The light turned green, the legitimacy acquired: the Security Council gave its anointing by voting, March 17, 1973 resolution on Libya, and a breakfast summit at the Elysee Saturday, organized in haste, has confirmed the unexpected "lady-killer" from Qaddafi. But discussions at the UN were already far: experience shows that we should not get too attached to the letter of the resolutions, whose application is often done on a "rolling", according to the intentions of those responsible to interpret and implement.
example, with this invocation loop of the urgent need to "protect the population" (Civilian Protection):
- The "people" as such had been targeted during the first phase of repression, when Libyan police officers and African mercenaries had fired on demonstrators, causing hundreds of casualties. But if all the opponents were treated as "terrorists of Al Qaeda" or "bandits", then there was no deliberate policy of massacre civilians. If this were the case, the UN resolution would probably have been adopted much earlier. He has acted honestly or not, the Libyan government has asked civilians to successively push, to disarm, to rally, to take advantage of an amnesty, etc..
- There are a million people in the Benghazi region, but a fraction of the civilians are also ... fighters, which now belong to an army ... even if it seems makeshift and inefficient. It is sometimes very seasoned soldiers, including former military officers rallied (including some generals) or more recent recruits, civilian in origin, but who wield weapons in recent weeks, including respectable size (mortars, machine guns, antiaircraft batteries, etc..) or even heavy (some tanks, some planes ). They are not, or more, unarmed civilians (typically, women, children, old, sick, etc.). ...
Secret War
So no need to hide his face. The goal is not only to protect civilians: it is to reverse the tide of battle by allowing the insurgents not to lose, and get in the wake the collapse of the regime. This is the true "purpose of the war," or "desired end" as saying the military, who like to know where they go.
Since the "Get! "That was all the rage in recent weeks in the Arab world was not enough to Libya to drop the fruit (not too ripe, apparently, in Tunisia and Egypt), he needed a boost from the West , who has an old score to settle with the dictator of Tripoli stirred himself at odds with much of the Arab League and African Union. But here, we are in the field of geopolitics, rather than in the humanitarian, whatever claims to the UN resolution.
Another aspect that can be confusing: The ground intervention - which alone can lead to the complete collapse of the regime Khadafi. It is explicitly rejected by the UN resolution: "... while excluding the deployment of a foreign occupying force in any form whatsoever and on any part of Libyan territory."
The main partners involved do not wish, moreover, in principle, that their troops appear as invaders or occupiers an Arab or Muslim country in the wake of what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan. So, this intervention on the ground should not be done. But there are ways to circumvent the difficulty
- the shipment of weapons via third-party vendors - the sending of "advisers" to train Libyan insurgents - the covert action , led by commandos ("light" strikes, raids, sabotage, provocation).
A team of British commandos had intercepted last month ... by the rebels - an indication of this "secret war" that almost always precedes or accompanies an operation "official." Indeed, resolution 1973 authorizes "the use of all necessary means" to protect our people, which finally gives a rather wide margin of interpretation ...
Dress Policy
This war for democracy in Libya (in the best case!), Launched under French sting is mainly Franco-British, with the controls two Conservative governments: not up to world wars, we may recall the joint expedition to the Suez Canal in 1956 and concluded between Paris and London in November 2010, a battery of military cooperation agreements with - for the first time - a component for nuclear deterrence, that these are the only two countries to practice in the European Union.
This is the opportunity to get rid of a discredited regime, beyond the pale, etc.. - The paradox being that in recent years, the scheme was amended, and was partially reintegrated into the international game. Italy had made him his partner in the economic sphere, but also terrorism and controlling illegal immigration. France had signed an agreement with Tripoli defense, with the key of arms sales and cooperation (most of which, by chance - seen in retrospect - had not been acted upon!). And now, Paris is found in position of having to destroy Libya's latest French-made Mirage, sold in their time, and recently upgraded by Dassault with support ... the French state.
Staff Officers in Paris and London, preparing for several weeks of intervention scenarios. They lived elsewhere these days, in France, a joint exercise called "Southern Mistral" long planned, including technical and human resources have been diverted into the current operation. But in practice, and although they deny being at the forefront, the U.S. military provide the bulk of the coordination of the operation, including from their air staff at Ramstein, Germany. Even if France gives the best part, the United States is the "lead nation" in fact, at least for now.
Mini coalition
Some findings politico-diplomatic:
- The armies of these three countries are backed up on a minor mode, for Canada, Denmark, Norway, Poland, Spain, Belgium;
- Italy, which had wanted to avoid an engagement until recent days, agreed that its bases in the south are used by the mini-coalition
- Germany and Turkey have done everything to stay out of this initiative;
- Americans, who were praying for a few weeks ( Because of the dangerous situation in Bahrain and Yemen?), have agreed to give their voice and assistance when it appeared that the Gaddafi regime would succeed at the game, even emerge stronger from the adventure, they argue that their support for the operation is "limited" (Barack Obama);
- NATO is held at a distance - mainly because of the French - in order to forget the current disastrous operation in Afghanistan, but acts in-hand.
