Who is going to invade the United States? What would they gain by doing so? Who is going to invade Europe? Who is going to invade Russia? Who is going to invade China? None of these countries or regions have any serious military threats, yet they all have very large military forces. Most if not all call these defense forces, but defense against whom?
North Korea feels or claims that South Korea and the United States are threats to its security. Ironically, any threat to North Korea will be because of its own bellicose behavior.
Pakistan feels threatened by India with some cause. They have had at least three wars since their independence from Great Britain. Pakistan was founded as a religious state, and as such it has a bit of paranoia against the secular state it split from. Ironically, there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan.
Israel feels threatened by almost all of its neighbors, sometimes with reason, sometimes because of its own actions. It definitely could use more imagination in the carrot department instead of overuse of the stick.
What need does Egypt have for a large army? The large army led to a military dictatorship that, despite the downfall of Hosni Mubarak, still wields a lot of political power.
What need does Libya have for a large army? Despite the antics of Muammar Gaddafi, Europe was content to buy Libyan oil without feeling the need to invade it.
These last two countries show one of the downsides of a military that is larger than any foreseeable threat. Someone in the military decides to overthrow the government, legitimate or not, effective or not.
This is one of the reasons many of the writers of the U. S. Constitution were leery of a standing army. They saw how many of the European countries used standing armies for foreign adventures and control of the people.
Unfortunately, they were overridden and shown to be prescient about foreign adventures and control of the people. Let's see, Cuba, Philippines, Iraq, Panama, Granada, and many, many more. The Army was called out to put down many strikes. General Douglas MacArthur and Colonel Dwight Eisenhower had brought out machine guns to forcefully breakup the unarmed Bonus Army camps in Washington DC. The Bonus Army was made up of unemployed World War I veterans who felt they had been promised a bonus for their service.
Showing posts with label Gaddafi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gaddafi. Show all posts
Monday, August 08, 2011
Friday, March 11, 2011
Libya: Damned if you do and damned if you don't
There are many voices being raised in the U.S. that the U.S. should enforce a no-fly zone over Libya to reduce Gaddafi's advantage over the opposition.
One of these is Nicholas Kristof, "The Case for a No-Fly Zone Over Libya", New York Times, 2011-03-09.
On the other hand, they are those who give many arguments for the long-term consequences of unilateral action, "Kicking the Intervention Habit", Richard Falk, Al-Jazeera, 2010-03-10.
Count me as one of the sympathizers of a no-fly zone, yet I really hesitate because of the long-term damage to U.S. prestige and influence. What right does a country thousands of miles away have to determine military action that is not threatening its own shores? What arrogance to think that the U.S. military is the only one capable of acting?
Wouldn't the European Union be a more appropriate actor than the U.S.? Don't France, Germany, and the U.K. have sufficient capability to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya? Even then, it will be interpreted by many in the Arab world as another example of colonialism.
If any no-fly zone were to be enforced, it would have to come from an Arab country. Is it in the interest of the current governments of Tunisia and Egypt to do so? They are the ones who had to deal with the thousands of refugees fleeing Libya. Is not Egypt getting over $50 billion per year in military aid? Is that going into paper airplanes?
I think the only course of action for the U.S. is to have very private talks with the Egyptians as to what the latter can and should do.
Maybe there is one other thing the U.S. can do. If the embargo on Libya is rewritten to exempt the opposition government, then by all means ship arms, food, and other supplies into Benghazi and other safe ports. If the U.S. could supply Stinger missiles to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan with disastrous effects on Soviet forces, could and should it supply them to the opposition in Libya, either directly or through a surrogate?
One of these is Nicholas Kristof, "The Case for a No-Fly Zone Over Libya", New York Times, 2011-03-09.
On the other hand, they are those who give many arguments for the long-term consequences of unilateral action, "Kicking the Intervention Habit", Richard Falk, Al-Jazeera, 2010-03-10.
Count me as one of the sympathizers of a no-fly zone, yet I really hesitate because of the long-term damage to U.S. prestige and influence. What right does a country thousands of miles away have to determine military action that is not threatening its own shores? What arrogance to think that the U.S. military is the only one capable of acting?
Wouldn't the European Union be a more appropriate actor than the U.S.? Don't France, Germany, and the U.K. have sufficient capability to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya? Even then, it will be interpreted by many in the Arab world as another example of colonialism.
If any no-fly zone were to be enforced, it would have to come from an Arab country. Is it in the interest of the current governments of Tunisia and Egypt to do so? They are the ones who had to deal with the thousands of refugees fleeing Libya. Is not Egypt getting over $50 billion per year in military aid? Is that going into paper airplanes?
I think the only course of action for the U.S. is to have very private talks with the Egyptians as to what the latter can and should do.
Maybe there is one other thing the U.S. can do. If the embargo on Libya is rewritten to exempt the opposition government, then by all means ship arms, food, and other supplies into Benghazi and other safe ports. If the U.S. could supply Stinger missiles to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan with disastrous effects on Soviet forces, could and should it supply them to the opposition in Libya, either directly or through a surrogate?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)