No Woman, No-Fly

The title actually makes no sense but it was sort of irresistible.

At Foreign Policy Tom Ricks has an essential list of considerations for anyone trying to think through the implications of establishing a no-fly zone in Libya. The first few:

1. Imposing a no-fly zone is an act of war. For example, it would require attacking Qaddafi’s air defense systems-not just anti-aircraft guns and missile batteries, but also radar and communications systems. We may also need some places out in the desert to base helicopters to pick up downed fliers. So, first question: Do we want to go to war with Qaddafi?

2. Hmmm, another American war in an Arab state -- what’s not to like?

3. How long are we willing to continue this state of war? What if we engage in an act of war, and he prevails against the rebels? Do we continue to fight him, escalate — or just slink away? And what do we do about aircrews taken prisoner?

He also notes that the proper historical analogy is not America’s relatively quiesent experience protecting northern Iraq after the Gulf War, but in Serbia in 1999 with a hostile Slobodan Milosevic genuinely intent on fighting back. Any intervention in Libya would certainly seem to fit the latter model.

It’s also important to note that our experience in Iraq perfectly illustrates the relevance of Ricks’ #3. The no-fly zones did realize their immediate objectives—keeping in check Saddam’s addiction to slaughtering Kurds, and preventing him from strafing rebellious Shiites in the South. But it was a strategic dead end. The NFZs only ended with our full-scale invasion in 2003. Absent forcible regime change, we’d still be there with 20,000 troops and hundreds of military planes and dozens of naval ships, at a significant financial cost. In other words we would now be coming up on twenty years of no-fly zone stalemate, unable to disengage and wary of the consequences of escalation. It’s precisely what Ricks is worried about with Libya.

I really don’t think this will happen, or if it did it would have to be so internationalized that the U.S footprint would be all but invisible (which is another way of saying it probably won’t happen). But if Libya really explodes, those advocating intervention better have excellent answers to all of Ricks’ questions.