Politics finally gives way to armed might against Gaddafi Simon Tisdall March 18, 2011 - 9:44AM
With a boldness that the world had begun to believe he lacked, Barack Obama has gone for broke. The US wants Muammar Gaddafi's head. It will not rest until he is deposed and there is regime change in Libya. And it will fight to get it.
Obama spent weeks pondering, prevaricating and posturing, infuriating Britain and France, arch advocates of military intervention. But eventually the prospect of the US standing idly by as Gaddafi, the man who gave the world Lockerbie and a hundred other evils, crushed Libya's would-be democratic revolutionaries and wreaked his revenge on Benghazi was too much to bear.
The US would intervene to stop him. And there would be no half measures. All steps short of boots on the ground, as the US under-secretary of state William Burns put it yesterday are now urgently contemplated, with a view to immediate implementation.That means possible, imminent air strikes as well as an air exclusion zone. Advertisement: Story continues below
It means direct head-on combat with Libya's air force, if it chooses to fight. And if things do not go well, it may mean escalation beyond all that is envisaged now. Who knows when it will stop.
The immediate impact may be to stop Gaddafi's advance on Benghazi in its tracks. If that happens, the revolution will have been salvaged, albeit at the very last moment. Whether it can endure is another matter entirely.
The US and its European and Arab allies will hope that Gaddafi, facing the prospect of overwhelming, punitive force, will quickly back down, observe the UN demand for a ceasefire, even agree to negotiations. But to be sure of saving Benghazi, a no-fly zone will not be enough. It is likely allied air strikes on Gaddafi's heavy armour and artillery will be required, and possibly also attacks directed at him personally, as Ronald Reagan tried in 1986.
Gaddafi is full of bluster. Only a sudden, bloody nose will convince him to desist. This he is probably about to receive. And the betting must be that those remnants of the Libyan army and security forces that have so far remained loyal will desert him, too.
The longer term impact of the intervention is immeasurable - but disaster is certainly one possible outcome. If the fighting is prolonged, if Gaddafi does not quit and run, if his more able sons take up his cause, if the intervention makes things worse not better for ordinary people (as in Iraq), if there is no clear-cut win but ongoing low level conflict and resistance (as in Afghanistan), then Arab opinion will turn against the Westerners once more.
But there is a reasonable prospect of success, too. If the rebels prove capable of creating a government able to take over the running of all of Libya, and not just the rebellious east, then Obama's gamble could pay off. It will be hailed as an improbable triumph for, among others, David Cameron, who took a harder line than most, earlier than most. Britain may profit from the gratitude of a grateful people.
If Libya falls to democracy, then like-minded reformers in Bahrain and elsewhere will be heartened.
Obama and Cameron are looking for another Kosovo or Kuwait, not another Iraq. But last night, politics gave way to armed might. They cannot control the outcome. Now they can only wait and hope they were right.
