26 March 2011 Last updated at 22:16 GMT
Libyan rebels at crossroads after taking Ajdabiya
Kevin Connolly By Kevin Connolly BBC News, Benghazi
Libyan rebels after taking Ajdabiya, 26 March 2011
Continue reading the main story
Every conflict in history makes household names out of places which were
previously obscure.
That is how we know the names of Stalingrad and Waterloo, and indeed Tobruk in
Libya.
The desert town of Ajdabiya may not be destined to be mentioned in the same
breath as those great battles of the past, but it may yet mark a crucial
turning point in the uprising against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.
The town stands at the intersection of two of the main roads in Libya - the
great coastal highway that hugs the Mediterranean coast and the straight, flat
desert road that runs east through Tobruk to Egypt.
It was to defend that strategic location that Col Gaddafi's commanders deployed
tanks and heavy artillery there in such numbers. And it was for that reason
that they defended it for several days - the hallmark of their tactics an
extraordinary brutality and carelessness for civilian casualties and suffering.
Col Gaddafi's forces made Ajdabiya into a war zone, and then lost the war there.
Mandate not tested
It is fitting that the town stands at a crossroads, because so now does the
rebel's military campaign. And so too does the allied air campaign that
effectively supports it.
Continue reading the main story
"Start Quote
The rebels say protecting the civilian population of Libya involves the
systematic destruction of Muammar Gaddafi's military infrastructure"
End Quote
The UN mandate under which the US, France and Britain have been flying bombing
missions talks about taking "all necessary measures" to protect the civilian
population of Libya.
So far that mandate has not been put to any particularly difficult political,
diplomatic or moral test.
A Libyan government armoured column destroyed on the road outside Benghazi last
weekend by French fighter jets was plainly sent to attack the civilian
population.
And in Ajdabiya they were clearly using weapons of war against civilians.
But defining what the mandate may mean in other circumstances may be quite so
straightforward.
The rebels have the simplest and clearest interpretation of what the UN mandate
is meant to mean.
They say protecting the civilian population of Libya involves the systematic
destruction of Muammar Gaddafi's military infrastructure, if possible down to
the last rifle and pair of desert boots.
They reason that if Col Gaddafi is left with any military capacity in his
hands, sooner or later he will use it. No group of citizens wishing to conduct
a peaceful protest anywhere in the country would be safe.
Clearing the way
The rebels now plan to proceed with the liberation of further towns and cities
in Libya including, they hope, Col Gaddafi's power base at Sirte and the
substantial centres of population like Misrata.
Their vision of the campaign before them is simple. They will proceed from town
to town, and will fire back if fired upon as they approach. They will expect
allied air operations to punish any use of force by Gaddafi loyalists - a
situation that in effect has the allies flying close air support for rebel
forces. In practice, that means clearing the way for rebel troops to reoccupy
towns, as happened in Ajdabiya.
Things may be particularly messy if, in a town like Sirte, the population is
broadly supportive of Col Gaddafi. How would protection from the air work then,
if at all?
There are plenty of people in the West who would support that view of this air
campaign. Others though, may interpret the UN mandate about civilian protection
to have meant attacks on Libyan government tanks and guns only when they were
caught in the act of attacking civilians, or when they were poised to do so.
So agreeing what the mandate means is one problem.
Another is applying even those parts of it which are agreed.
Pinpointing targets
In Misrata, for example, there is no doubt that government forces are
terrorising the civilian population. But they appear to be doing it using
armoured vehicles concealed in the very heart of the city and teams of snipers
positioned in high buildings.
Destroying such targets without destroying anything else and without killing or
injuring civilians is possible, but difficult. And it might involve the
employment of American predator drones, bringing more US equipment and manpower
into play when the Obama administration is trying to make this look like less
of an American operation.
We should also note that allied operations are presumably killing substantial
number of Col Gaddafi's soldiers, although no-one seems to be counting how many
at the moment.
It may well be argued that they are dying in the service of a brutal regime,
but we don't know how many are committed volunteers and how many are coerced in
some way into service.
There is one further problem too. If Western air power is speeding up this
campaign and making a rebel victory much likelier, then thoughts must soon turn
to what the end game might look like.
Even those powers, like France, which are clear about their desire for regime
change, don't seem to have any clear vision of how it might come about if air
power does not do it.
If the Gaddafi regime simply implodes under Western military pressure, then
chaos would be the likeliest immediate result (the rebellion was nothing more
than a spontaneous street movement for democracy six weeks ago). It is
impossible to say who would end up running the country, even in the short term.
But what if once the Gaddafi administration's military infrastructure is
completely destroyed, he still has armed gangs of loyalists under his control
ready to fight the rebels with AK-47s, or even to attempt to split the country
between east and west?
And none of that even touches on whether or not allies should arm or train the
rebels - or whether the bulk of the rebel movement would support Western ideas
and values once victory was won.
The countries behind the rescue of Libya - and make no mistake, Libya has been
rescued - meet in London for talks next week. They have plenty to talk about.
------------------------------------
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : [email protected]
List owner : [email protected]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
