The United Nations-supported operation, Operation Odyssey Dawn, has, so far, been a success. However, without making a clearer goal for the operation and taking more definitive actions, the coalition of Western Allies risks jeopardizing the cause of the entire operation.
The resolution adopted by the Security Council on March 17 authorizes Member States “to take all necessary measures … to protect civilians.” To carry out this resolution, a coalition of Western Allies started a series of extensive airstrikes and missile attacks against military targets in Libya last Saturday, which severely undermined Qaddafi’s ability to resist a no-fly zone. Although the early phase of the operation has been successful, its cause still remains shortsighted. The purpose of the entire assault, as stated in the resolution, is “to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack,” which reflects the Security Council’s attempt to reiterate that the ultimate cause of the effort is not to fight for one side in a war, but to protect innocent civilians. However, it is unclear how Western Allies will remain the apolitical guardians of innocent civilians in Libya without choosing a side in the Libyan civil war.
Most world leaders do not want to get involved in a large-scale, prolonged armed conflict. Having realized the risk of waging a full-blown war against pro-Qaddafi forces, the United Kingdom’s chief of the defense staff, General Sir David Richards, stated Qaddafi is “absolutely not” a target for military action. President Barack Obama also said U.S. strikes on Libyan air defenses and military airfields “will be limited in their nature, duration and scope.”
However, a lukewarm response from the international community to the Libyan situation may undermine the very cause of the resolution. Imposing no-fly zones and an arms embargo will surely increase the rebels’ chance against pro-Qaddafi forces, but it will not guarantee a smooth takeover of the nation by the rebels who are relatively unorganized and untrained. Qaddafi, who vowed “a long war,” is expected to insist on fighting with his highly trained tribal paramilitary forces and mercenaries who have been loyal to him so far. Without implementing more comprehensive military intervention of Western countries, which may involve the use of ground forces, prolonged armed conflicts between pro-Qaddafi forces and rebel fighters seem unavoidable. In the worst case, Libya may fall into a long anarchic period during which a bloody civil war between the rebels and pro-Qaddafi forces persists.
America and its coalition is now faced with a daunting conundrum. As a permanent member of the Security Council, America is obliged to play a vital role in carrying out the resolution. Stopping the escalation of civilian casualties, and ultimately fulfilling the humanitarian cause of the resolution, requires more than simply enforcing the stated no-fly zone and arms embargo. Yet, the opposition remains strong. American forces are already overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the U.S. government still needs to deal with its soaring budget deficit. In this situation, sending ground troops to Libya would be its least favorable option.
As the situation develops, Americans will be asked to make tough decisions. A smart course of action will put an end to the murder of innocent civilians while minimizing American intervention in Libya, but how is Obama leading us there?