Maybe it's just bluster when Saif Gaddafi says that his dad's forces will have reconquered the country within 48 hours. But maybe not.

Boot is absolutely correct about the cost:

Most obvious is the human cost of this dictator continuing his 41-year reign: His throne rests on an ever-growing pile of corpses. But there is also the strategic cost. Given the way the U.S. and our allies have turned against Gadhafi, at least rhetorically, he could easily decide to seek revenge by returning to his old tricks. Considering that Gadhafi was responsible for the midair bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in 1988, among many other acts of terror, that is no idle threat.

Moreover, if he is able to keep power by force, it will encourage other Middle Eastern despots to emulate his example. Already the Saudis have sent an armored column to quell protests in Bahrain. Expect more of the same if Gadhafi clings to power. The Arab Spring could easily turn into a very dark winter that will arrest and reverse the momentum of recent pro-democracy demonstrations. That means consigning the entire region to a dysfunctional status quo ante in which the long-term winners will be al Qaeda and their ilk.

The Obama administration's dithering has been baffling to Europe, which is impotent without US leadership. As Gaddafi's planes attack Benghazi, the US ambassador is suddenly seeking authorization from the Security Council for intervention. Don't expect it (waiting for UN authorization, as Abe Greenwald notes tartly, amounts to outsourcing our foreign policy to the autocracies who hold veto power). But even if it comes, it's not at all clear that it will be soon enough to do any good.

View all comments (20) | Leave a comment

Floyd Looney| 3.16.11 @ 10:54PM

I have yet to see any evidence that the rebels would be any better than Gadhaffi. The Egyptians are already repressing Christians and others. The US shouldn't get involved.

Pelligrino| 3.17.11 @ 5:55AM

I would posit that the aim here is IMMEDIATE, violent removal /death for the lunatic colonel -- a pinpoint strike on just him.

1. If ever a man deserved it, he does.
2. Surely we have the technology and weaponry in year 2011 to make a strike on him. (If we don't what are we spending billions on daily?)
3. This would be the most powerful message we could ever send.
4. In the end, it is the dictators (like the midgets in North Korea) who cause us ill.
5. Cutting them down to size, nee daisy height, warns any successor, "Don't mess with the US."
6. The Arab/Muslim world knows that our issues with the Libyan colonel are real.   They know that he deserves a ticket to hell.   To allow him to simply die in old age with his riches sends all the WRONG signals.
7. The colonel, like all such Middle Eastern leaders, was deathly pale at the end of April 2003. Why?   We crushed Saddam's "army?" in less than 3.5 weeks.
8. Only swift action/decisive/brutality speaks presently in this part of the world.
9. The brilliant aspect of this: Some collateral damage. This is also a VERY powerful message:   “Don’t cavort with anyone on the US’s ‘Most Wanted’ list.”

Yes, I am very much for a full-scale assassination policy permanently built into our national defense. Except is NOT purely assassination at all; it is just war.

When this was attempted while President Reagan was in the White House (after the Berlin disco bombing), was this immoral? We don't seem to think so. What, has the Libyan colonel recanted and redeemed himself since then?

Alan Brooks| 3.17.11 @ 9:31AM

Below Phillips writes "In another post, someone expressed disbelief that there were neocons who were calling for war with Libya"

Phillips ignores how assassination CAN possibly be arranged. Or destabilization of the regime as a whole.

paging Saudis| 3.17.11 @ 10:42AM

FLASHBACK 2004: Kaddafi's henchman was convicted of plotting to assassinate the Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah.

It's time the Saudi royals put a bounty on Kaddafi's head... and watch is hired mercs trip over each other to collect.

*that was easy*

Alan Brooks| 3.17.11 @ 12:20PM

Anyway you look at he is finished.
If Gadhafi dies, he is off to his giant plate of babaganoush in the sky;
if he lives he will be always be looking over his shoulder, and jumping every time a car backfires.

Red Phillips| 3.17.11 @ 1:00PM

A lot of neocons were/are calling for a no-fly zone. Establishing a no-fly zone is an act of war as Robert Gates has pointed out. Therefore calling for a no-fly zone is calling for war. What about that is hard to understand.

Here Tabin is explicitly calling for ground forces. I'm not sure how your attempted clarification applies here.

Red Phillips| 3.16.11 @ 11:05PM

In another post, someone expressed disbelief that there were neocons who were calling for war with Libya and wanted examples. An astute reader quickly provided him with some. Well we can add Tabin's name to that list.

