One might be led to think that NATO supports the rebels in Libya, after all France publicly endorsed the rebels, NATO leaders met in order to discuss different options of intervention and Obama said that Gaddafi's regime lost his legitimacy to role.

In such a case all that is left to do is to decide how to act in order to achieve Gaddafi downfall. There are number of ways and plenty of suggestions on how to do just that, but the real question is not how to strengthen the rebels, but if to strengthen the rebels. It seems today that question remains unanswered at least publicly.

Indeed the west flashed its cards too early and there is no turning back on that. There are a lot of interests in favor of keeping Gaddafi's regime and a lot in favor of the rebels. But no matter which interest you will place under the "keep Gaddafi" rubric, it will have to be considered under the new circumstances of the "All Knowing Gaddafi". The new Gaddafi will never be the same Gaddafi that gave out on the pursuit for nuclear weapons and joined forces with the west to fight terrorism, but more like the old Gaddafi.

Aaron Ellis seems to think that the discussion over the "No Fly Zone" is suffering from politician logic as presented in "Yes Minister" sketch (We need to do something, this is something therefore we must do it). But for me the important part of this sketch is the notion that doing anything is worse than doing nothing. It is this notion that made some of us forget the lessons of the Melian Dialogue (contained in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War), there is no neutrality in IR. Avoiding the actual steps needed in order to topple Gaddafi's regime means to strengthen him.

As evidence to my claim we could turn to James clapper's latest statement; it seems that Gaddafi will prevail in his struggle against the opposition forces.  Clapper is not alone thinking that unless something is done, Gaddafi will come out with the upper hand, Reality is also doing its best to back his claims.

NATO should choose quickly since the window of opportunity is shrinking rapidly. Doing nothing will help Gaddafi and keep NATO countries as opponents to the regime, backing Gaddafi publicly will be seen as hypocrisy and backing the rebels will mean doing something.

I believe that NATO countries already did the math and chose to publicly support the rebels while behind the scenes defending their interests in the Gaddafi's regime. But in case I'm wrong about NATO's choices and there is still a chance for them to come around, I would like to suggest focusing on Gaddafi ability to recruit mercenaries by monitoring Libya's borders and establishing a "No Fly Zone".

Share it

Hide Sites

Podcast מעניין בו Sarwar Kashmeri מראיין את Juurd Eijsvoogel, כתב הולנדי לענייני חוץ של העיתון NRC Handelsblad, על המשמעות של המסרים הסותרים מרוסיה.

Share it

Hide Sites

פוסט בחטף…

קבוצת פעילי שלום פרצה לפני מספר ימים (בפעם השניה) לבסיס חיל האוויר הבלגי "Kleine-Brogel" וכן ניחשתם נכון, מאוחסנות בו פצצות גרעין ומטוסים לנשאיתן. מעקב אחר הפרסומים על העניין (1,2,3) מייצר את המסלול שעשו במשך 40 דקות עד שעה (תלוי את מי שואלים).

הקטע המצחיק הוא שעד שהגיע אליהם שוטר הוא הגיע עם נשק לא טעון.

Share it

Hide Sites

[1]

[2]

Share it

Hide Sites