- The European Union is marginalized, once again, as an institution: the economic giant struggles to define and implement a common foreign and defense policy - Russia and China have left to do (Gaddafi is untenable, even by them), waiving their right to veto other fish to fry, probably (see below what they have said in New York).
Some smaller countries of the Arab League are expected to make up the numbers for "dress", especially on a political level, the intervention Franco-British-American: Lebanon, Qatar (only one to have announced the engagement of four Hunters in close collaboration with the French Air Force), United Arab Emirates, Jordan. But the immediate neighbors of Libya (Tunisia, Egypt), yet fragile, remained silent. Sudan, Chad, Algeria - which are lying around - do not think less, etc.
Banquet strikes
In fact, the dress is not as shiny as this: after the first waves of bombing, the secretary general of the Arab League Amr Moussa said on Sunday they have "deviate from the goal is to impose a no fly zone ", a measure which was supported initially by the pan-Arab organization. As for the African Union, however, announced at the "banquet of the hits" Saturday at noon, at the Elysee Palace, she was not represented, and called Sunday "the guns fall silent." Admiral Mike Mullen, Chief of Staff American, recalled that same Sunday that the objective was not, in principle, to go after Qaddafi regime as such, seemingly back from the bluster French and the UK.
But about Elysee, beautiful inner-policy operation outside of Nicolas Sarkozy, flanked by the former - former Prime Minister Alain Juppe, called for help from a French diplomacy at risk - which in "nation framework "of a multinational operation more or less manages to make us forget ... the cantonal hexagonal; concerns Safety in the Central time world champion France electricity nuclear disasters in Japan ... Nothing like a good war, especially if it is not too difficult to carry, to move the lines ... policies.
Key targets
The assembly of this coalition, once dressed politically by the UN, the Arab League, etc.. Poses particular problems of coordination and effectiveness on the ground - the difficulty is to divide tasks, and identify targets and their priorities, in the first phase of strikes: in a narrow sense, these radars, anti-aircraft systems, runways and air bases. In a broader definition, which seems to have been adopted from the outset, a range of goals that can range from command centers, barracks, etc.., Or the armored columns of army vehicles Gaddafi and even lines supply, or its instruments of communication and propaganda, such as radio and television transmitters.
coalition said on Sunday afternoon have halted the advance of troops on Gaddafi in Benghazi, and touched on degrees 20 targets out of 22 (including air defense systems and strategic communications nodes, all on the Mediterranean coast), especially when shooting a hundred Tomahawk cruise missiles during the night from Saturday to Sunday by ships and U.S. submarines.
On a technical level, the "cocktail" of resources compiled by France and its allies seems very heavy, especially if one considers the relatively low capacity of the Gaddafi regime, moreover disorganized by 2 or 3 days intensive strikes: at best, some forty thousand troops, of which less than a third of elite troops, and a fraction of African mercenaries and a dozen hunters, and as many helicopters were flying condition (before the strike) of armored former model, etc..
To enforce a "no-fly zone" over time, it took mobilized:
- the means of observation (American satellites) or guidance and control (AWACS French or Nato )
- squadrons of fighters (Mirage, Rafale, Tornado, F16), and tanker aircraft;
- bases (as Solenzara in Corsica, located one hour from the Libyan coast, or the US-NATO base in Sicily);
- the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, who sailed on Sunday, will take over, off the Libyan coast, where several units already crossed the U.S. Navy, the Royal Navy, etc.. .
Reasons principle
For information, here - such as Jean-Dominique Merchet restored on his blog Secrets - the reasons given by the five countries (out of five) of the Security Council who abstained from supporting the British-French resolution:
- Germany "does not wish to engage in military confrontation;
- India is convinced that "there is virtually no credible information on the situation there" to justify the decision to establish an air exclusion zone and does not "know no more how actions will be applied;
- Brazil believes that "the text presented today to consider measures that go well beyond the call of the League of Arab States called for strong measures to stop the violence. (...) We are not persuaded that the use of force will achieve the common goal of ending the violence and protect civilians;
- Russia opposes " for reasons of principle "and deplores the failure to get an answer on how to implement the scheme fly. "We saw before our eyes a text whose wording has been changed, even in places suggesting the possibility of large-scale military intervention. "
- China reiterates that it has" always opposed the use of force in international relations "and that" it always feels great difficulties with regard to several important provisions of the resolution. " PHILIPPE LEYMARIE
0 comments:
Post a Comment