Caution Precedes Military Force in Libyan Crisis

Rebel fighters shoot into the air during a funeral for slain comrades on March 3, in Ajdabiya, Libya. At least 14 people died reportedly in fighting in Brega, Wednesday when rebels fought back an offensive from troops loyal to Pres (John Moore/Getty Images)

A small group of rebels—poorly armed yet fearless—stood up against a nation. The mujahedeen, who renounced their lives to resist the Soviets, won the hearts of Americans who were quick to provide them with weapons and training. Later, members of the mujahedeen would form the Taliban, and then turn those same weapons on Americans.

The rebellions sweeping through Libya bear a discomforting resemblance to when U.S.-backed rebels toppled Afghanistan’s Soviet-backed Najibullah government in 1992. A civil war ensued, the Taliban took power, and the United States returned in 2001 to fight a war that lasts to this day.

While Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi is launching airstrikes and hiring mercenaries to crush his own people, rebels are again calling for aid in toppling a regime.

The United States and NATO, meanwhile, are on the fence, uncertain of what their support could create.

“The government sees a real threat in helping the revolutionaries now, because if the Islamists get hold of the government then they'll have this arsenal of weapons they can use against us,” said Jack Winnick, professor emeritus of chemical engineering and author of “East Wind,” a novel on nuclear terrorism.

U.S. naval ships and 400 Marines were deployed to the Mediterranean where they await orders.

NATO meanwhile, is being pulled in opposing directions by its member-states over whether it should intervene. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen called an emergency meeting on Feb. 25, stating afterward, “NATO can act as an enabler and coordinator, if and when, individual member states want to take action,” according to a NATO statement.

Many NATO members are likely waiting to see what the United States will do before deciding further action.

“All eyes once again turned to the United States to set the pace,” states a report from the Atlantic Council. “Taking a much stronger stance immediately, President Obama suggested on Wednesday that all options were on the table, including unilateral action.”

The main card on the table is establishing a no-fly zone over Libya to end Gadhafi’s use of the air force to kill opposition forces, which was proposed by Sen. John McCain. A no-fly zone would permit U.S. and NATO forces to shoot down Libyan jets, but would also require the destruction of the country’s air defenses.

The United States appears unlikely to make the move, however, as “the U.N. Security Council resolution provides no authorization for the use of armed force,” said Defense Secretary Robert Gates during a March 1 press briefing.

On Feb. 26, the security council voted unanimously to impose sanctions on Libya including an arms embargo, freezing the assets of its leaders, imposing a travel ban on Gadhafi and family members.

Gates added, “All of the options beyond the humanitarian assistance and evacuation are complex.”

Military action carries a few key concerns. Rebellions that are sweeping through the Arab world have taken the United States and NATO by surprise. Although many of them aim to overthrow anti-American regimes, their futures are uncertain.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated on March 2, “The region is changing, and a strong, strategic American response will be essential,” according to a Department of State (DOS) transcript.

According to Winnick, any involvement in the Arab revolutions needs to be taken carefully. He notes that the region as a whole typically has strong anti-American sentiment. “Almost anything we do would be seen as trying to take control. They’ve been taught that we’re imperialists, and anything we do could be taken as imperialist action.”

“If we can do it while avoiding the use of military that will be best because we won’t be seen as the power behind the revolution,” Winnick said.

There is also a more prominent factor that is dissuading military action against the Libyan regime: the United States does not want to involve itself in a third war.

Defense Secretary Gates raised the issue during the March 1 briefing, stating, “If we move additional assets, what are the consequences of that for Afghanistan, for the Persian Gulf? And what other allies are prepared to work with us in some of these things?”

“We also have to think about, frankly, the use of the U.S. military in another country in the Middle East,” Gates said.

As the situation unfolds, military action may become necessary if Gadhafi is going to be stopped. Gadhafi’s son, Saif al-Islam, stated in a Feb. 20 state TV broadcast, “We will fight to the last man and woman and bullet,” according to a report from conservative think tank The Jamestown Foundation.

“He will not step down. He is not going to leave without a serious fight—Absolutely not. More people will have to die before he actually leaves, and he will have to probably leave forcefully,” said Dr. Karam Dana, Dubai Initiative research fellow, The John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, in an interview with Sound of Hope Radio.

Dana stated that removing Gadhafi from power may require his assassination or foreign intervention to place him on trial in the International Criminal Court. “That is very unlikely to happen,” Dana said.