NATO Mission in Libya Extended Another Ninety Days

The NATO bombing campaign continued following a

failed bid by South African President Jacob Zuma to
broker a peace deal on behalf of the African Union.
Both sides, NATO and Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, are
recalcitrant in their positions and therein lies the
dilemma for Western nations and the increasingly
isolated Libyan leader.

According to Mr. Zuma, Qaddafi was prepared to accept the African Union sponsored
ceasefire but would not step down as demanded by the rebels and Brussels. “He is
ready to implement the road map,” said President Zuma. In Benghazi, Fathi Baja, the
foreign minister for the Transitional National Council said of Qaddafi’s position, “We
refuse completely. We don’t consider it a political initiative, it is only some stuff that
Gaddafi wants to announce to stay in power.”

Further underscoring the resolve of Qaddafi to remain in power, following his meeting
with Mr. Zuma, Qaddafi’s chief spokesman, Moussa Ibrahim, offered a blunt response
to NATO and the rebels based in Benghazi, “We say: ‘Who are you to say the Libyan
cannot choose Muammar Qaddafi?…We will never give in.”

Qaddafi’s hardening resolve to remain in power and increasing isolation is the result
of over three months of the increasingly effective NATO bombing campaign which
has denigrated Qaddafi’s military. At the same time, rebels have begun to coordinate
their campaign against government forces. Additionally, Qaddafi has seen a number
of his key government officials resign or leave Libya. The Libyan ambassador to the
European Union, Al Hadi Hadeiba, defected along with his staff. Libya’s oil minister
and former Prime Minister, Shokri Ghanem, defected and in March, Moussa Koussa,
Qaddafi’s foreign minister fled to the U.K.

Further eroding international support for Qaddafi, Russia recently announced that it
too was joining the cacophony of calls that Qaddafi step down from power. Russia’s
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov suggested during the G8 Summit in
Deauville, France, “Colonel Gaddafi has deprived himself of legitimacy with his
actions.” Ryabkov continued, “We should help him leave.”

For NATO, patience is running out in many European capitals and the Obama
administration realizes that at some point the U.S. Congress might possibly exert its
Congressional prerogative and demand an end to U.S. participation in the no-fly zone
unless the administration seeks Congressional approval. Under the War Powers
Resolution, Mr. Obama must seek Congressional authorization if U.S. forces have been
engaged in hostilities for longer than sixty days.

Colonel Qaddafi faces few desirable options. The International Criminal Court could
indict the Libyan leader for any number of gross human rights violations. As a result,
he will have few places to seek political asylum. Qaddafi’s most likely course of action
will be an attempt to essentially wait out NATO hoping that their patience for long-
term military actions will force NATO to pull back. However, playing a waiting game
is inherently dangerous. NATO has not been shy about bombing strategic sites within
Tripoli, which has resulted in the death of Qaddafi’s family members.

The United States explained its initial involvement to protect civilians in Benghazi and
elsewhere from Col. Qaddafi’s military forces. Publicly, Washington has shifted its
goals in Libya to what is widely understood to be regime change. Despite earlier
claims that the U.S. would be handing over to NATO a significant amount of the
military operations, the U.S. military still conducts a significant proportion of the
combat operations against Qaddafi’s regime.

“I absolutely agree that given the progress that has been made over the last several
weeks, that Gaddafi and his regime need to understand that there will not be a letup
in the pressure that we are applying. And the United Kingdom, the United States, and
our other partners are putting a wide range of resources within, consistent with the
U.N. mandate in order to achieve that pressure. And I think will ultimately be
successful. The goal is to make sure that the Libyan people can make a determination
about how they want to proceed, and that they will be finally free of 40 years of
tyranny and they can start creating institutions required for self-determination,”
President Obama said during a news conference with Prime Minister David Cameron
during his recent trip to Europe for a G8 summit.

While it is now the explicit goal of NATO to see Qaddafi out of power, this end-goal
carries with it several challenges. However, in a sign of solidarity on the issue of
keeping pressure on Tripoli, NATO has extended its mission another three months
according to NATO officials in Brussels. Meeting in Brussels, the ambassadors of the
28 NATO member-states plus the ambassadors from Sweden, the United Arab
Emirates, Jordan, Qatar and Morocco have agreed to an extension of the no-fly zone
for another 90 days.

“This decision sends a clear message to the Gadhafi regime: We are determined to
continue our operation to protect the people of Libya,” said Anders Fogh Rasmussen,
the Secretary General of NATO. Mr. Rasmussen continued, “NATO, our partners, the
whole international community, stand with you…We stand united to make sure that
you can shape your own future. And that day is getting closer.”

The Obama administration calculates that external pressures on the Qaddafi regime
will prove effective before a point is reached when European and American publics
will demand a conclusion to Western military involvement. The administration has
publicly expressed confidence that using both hard and soft power will force the
Qaddafi regime from power.

In February, the U.S. froze several billion in Qaddafi’s assets. For a regime that has
sought to buy the allegiances of several African nations and hire mercenaries to fight
the rebels this potentially set back Qaddafi’s bid to stay in power. Additionally, the
Obama administration allocated $25 million in assistance for the rebels in the form of
medical equipment, vehicles, protective gear but not military equipment, which is
desperately needed by the rebels. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), told reporters in early May, “I am currently
drafting legislation at the request of the State Department and the administration that
will authorize the transfer of available cash assets to the [Libyan Transitional National
Council] so that they will have available money…It will not come from an American
taxpayer. It will come from Col. Qaddafi himself.”

In an effort to further expedite Qaddafi’s downfall the British are sending Apache
attack helicopters to Libya to enforce the no-fly zone around Misrata. “These
helicopters are designed to destroy ground-based targets, primarily armor, missile
sites and command centers. They have nothing to do with enforcing the no-fly zone
over Libya. Their purpose is to provide air support for ground forces,” Andrei
Fedyashin of RIA Novosti reports.

While the injection of Apache attack helicopters could prove to be effective in further
eroding Qaddafi’s military abilities undoubtedly the single most productive element
would be to supply the rebels directly with military aid. Thus far, the United States
and others have been hesitant to do so for fear of blowback further down the road.
However, despite the fact that NATO powers have not begun to supply to rebels with
significant amounts of military hardware, this could be an afterthought if the Apache
helicopters prove effective. According to sources on the ground in Misrata, the rebels
have been instructed not to position their forces beyond pre-arranged lines.

According to reporting by the Guardian’s Chris Stephen, “Misrata airport, which

includes military facilities abandoned by pro-Gaddafi forces, was abruptly closed to
visitors and ringed with armed fighters. Rebel commanders said that ‘facilities’ were
being constructed there, prompting speculation that NATO may be using the airport
either as a base or an emergency landing zone for helicopters damaged on frontline.”

NATO is committed to see the mission to fruition. If the U.S. and Europe were to back
down and allow Qaddafi to remain in power this would illustrate inherent weaknesses
in that organization. Additionally, short of removing Qaddafi from power the
international community would be forced to partition the country in two to insure that
he is not able to inflict further suffering on Libyans outside of Qaddafi’s control.

While the no-fly zone initially only dealt with insuring the safety of Libyans, the
current mission constitutes a mission creep. With the 90-day extension approved by
NATO ambassadors in Brussels, a more concerted air campaign against Qaddafi and
his military can be waged with the goal of forcing him from power.

John Lyman is the Editor-in-Chief of Foreign Affairs Journal.