Contemplating the end of his Latin American visit and the apparently imminent turnover of operations in Libya, President Obama said: “This is something that we can build into our budget. And we’re confident that not only can the goals be achieved, but at the end of the day the American people are going to feel satisfied that lives were saved and people were helped.”
Wanna bet, Mr. President? Most self-respecting countries might have organized a coup, which is apparently what your administration was hoping for as the eventual outcome in Libya. But “Hillary’s War” was apparently planned without reference to doctrine (you haven’t announced one) strategy (ditto) or any conceivable American national interest. Ending Gaddafi’s forty-year reign of mixed terror and error is the only rationale worth risking American lives and treasure for, but since this hastily slapped-together operation began, American military officials have repeatedly denied that Gaddafi is a target. If not, then why not?
You might recall that terror was an issue once before, when Gaddafi’s direct role in orchestrating the 1980s bombing of a Berlin disco led to an American air strike that nearly killed him. An early generation of precision weapons meant that F-111 bomber pilots had the daunting tasks of flying their aircraft close to the target, avoiding ground fire and “pickling” the weapon at exactly the right instant. The bombs landed a little long, Gaddafi escaped and two years later ordered the bombing of PanAm Flight 103. Almost 300 unsuspecting and utterly innocent people died in the sky and on the ground of Lockerbie, Scotland. You cannot repeat the old axiom often enough: When you shoot at a king, you must kill him.
Yet somehow that principle and every other prudential reservation was abandoned as the White House finally realized that Gaddafi was deadly serious about maintaining his stranglehold on power despite the overdue awakening of his people. In George Will’s apt phrase, “In Libya, mission creep began before the mission did.” Included in this Bonfire of the Ambiguities:
Who will ultimately lead the enterprise? While other nations can play supporting roles (an aircraft from Qatar is supposed to show up today), only the American military has the weapons, the technology and the endurance to persevere and prevail. Even a cursory glance at military history demonstrates that military campaigns thought to be quick and easy are usually long and difficult.
What happens when un-reinforced air power fails? Don’t misunderstand: Airpower is an essential component of modern combat, as those armored forces arrayed against Benghazi may have understood during their last seconds on earth. But wars are won on the ground and President Obama has sworn he will not introduce ground forces into Libya. How then will he prevail, especially if Gaddafi is smart enough to extend the conflict with ground combat and insurgency?
Who are the rebels and why is supporting them in the American interest? Just a week prior to the administration’s stunning reversal, Obama’s own intelligence chief (Lieutenant General James Clapper) testified that he expected the Libyan regime to prevail. Why did he think that and how has the equation changed? What does the American intelligence establishment actually know about Gaddafi’s opposition? Does it include Al Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood? Prior to the uprising, the last demonstration seen in Tripoli was the hero’s welcome for the Lockerbie bomber (released for supposed medical reasons but still living comfortably in Tripoli).
One of the oddest things about President Obama’s statement yesterday was his reference to the defense budget. A number of media sources have even suggested that the costs of the operation will likely be modest, despite the opening barrage of cruise missiles (roughly $1M apiece), the F-15E fighter that crashed the other day or the B-2 bombers commuting from the American heartland to Libya. Despite the official optimism, the defense and intelligence budgets are being held hostage by Washington politicians. We are currently six months into FY 2011 and still haven’t passed this year’s budget. FY 2012 is looming and so is the debt ceiling. Does anyone see a problem here?
It is a book with many chapters, but surely Libya will be added as one more misadventure that seemed like a good idea at the time.
Colonel (Ret.) Ken Allard rose from draftee to Dean of the National War College. A former military analyst for NBC News, he is a prolific writer on national security issues.