Alan Brooks| 3.17.11 @ 9:28AM

Hitler-loving Confederate-symp Red Phillips hides behind paleocon rhetoric.

Clint| 3.17.11 @ 12:18PM

Uh Oh !
ObamaEunuch Israel Firster Smear Slanderer of The Red State South Chickenhawk Brooks tries to Play The Hitler Card on Red.

The Squirrels ate ObamaEunuch Brooks' Nuts.

Alan Brooks| 3.17.11 @ 12:23PM

"The Squirrels ate ObamaEunuch Brooks' Nuts."

Well as a matter of fact they did. I'll have to show you the scars sometime, and you can touch them, too- if you like.

Red Phillips| 3.17.11 @ 1:08PM

"Hitler-loving?"

Perhaps you could direct me to any comments I have made that led you to that conclusion. Otherwise you are just name calling.

Let me clue you in on how this game is normally supposed to work. Generally you attempt a legitimate debate first and only resort to the Hitler card once it becomes obvious you are losing. To resort to the Hitler card preemptively is a sign of intellectual weakness and/or desperation. It's really kind of pathetic.

Mike| 3.16.11 @ 11:22PM

John,

If you can give convincing answers to the questions George Will posed in a recent column concerning intervening in Libya, I will take you seriously.

LMajito| 3.17.11 @ 9:22AM

as long as islam continues to be a religion of death, torture and cruelty, the despots will continue to rule there.

leave libya alone along with the whole me scenario. give israel a green light to defend itself as it see fit and let's pull the navy from the persian gulf (why are we paying to keep this lanes open when we pay $100/barrel??) and focus instead of gearing up at home to move from gasoline/diesel to natural gas. many municipalities already have gas-only fleets of buses/trucks. it's time for us to tell exxon, chevron and their partner skeiks. fu very much and leave them to sell their oil to the chinese

Dixie Pixie| 3.17.11 @ 9:39AM

It was too late to help the Libyan "Peaceful Protesters" last week when Daffy Gaddafi started his military drive to reconquer his country.
Now it would take nothing less than a full armored division to turn the rebels fortunes around.
The window of opportunity for a minimal use of military force to topple Gaddafi has closed.

ncatty| 3.17.11 @ 9:49AM

Let the Italians do it. It was their colony.

Kaddafi_Delenda_Est| 3.17.11 @ 10:37AM

The issue for Americans is whether we have the will and moral courage to address Kaddafi's long train of abuses against the still greiving families (orphans, widows, aging parents) of innocent American victims.

Libyan officials have now confirmed that Kaddafi (personally) masterminded the Lockerbie massacre.

"The orders were given by Gaddafi himself... This evidence is in our hands and we have documents that prove what I have said and we are ready to hand them over to the international criminal court."

The fig leaf has been stripped away. Obama has NO excuse for continued inaction.

Nemo me impune lacessit?

PM| 3.17.11 @ 11:17AM

"The Obama administration's dithering has been baffling to Europe, which is impotent without US leadership. As Gaddafi's planes attack Benghazi, the US ambassador is suddenly seeking authorization from the Security Council for intervention. Don't expect it (waiting for UN authorization, as Abe Greenwald notes tartly, amounts to outsourcing our foreign policy to the autocracies who hold veto power). But even if it comes, it's not at all clear that it will be soon enough to do any good."

The "world," and especially Europe, is getting exactly the kind of American policy it wished it had had under George W. Bush--and how does it like it now? The possible upside is that perhaps Europeans and the others with some concern for civilization will act to defend their own interests and the overall world order, without leaving it all to the questionably competent initiative of the United States, and then complaining about the results.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.17.11 @ 12:31PM

Its never too late! No-Fly Zone, a few air-drops of munitions, wash our hands, done!

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.17.11 @ 12:41PM

Taken from transcript of Rush's March 2nd show:

CALLER: -- that I was gonna ask you what do you think Ronaldus Magnus would do in the situation with Khadafy?

RUSH: What would Reagan do with this current situation with Khadafy?

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: He'd probably call up and say, "Look at the remaining members of your family who are still alive, Colonel." And Khadafy would offer some sort of bluster and so forth. I'm sure the Reagan administration would pass the word, if you harm one American -- now you remember what we did to you because of your involvement in Lockerbie, Scotland -- if you harm one American the rest of your family better flee because we're coming. I can tell you one thing. Ronald Reagan would not be running around saying, "Gee, I'm not gonna do anything because the world might think I want his oil," because Reagan would not have shutdown domestic oil drilling. I appreciate the call, Charles. Thank you much.