Operation Odessey Dawn: No American Boots on the Ground...Yet!

It's time to Break It Down!

Two weeks ago I wrote a post about America’s Next War. Though cynics may have casually labeled that assertion alarmist hyperbole then, welcome to the future! The United Nations (U.N.) Security Council approved a resolution last Thursday, designed to achieve several objectives, including:

• Protect civilians

• Ban travel

• Freeze assets

• Embargo arms

• Invoke a no-fly zone

The rebels in Libya solicited support to aid their efforts to overthrow Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and his Regime, for several weeks. The League of Arab States and the African Union, two regional alliances, were among numerous groups advocating direct involvement by the United States, specifically and especially in creating a no-fly zone, which would prevent the Gaddafi Regime from bombing the people of Libya.

A number of factions in American also lobbied intently for President Obama to intervene. There was a particularly keen and persistent castigation of the Administration by several prominent, prospective candidates for the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination. I will leave you to draw your own inferences about whether this was a self-serving tactic, designed to enhance their individual profiles, or a mere coincidence, based on their otherwise legitimate ideological differences with the President.

Be that as it may, when the U.N. Security Council approved Resolution 1973 (2011), it represented a fundamental shift in America’s role in what many have characterized as Libya’s Civil War. The resolution passed on a 10-0 vote, with five members abstaining. The members voting in favor of the resolution were:

• Bosnia & Herzegovina

• Colombia

• France (Permanent)

• Gabon

• Lebanon

• Nigeria

• Portugal

• South Africa

• United Kingdom (Permanent)

• United States (Permanent)

Those members abstaining were:

• Brazil

• China (Permanent)

• Germany

• India

• Russian Federation (Permanent)

In effect, Operation Odyssey Dawn was born with that vote. While the most talked about feature of the resolution, before and after its adoption is the inimitable “no-fly zone,” the action includes several other elements, as enumerated earlier. Of course, the main purpose of this post is to point out the logic vacuum that exists in some corners, pertaining to the Operation. The concept of the no-fly zone was frequently bandied about as though it were a cure-all, and as if it were a kind of discreet action that could be implemented without preceding steps, or subsequent outcomes. It is neither.

In simplistic terms, invoking and enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya means Coalition air craft fly overhead and ensure that Libyan planes can no longer take off and initiate raids on Libyan rebels. The concept sounds simple enough, when framed that way. There is a basic problem with that description; it leaves out key information. In order for Coalition forces to fly over Libya in relative safety, the Allies had to first disable Libyan artillery and air craft. This entailed executing precision bombing strikes in areas where munitions and planes were maintained. Naturally, the odds that this equipment is stored in isolation of people are slim and none.

Put another way, we are at war! You don’t think so? Turn the tables; think of Pearl Harbor. When a nation or nations use military implements to attack another nation, it is war, regardless of whether it’s called that.

There have been reports that the Arab League, whose members emphatically urged the US to join the fray, recoiled at the attacks which cleared the way for the no-fly zone. Not surprisingly, whereas much of the negative internal political dissonance revolved around concerns that President Obama should have acted more swiftly and decisively to aid the rebels, in the aftermath of America assisting Coalition efforts to stage the no-fly zone over Libya, dissent persists from both sides of the Aisle.

GOP Senators Rick Santorum, PA, Marco Rubio, FL, and John McCain, AZ, have all expressed their opposition to the way President Obama and his Administration have responded to events in Libya. No to be outdone by his Republican colleagues, Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich, OH, went so far in panning Mr. Obama's actions, as to suggest the President may be culpable of an “impeachable offense.”

Mr. Kucinich, of course, opposed the action from the start. While I don’t view his current position as tenable, it is at least consistent. On the other hand, some of the Republicans who complained about America’s lack of involvement are now adroitly repositioning their arguments to find fault with actions they previously supported. Self-serving political opportunism; you decide! As for the members of the Arab League, they seem to have revisited and tweaked their shrill notes of opposition. Still, it needs to be reiterated, all of this seeming inconsistency and confusion is part of the dysfunction inherent in real life war. This is not video gaming, and there are no do-overs.

Death and casualties are both unavoidable and irrevocable aspects of war. That line should become the recurring refrain of every leader and legislative body considering initiating acts of war, much as Dorothy repeated “No place like home,” as she transitioned form Oz, back to Kansas. It may never prevent a war; but then again, it just might.

Finally, General Carter Ham, top Commander of American forces in the Libyan conflict insists that the impetus of this mission is to protect civilians. He pronounced the initial phase of the Operation, disabling Libya’s ability to effectively attack Coalition forces, successful. “Operation Odyssey Dawn: No American Boots on the Ground…Yet!” Yet is the operative word here. President Obama has expressed confidence that America will be able to hand over responsibility for maintaining the Coalition effort in days; not weeks, or longer.

At this juncture, that sounds overly optimistic. Colonel Gaddafi has remained openly defiant, and promises not to submit. With a mission aimed neither at Regime Change, nor targeting The Leader, continuing to protect civilians successfully sounds like a protracted engagement. We will see.

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WY02a_E3sw

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Video-Libya-UN-Security-Council-Votes-In-Favour-Of-A-No-Fly-Zone/Article/201103315954268

http://www.un.org/sc/members.asp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRScYQ_BLIs

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7360170n

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZLkwbeROa0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOMHvdZE5G0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlUdvYyr7ok&feature=watch_response

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12562504

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/22/obama.libya.policy.defense/

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2014572662_apltobamawarandpeace.html

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Gibson-opposes-Obama-on-Libya-1246505.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Santorum

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/65740/will-opposition-to-libya-attacks-hurt-obamas-2012-campaign/

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/15/mccain-lieberman-urge-obama-to-recognize-libyan-opposition/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-22/obama-has-no-doubt-u-s-can-hand-libyan-command-to-international-force.html

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm#Resolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_League

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_African_Union

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/17/seeks-resolution-authorizing-wide-range-strikes-libya/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_Ham