Gaddafi and NATO

April 10, 2011 By Malcolm Blair-Robinson

There are at the heart of this military adventure a number of miscalculations. The rebels are not a competent military force. Gaddafi enjoys more support in depth among his population than the West thought. He is a wily and resourceful commander. His forces, with a backbone of mercenaries, have shown adaptability similar to the  North Vietnamese, whose tactics neutralised so much of  the superior US firepower. There is stalemate on the ground. But most important of all Gaddafi is stronger politically than when the operation began. He is by no means losing. Indeed as this Blog pointed out at the start, in a battle of wits he will most likely win.

Hague and others refer to multiple defections and declare that the Libyan government is collapsing from within. This is rubbish, based on another miscalculation. It is the supposition that the Colonel had modeled his government on conventional lines. Instead he has set himself up as a King.  A King needs two things to survive. A loyal army and a loyal family. Ministers are just window dressing and, in times of trouble, a nuisance.

To topple Gaddafi you have to get at his family and his army. If they turn on him, then it will be his end game. There is little sign of this now, not least because it is not part of the plan. Maybe it should be. But if it were, the military adventure would have to become a full scale war. Whatever resolutions may or may not be passed to invoke it, no paticipating Western government would survive long after its declaration. Washington has already calculated that Obama would lose in 2012 if the Administration is caught up in another foreign war. That would leave only London and Paris gung ho, but Sarkozy is too near an election to risk it and here the coalition would bust apart if Cameron, whose judgement is already in question, tried to go it alone.

The ideal outcome for many would be a drone strike on the Gaddafi family as they gather for evening cocktails. This is specifically against UNSC 1973, though if it happened, relief worldwide would mute the criticism. The trouble with that scenario is that the Gaddafis are more than savvy to the risk. They are rarely in one place together and the places change all the time without warning and pattern. There is a lack of good enough intelligence to guarantee a hit. A miss would involve collateral damage involving innocent civilians. That would be a disaster for NATO and a triumph for Gaddafi.

Over three weeks into this adventure without any resolution in sight, this Blog asks , once again, where is it going?