Since before the Obama Administration began its confused Libyan campaign, I argued against American involvement for several reasons. For instance, America has no vital interests in Libya and it imported very little of Libya’s oil. I also argued that America’s bombing of Libya would harm America’s broader regional non-proliferation efforts. By showing others that once America defangs a nation’s WMD programs, there is little to stop it from bombing that country shortly thereafter, America sent a mixed message to future proliferators.
I also had major problems with the President’s approach to the campaign. For instance, he ruled out ground forces at a time when he should not have been taking any options off the table.
Furthermore, the President engaged in the campaign without knowing much, if anything about the opposition he would be supporting.
Even today, the rebels do not agree who is in charge of their forces. General Khalifa Hifter recently told a reporter:
“I control everybody, the rebels and the regular army forces…I am the field commander, and Gen. Abdul Fattah Younes is chief of staff. His job is to support us in the field, and my job is to lead the fighting.”
However, the rebels’ civilian leadership insisted that Hifter’s claim was “not true” and that “General Younes is over him, this is for sure, and General Hifter is under him.”
To make matters worse, the first weapons shipment of 400 AK-47s went to neither general. Instead, the Arab nation donating these weapoons sent them directly to a civilian petroleum engineer, who was training other civilians.
The bottom line is that two months into the campaign, things appear to be more confused than ever. By not assuming any leadership in the endeavor, the President now presides over a NATO that is both confused and divided about what to do next.
The sooner the President can force a diplomatic solution, the better.