peacefare.net

Actions now count more than words

While Tripoli’s Foreign Minister had initially announced acceptance of UN Security Council resolution 1973 and implementation of the ceasefire it called for, Colonel Gaddafi’s spokesman has rejected it:

Tripoli’s forces apparently continued to fight, entering Benghazi in tanks as well as activating “sleeper” cells in the still rebel-held city.

None of this should surprise:  Gaddafi’s penchant for duplicity is legendary.  What is disturbing is the lack of readiness on the part of those taking on the responsibility to enforce Resolution 1973 militarily.  President Obama set out explicit redlines in his speech yesterday that have already been crossed.  Militarily, it is much harder to do something about a tank in the streets of Benghazi than in the desert sands surrounding it. French and British planes are said to be beginning their efforts today–they need to make haste.

What should they do? We are past the point at which the no fly zone (NFZ) is an adequate response. Resolution 1973 authorizes all necessary means to protect civilians. I’ll leave it to the military planners–if they’ll work quickly–to decide what actions will have the biggest effects, but in addition to obvious targets like armored vehicles I would think taking out the supply convoys for Gaddafi’s force moving east would be both appropriate and effective. A tank doesn’t run long without fuel, and soldiers need water. And there shouldn’t be many civilians in a military supply convoy.

There is also the question of Tripoli’s command and control. So long as it is giving orders to attack civilians, it is a legitimate target. The responsibility to protect will mean little if Gaddafi continues to defy the Security Council. Taking out communications facilities can be amazingly effective–ask the Bosnian Serb Army, which turned and fled once its communications nodes were bombed by NATO in 1995. Even if Gaddafi is not there, it may be symbolically important to destroy his main bunker at Bab Al Aziziya. It might even be wise to give warning, if there is concern about collateral damage. Once Gaddafi is on the run, maintaining control of Tripoli is going to be very difficult for him. Saddam, remember, fell from power well before he was captured.

Of course none of this should take place without a parallel diplomatic effort to enforce the sanctions more vigorously and get Gaddafi out of Libya. The sooner he leaves, the better. Neither Libya nor those enforcing 1973 will benefit from extended military action.

Thinking ahead to New Libya

Some will be surprised that Gaddafi’s Foreign Minister announced an immediate ceasefire in response to the UN Security Council resolution.  This is no surprise.  Gaddafi’s forces hold most of Libya–a ceasefire in place favors them, not the rebels.  Moreover, Gaddafi likely hopes to prevent strikes from taking down his air defenses, the necessary prelude to real enforcement of the “no fly, no drive” zone.

In the meanwhile, his forces continue to fire on rebels in Misrata.  That too should be no surprise.

What is surprising is that NATO is apparently behind the curve in getting organized for the air campaign.  The UK and France are expected to take the lead.  U.S. NATO Ambassador Ivo Daalder tweets:  “#NATO will meet this morning to discuss #UNSCR 1973 authorizing “all necessary means” to protect civilians in #Libya. Busy days.”  I should say so.  Why isn’t all this ready?

There is real peril here.  If Gaddafi perceives that there is a window of opportunity to advance further, he may well take it.  Anticipating negotiations, he’ll want to control as much territory as possible.

On the rebel side, the military effort is looking weak and exhausted.  Let’s hope they are better at the negotiating.

What they need is for Gaddafi to leave Libya.  This he will do if he sees a real threat in Tripoli, either from demonstrators or from those within his regime who are starting to see the handwriting on the wall.  Demonstrators who braved the streets this morning were shot for their courage.  I assume he’ll do the same to any of his inner circle who turn on him. This is a situation in which a few brave souls count for a lot.

President Obama is to speak on Libya at 2 pm.  He has reason to vaunt American diplomacy’s success at the Security Council last night.  But he likely also wants to make it clear that this is not a U.S. operation.  I won’t be surprised if he says UK, France and others will take the lead on military operations.

Who is working on the post-war efforts?  Libya is a country without a state.  It is going to need a lot of help–not money–once Gaddafi is gone.

Who is going to maintain law and order? How will revenge killings be prevented? How will accountability for past crimes be pursued? Are the Libyan courts and prisons functioning? How will state property be protected from regime elements who will try to walk away with it? Is there a social safety net that needs to be rescued quickly? How will a new constitution be written? Will foreign workers be invited back, or should Libyans fill their jobs? Lots of questions for a post-Gaddafi government.

The Benghazi Transitional Council looks like the best bet for a new government, but is it fully representative? Will Tripoli embrace it? How can it be made more so? What about local governance? Can the Gaddafi-era local committees be used, or reconstituted with different people?

Who will take the lead in supporting all this in the international community? The Americans and Europeans have clearly maxed out their state-building capacity. What about the Arab League? UN?

Of course there is also a possibility that a new dictator will emerge from the wreckage of the old regime or from the ranks of the rebels. But it is hard to see how Libyans who have tasted freedom are going to be stuffed back into an autocracy. Libya is going to need help getting it together after this war.