It was no surprise that the UN Security Council decided on a no-fly zone over Libya after the UN authorized “use of all necessary means” to employ a ban on flights in Libyan airspace. According to the New York Times, the closed meeting only took 45 minutes. Nor was it a surprise that countries such as the United States, Britain, France, Denmark, Canada, Italy and Qatar announced their participation in the no-fly zone. I’ve been voting for the Security Council to make this move for weeks, however, now I find myself wondering about the repercussions of this potentially hazardous mistake.
The American and European missile attacks on Libya’s little force have already proved their power to Colonel Qaddafi, but is are these attacks really enough to make him stop his attacks completely? According to the LA Times, Qaddafi’s armed forces are working in urban areas where the population is difficult to control, often killing civilians in the action. If this gets worse, is America and Europe ready to take ground forces?
According to Obama, no. He claims this could lead us into a stalemate. Qaddafi would simply grasp onto his power while international help would slowly deteriorate as usual. Even if we were to employ ground forces and Qaddafi steps down, we’re still going to be left with a list of problems which we have now dived into head first. We could end up with another war on our hands. After ten years, I’m simply begging that we escape Afghanistan and Iraq. I’m not quite sure this country has the endurance for another war.
Surely fighting Libya would be far less risky than the present wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, due to its size. Libya is bigger, although smaller in population and is primarily Muslim which means that bitterness between ethnicities is little to nonexistent. Libya is also not surrounded by countries that would further engage in war with us, such as Pakistan or Iran.
However, as Obama explained late last week, there is simply too much that can go wrong in a Libya with Qaddafi out of the picture. Although a week ago I was praying for a UN decision to help Libya, I now see that the best option is some sort of peacekeeping force under the United Nations, and as Max Boot of the New York Times suggests, NATO and the Arab League. This will require a Security Council resolution, not just decision to employ a ban on airspace.
I’m not saying I don’t support us in intervening in Libya. I think for humanitarian reasons we’ve done the right thing. However, now we must realize and plan for the future predicaments that we’ve pushed ourselves into.
This is basically very good - it does seem like you go back and forth a bit. Fine for this assignment, but something to think about in terms of future op ed writing. Also, not sure you have all your facts straight. Like fighting in libya would be less risky than was in Afganistan and Iraq. Feels like comparing apples and oranges. But basically very good!
ReplyDelete