So the airstrikes in Libya continues and the rebels are drawing closer to Tripolitana. Seems that they have run into a bit of difficulties the further away they move from Benghazi: the lines of communication are extended, although NATO will be providing command of the air/seas, the supply lines will be increasingly difficult to maintain, and consequently, the rebels will probably not maintain the same momentum as they have up to this point.
If memory serves correctly, it takes about four-five days to drive from Benghazi to Tripoli, according to the company that was offering to take us to Leptis Magna (close to Tripoli) and to Cyrene (close to Benghazi) when we were in Tunisia and trying to find ways to get into Libya, which ultimately never happened. (You can't visit Libya as a tourist, you must go with an official travel agency and be shadowed by a government PR team. A one week trip is about 2k USD, only North Korea is restrictive like that...you can apply for Iranian visas online, and Syria issues them right at the border, both of which were fairly easy.)
Now eager, unemployed young men in 50. cal mounted toyota land cruisers could probably do it in half the time. I don't know what the status of the rebel armed forces is, but if they are serious about launching a full on assault against government forces dug in at various towns, they will probably need the armour, heavy guns, support units, medics, extra fuel, command vehicles. etc. etc...all that will take time to get to Surt and insha'allah Tripoli. Unless the government troops pull back, the war will probably turn static, and to take a city the rebels would have to be able to establish a more permanent presence outside their objective city, and when that happens, it will be a logistic nightmare if the rebels consisted of nothing but eager, unemployed young men with kalashnikovs, technicals, and a fortnight's training.
Can the rebels take down Gaddafi with only limited NATO air-support?
I am skeptical...hopefully they do, or through a series of coordinated assaults and internal uprisings we see Gaddafi pushed back and ultimately swept away. If that happens, then great, all we have to worry about is the formation of a new coalition government in which the formerly marginalized tribes will have greater voice, and the previously powerful tribes now marginalized. There will be discontentment, but at least we shall have peace for a few years, and a continuous flow of oil to the OECD and the NIEs. Which really is the best one can hope for.
But what if Gaddafi ends up staying? Obama has claimed that removing Gaddaffi is not an objective of the military missions, but this is surely problematic in many ways?
1. De facto dissolution of Libya.
Gaddafi controls the west, while the east is held together by the rebels. Its Sudan take-two. Two countries form, and Gaddafi remains in power, and Libya remains unchanged but for a halving of its size and a doubling of its hatred for the west.
2. Gaddafi consolidates power
Gaddafi stays in power, having been chastised by the west. What does he do? Surely he would not turn towards greater transparency and move towards democracy? After all, his rapproachment with the west in giving up on his nuclear ambitions and terrorist sponsorships came to nought?
In Gaddafi controlled areas, there will most likely be a re-centralization of power, a purge of units, persons, and officials of questionable loyalty, a greater curtailment of freedoms, and a heavier hand of the state upon the populace. In other words, he will regroup, and exert greater control in response to his recent vulnerability.
3. Gaddafi turns away from the international community for good.
A new Gaddafi led Libya will dream of becoming North Korea, a pariah among nations, but ultimately, untouchable. Will he try to restart his WMD program? Doing so might incur an American invasion, but it is still possible if he sees it as a strategic gamble worth taking.
Covert sponsorship of terrorism resumes? Libya can turn into a hotbed for terrorism, Gaddafi had so far been very hostile towards terrorist organizations, although he has committed several such acts himself. Perhaps he will be more sympathetic to the likes of Hezbollah, and the Mahgrebi Al-Qaeda? The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right?
4. IF Gaddafi actually stays in power and pursues these tenets of a newly radicalized and alienated foreign policy, it would prove to be a much larger headache for the Western World than it is currently posing. Will NATO then go to war with Gaddafi once more to rid him for good?
If memory serves correctly, it takes about four-five days to drive from Benghazi to Tripoli, according to the company that was offering to take us to Leptis Magna (close to Tripoli) and to Cyrene (close to Benghazi) when we were in Tunisia and trying to find ways to get into Libya, which ultimately never happened. (You can't visit Libya as a tourist, you must go with an official travel agency and be shadowed by a government PR team. A one week trip is about 2k USD, only North Korea is restrictive like that...you can apply for Iranian visas online, and Syria issues them right at the border, both of which were fairly easy.)
Now eager, unemployed young men in 50. cal mounted toyota land cruisers could probably do it in half the time. I don't know what the status of the rebel armed forces is, but if they are serious about launching a full on assault against government forces dug in at various towns, they will probably need the armour, heavy guns, support units, medics, extra fuel, command vehicles. etc. etc...all that will take time to get to Surt and insha'allah Tripoli. Unless the government troops pull back, the war will probably turn static, and to take a city the rebels would have to be able to establish a more permanent presence outside their objective city, and when that happens, it will be a logistic nightmare if the rebels consisted of nothing but eager, unemployed young men with kalashnikovs, technicals, and a fortnight's training.
Can the rebels take down Gaddafi with only limited NATO air-support?
I am skeptical...hopefully they do, or through a series of coordinated assaults and internal uprisings we see Gaddafi pushed back and ultimately swept away. If that happens, then great, all we have to worry about is the formation of a new coalition government in which the formerly marginalized tribes will have greater voice, and the previously powerful tribes now marginalized. There will be discontentment, but at least we shall have peace for a few years, and a continuous flow of oil to the OECD and the NIEs. Which really is the best one can hope for.
But what if Gaddafi ends up staying? Obama has claimed that removing Gaddaffi is not an objective of the military missions, but this is surely problematic in many ways?
1. De facto dissolution of Libya.
Gaddafi controls the west, while the east is held together by the rebels. Its Sudan take-two. Two countries form, and Gaddafi remains in power, and Libya remains unchanged but for a halving of its size and a doubling of its hatred for the west.
2. Gaddafi consolidates power
Gaddafi stays in power, having been chastised by the west. What does he do? Surely he would not turn towards greater transparency and move towards democracy? After all, his rapproachment with the west in giving up on his nuclear ambitions and terrorist sponsorships came to nought?
In Gaddafi controlled areas, there will most likely be a re-centralization of power, a purge of units, persons, and officials of questionable loyalty, a greater curtailment of freedoms, and a heavier hand of the state upon the populace. In other words, he will regroup, and exert greater control in response to his recent vulnerability.
3. Gaddafi turns away from the international community for good.
A new Gaddafi led Libya will dream of becoming North Korea, a pariah among nations, but ultimately, untouchable. Will he try to restart his WMD program? Doing so might incur an American invasion, but it is still possible if he sees it as a strategic gamble worth taking.
Covert sponsorship of terrorism resumes? Libya can turn into a hotbed for terrorism, Gaddafi had so far been very hostile towards terrorist organizations, although he has committed several such acts himself. Perhaps he will be more sympathetic to the likes of Hezbollah, and the Mahgrebi Al-Qaeda? The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right?
4. IF Gaddafi actually stays in power and pursues these tenets of a newly radicalized and alienated foreign policy, it would prove to be a much larger headache for the Western World than it is currently posing. Will NATO then go to war with Gaddafi once more to rid him for good?
No comments:
Post a Comment