Late Monday afternoon, as Libyan rebels prepared another desperate attack on the eastern oil town of Brega, a young rebel raised his rocket-propelled grenade as if to fire. The town’s university, shimmering in the distance, was far beyond his weapon’s maximum range. An older rebel urged him to hold fire, telling him the weapon’s back-blast could do little more than reveal their position and draw a mortar attack.
The younger rebel almost spat with disgust. “I have been fighting for 37 days!” he shouted. “Nobody can tell me what to do!”
The outburst midfight ”” and the ensuing argument between a determined young man who seemed to have almost no understanding of modern war and an older man who wisely counseled caution ”” underscored a fact that is self-evident almost everywhere on Libya’s eastern front. The rebel military, as it sometimes called, is not really a military at all.
Air-Land Battle Doctrine requires a competent land force. Air capability doesn’t matter if there is no ground force capable of exploiting the tactical and strategic opportunities provided by Air. That’s why the coaltion strategy has always been doomed to failure. The best it could do was degrade Government forces to the point that government victory could not be achieved. That means stalemate, and that is why the word is being tossed around all of the sudden.
carl
Phase 1 has been achieved – the protection of the citizens of Benghazi. It has all come so late unfortunately for other cities, and it is not clear if anything can or will be done for Misurata. But they and we are grateful for the saving of so many lives and the chance for the opposition to shore up their defenses.
It is not stalemate – it is a stopping of the really large scale massacres in the East, while giving time for the financial sanctions to work, as the signs are that they will.
Phase 1 having been achieved and the short term protection of civilians put in place, it is open to the United Nations to either give the sanctions a chance, or to make such further resolutions as it sees fit.
2. Pageantmaster [blockquote] Phase 1 has been achieved[/blockquote] There are phases now? Wouldn’t that imply a level of planning that has never materialized in this operation? This is after all the campaign that included threats of bombing against both sides – which bespeaks of a lack of planning and seriousness. Is bombing the rebels part of phase 2 then? [blockquote] It is not stalemate [/blockquote] OK, perhaps we could call it a ‘prolonged strategic pause’ or an ‘advance to the front in place.'[blockquote] giving time for the financial sanctions to work[/blockquote] How do you define ‘work?’ Gadhaffi flees the country? Gadhaffi gets capped by his own military? Those are both possibilities I guess. But how do they end the war? Who takes power afterwords? You have a view of post-Gadhaffi Libya that is decidedly .. optimistic. Of course, Gadhaffi’s exit would allow the Coalition to step away. But Libya’s problems would just be beginning?[blockquote] or to make such further resolutions as [the United Nations] sees fit.[/blockquote] Oh, I’m sure it might come up with a scathing denunciation or two, and it might even call for hostilities to cease. In the meantime, I wonder what it might do about the Congo?
carl
Carl please! You forgot the “Strongly Worded Letter” followed by the “Comfy Chair”. It’s time to get serious about this.
Carl (#3), you’re aware that there are appoximately 20,000 uniformed UN personnel currently in the Congo? The Canadian government and Canadian Forces took a serious look at sending a significant (for Canada) force to the Congo about a year ago:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2010/04/30/canadian-military-congo-deployment.html
It may not be a highly informed position, but I think the Canadian population would be generally supportive of sending Canadian troops to the Congo (the government would face little criticism for such a decision).
5. WarrenS
I didn’t know the number, but their presence was sort of the point. What are those 20,000 soldiers doing? Are they hunting down the bad guys and killing them? Are the stopping the use of rape as a weapon of war? Are they ‘protecting civilians’ in the vulnerable parts of the country? Are they imposing order? Have they even so much as established a ‘no-fly’ zone? (I know, I know. The rebels in the Congo have no air force. That must explain the complete lack of activity.) Hrmm, let’s see now. Where are those 20,000 soldiers from? Mostly from India, Bangladesh, South Africa and Pakistan. Not a European soldier in site. Even the Canadians decided not to participate. Wonder why that is?
Meanwhile, just a handful of miles across the water from Italy, we return to the humanitarian crisis in Libya…
carl
Would it be a strech too far to ask what might be happening if the UN wasn’t there? I don’t have answers to your other questions.
Many Canadian service members have worn the blue beret and I suspect that few would praise the UN. That said, I think that most would admit that there is a baby in the bath water that should not be thrown out. Some third-world nations participate in UN missions largely because of the money they (and their soldiers) receive. That notwithstanding, I’m not going to denigrate their willingness to do something.