Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi continues to show the world if he’s going down it won’t be easy. He’s vowed to fight to the end and is ramping up his military actions. According to recent press reports Libyan aircraft dropped bombs near the oil refinery in the port town of Marsa El Brega. Judging from the conflicting press reports the situation in the area is undecided. Some reports quoted the manager of the oil installation saying pro-Qaddafi forces took control of the facility without shedding blood. More recent reports say the rebels have launched a counter attack and have regained control.
The BBC reported on a recent speech Colonel Qaddafi gave on Libyan state TV: “ ‘We will not accept [an] American intervention. This will lead to a bloody war and thousands of Libyans will die if America and NATO enter Libya.’ He said the UN had passed resolutions condemning Libya based on ‘false reports’ and he challenged the UN to investigate. ‘We urge the world, the United Nations, to see where the people were killed, to send a fact-finding team.’ He condemned those countries that had frozen Libyan assets, saying: ‘The assets are the assets of the Libyan nation… I am the asset of Libya, not the American dollar’.”
There have been reports that Libyan rebels are asking for UN backed air strikes against Colonel Qaddafi. Al Jazeera reported that Hafiz Ghoga, speaking on behalf of the rebel forces stated Qaddafi’s use of African mercenaries amounted to an invasion and that was the justification for requesting UN assistance. The report quotes him as stating “We call for specific attacks on strongholds of these mercenaries.” There is also continued debate in the media and international community about setting up a no fly zone over Libya.
Thus far the U.S. military response has been cautious deploying two amphibious assault ships and one destroyer through the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean. Secretary of Defense Gates has stated the military is looking “at a lot of options and contingencies. A New York Times report quotes Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mullen saying a no fly zone was “an extraordinary complex operation to set up” and U.S. Central Command chief General James Mattis telling the Senate Armed Services Committee that it would be “ ‘challenging’ and would first require disabling Libya’s air defense system, presumably with airstrikes. ‘So no illusions here…It would be a military operation. It wouldn’t be just telling people not to fly airplanes’.”
The reported composition of U.S. military forces deployed in response to the Libyan situation suggests to me that at least for now the U.S. is going to stick to what is commonly known as “show the flag” operations. Basically it’s the equivalent of beating our chests and letting the other guy know you can make their life difficult if you choose. The force will also probably be standing by to assist in humanitarian operations as needed. I think this is a wise move. There is more than the Libyan conflict going on in the world and it would seem to me it would set a dangerous precedent if various opposition leaders around the world got the idea they could request air support when they felt they needed it. I am by no means implying that the world should stand by while innocent people are slaughtered like we did during the genocide in Rwanda in the 1990’s; only that this should not be entered into lightly or in haste.
Looking at just the military aspects of a no fly zone many problems jump out at me. Most defense analysts’ focus on the fact that Libya’s military is poorly trained and has a lot of old equipment. That’s true but what is not known is how many good military personnel do they have left? They obviously have some people that can operate their equipment and aircraft. The press reports of aircraft bombing the rebels show that. Just because military equipment is old, doesn’t mean some of it isn’t operational. Thus far the U.S. has admitted to sending three ships in response to the crisis. The Libyans bought 6 submarines. Are any operational? A Center for Strategic and International Studies report says two are operational. I don’t know but if they can get at least one underway there’s a potential for major ugly ops. The Navy also has two Frigates with 83 kilometer range cruise missiles on them; a problem for any of today’s Navy’s to counter. The Libyans are also believed to have land based cruise missiles. They could ruin the day of ships participating in humanitarian operations such as evacuation of civilians.
What about mines? Does Libya have a mining capability? In 1984 at least 19 ships suffered damage from mines in the Red Sea. It was widely believed Libya was responsible. Many tend to also forget that during the first Gulf War two U.S. Navy ships, the Tripoli and the Princeton were severely damaged by Iraqi mines. Libya’s air defense weapons may be old but can’t be discounted. On paper the Libyans also have a pretty good air defense system to include the long range SA-5 missile. Whether they’re operational and does Libya have personnel who can operate them is unknown but they would have to be factored into any planning.
What appears to get lost with all of the talk about the need to cut the defense budget is the fact that our current national security obligations require military assets. A 28 February article in Navy Times reported that the Navy is now required to maintain 2 aircraft carriers in Middle Eastern waters for 9 months out of the year. This is a stepped up requirement. Naval Analyst, Norman Polmar, is quoted as saying this increased requirement is going “to put considerable strain on the fleet”. The article states: “The Carl Vinson and Enterprise carrier strike groups are in 5Th Fleet now (Note: in support of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan). The Ronald Reagan strike group is conducting final work-ups on the West Coast and could join the other groups in the region if needed. Enterprise will make one more deployment in 2012 before the 49 year old carrier is decommissioned…that…will take the available carriers down to nine. ‘We can barely sustain three forward deployed carriers with nine’, Polmar said.”
Mark Helprin has written an excellent article in today’s Wall Street Journal called The Decline of U.S. Naval Power. In it he states: “…the fleet has been made to wither even in time of war. We have the smallest navy in almost a century, declining in the past 50 years to 286 from 1,000 principal combatants”. It’s ironic that demands for the military remain high but the forces are shrinking.
Think I’ll end here. As always my views are my own.
