President Obama’s Libya strategy is sketchy, to say the least, when it comes to the question of what comes after the UN, and NATO’s and America’s “humanitarian intervention.”
One of the best and most succinct discussions I’ve seen on this question to date is in this NPR article — http://www.npr.org/2011/03/28/134920431/foreign-policy-what-happens-if-libyas-rebels-win
— in which Lisa Anderson, President of the American University in Cairo, says, “Any military and political intervention that will bring an end to the Gaddafi regime should be accompanied, from the beginning, by mobilization of the resources of political reconstruction.”
I see that the U.S. is dispatching a senior diplomat to meet with the opposition, whoever they are, in Libya, and that the Brits have such meetings scheduled in London. Will these early efforts bear fruit and lead to any realistic reconstruction, if total civil war can be avoided in the interim? Big question. We’ve blown efforts to deliver practical help towards reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do we even begin to understand the tribal dynamics in Libya? Do we understand the role of their military, and the basis of political power through Libya? I don’t think so.
Now that the air war has been brought under control and Gaddafi’s tanks have been knocked out in the East, and the opposition forces, if we can call them that, have been stopped by armed civilians in Gaddafi-controlled towns. Is this the beginning of a civil war, in which “humanitarian intervention” becomes more and more difficult to achieve, as civilians become the combatants and victims, on both sides?
Is this the dawning of tribal war and revolution? Will the U.S. be on the winning side of such a conflict? Will tribes previously loyal to Gaddafi switch sides to the opposition? Will an opposition coalition of tribes, towns and forces be formed, with a recognizable leadership widely supported by the population?
Will a new generation of terrorists, who hate the West, and one another, be spawned? Well, that’s probably already a given.
Will we regret the day we entered into “humanitarian intervention” in Libya? Or will we celebrate the victory of successfully imposing our U.S./Western ethos on another African/Middle Eastern culture? In what year, or decade, or century, will that “political reconstruction” be celebrated? And by whom?
One last comment: I fear that Obama has again, ala Afghanistan, been romanced by the military into believing that a limited armed intervention will likely produce successful political results.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 30, 2011 at 09:59
Prediction: 20 Years of War in Libya
[…] Is “Political Reconstruction” Possible in Libya? (applewoody.wordpress.com) […]
March 30, 2011 at 21:41
Susanne Tauke
So many questions, and no answers. May the force be with us!!
August 23, 2011 at 06:11
mstauke
Very thoughtful piece, Chuck. And, of course, one has to ask: If there were no oil under its sand, would we be doing anything in Libya? As one who well remembers the oil embargo of 1973, I find it amazing that, for the past 38 years, the U.S. has been paying lip service to energy independence, but success in that direction has been limited. Life is a constant weighing of risks. The question the Libyan situation poses (once again) is: Which, ultimately, is the greater risk: Fighting wars on the Arabian peninsula and coddling/enriching regimes like the Saudi’s or, until the day alternative energies become viable, mining the oil we have in the Gulf and Alaska? Neither is ideal, but which can do the greater harm?