No Peacekeeping!

And not just because there ain't yet peace to keep in Libya. It's never been clear how to extricate NATO from Libya, and NATO's reluctance to close the door on a post-Gadhafi role isn't exactly helpful. Gordon Adams goes yard:

Isn't it time to take stock here and recognize that the western countries have a pretty sorry record of bringing stability and reconstruction to other countries. The Europeans brought colonialism, and were chased from the scene. And the Americans brought a talent for destruction and a well-intentioned desire for near-term results, but little long-term success in telling other countries what to do.

Plus, I don't exactly see U.S. approval ratings in the Mideast rising after committing to the ouster of Gadhafi.  Mohamed Salem provides a win-win way out:

The worst idea of all would be to send in foreign ground troops now, even under the peacekeeping banner. Not only would this be met with fierce opposition by the Libyan people, it would send the message that the west still feels that Arabs cannot be trusted to look after themselves.

We'll see how easy it is to extricate NATO from Libya if Gadhafi can't be captured or if a post-capture insurgency begins. 

 

Comments

[mikey]

Yep. That would turn it into a disaster for sure.

What NATO needs to do (as soon as the civil war can reasonably be declared "over" and the potential requirement for air support ended) is announce they will keep a small residual air to ground capability to ensure that nobody (this would, of course, be a veiled threat to the rebels) begins killing civilians. Beyond that, the role of NATO in Libya would be over...