The Nato campaign in Libya has lost its way, cost too much and is open to strategic failure
Share28 Comments (92)
Chris Parry
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 22 May 2011 17.15 BST
Article history
A Libyan boy runs past graffiti in Benghazi. Photograph: Saeed Khan/AFP/Getty Images
The Strategic Defence and Security Review was criticised for its strategic illiteracy, incoherence and failure to allow sufficiently for the unexpected. These same features characterise the government's military intervention in Libya, now a classic example of how to act in haste and repent at leisure.
The campaign has lost its way. UN Resolution 1973 authorised intervention to forestall a massacre of Benghazi's citizens and to impose a no-fly zone, together with "all necessary measures" to protect Libyan civilians. This is, more or less, what the Nato-led coalition is doing; the problem is that they have been doing it for too long. The UK bill has passed £100m and costs are rising.
The "something must be done" lobby hope for regime change, which, apparently, is not on the coalition agenda. Of course it is on the agenda; it has been from the start. It's just that everyone wants the Libyan people to do it. The UN mandate is insufficient to resolve the situation – the Libyans lack the military muscle to engineer a decisive result. There is a further complication. Libya faces the prospect of progressive breakdown in services and in law and order.
Military commanders are now performing mental gymnastics over how to force Gaddafi from power within the terms of the UN mandate. This relies on degrading the regime's ability to exercise power and encouraging defections to induce a "tipping point".
This situation has occurred because the coalition has never had a coherent strategy. As in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is easy, with overwhelming force and superior organisation, to gain control in a conventional conflict; the real skill is to achieve a successful, enduring peace and political settlement. In concentrating on getting rid of Gaddafi as an end in itself, too little attention has been paid to what happens after – reminiscent of the campaign against Saddam Hussein.
The Prussian military theorist, Carl von Clausewitz, from whom most modern strategic doctrine is derived, must be spinning in his grave. While accepting that, "everything in strategy is very simple, but that does not mean that everything is easy", he said success depended on a skilful blend of political objectives (ends), military power (ways) and adequate resources (means). He also stressed that strategy should evolve and adapt as circumstances change.
The operation in Libya seems to defy this strategic logic, reflecting a war conducted on the cheap, with the least risk and by committee. There is no clear statement of ends. The ill-defined outcomes and parsimony about resources limit the ways the campaign can be conducted. No-fly zones, taking all necessary measures to protect civilians, even regime change, are simply ways; they are not ends in themselves.
What might a decent strategy look like? The Libyan people should, with international help, establish the political ends they require. Beyond a simple "road map", a strategy should flesh out a comprehensive stabilisation process to smooth the transition to legitimate, stable and responsible government.
The UK and its Nato allies could then conduct a campaign that is built around an explicit political purpose, expressed in a single, unambiguous aim. That would focus and prioritise military activities, demonstrating where it is silly to take down infrastructure that might be needed later and where further UN authorisation might be required.
The Chinese military theorist, Sun Tzu, is often attributed with the idea that "tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat". Although tactical defeat for the allies in Libya is unlikely, without a coherent strategy there is the prospect of strategic failure if Libya descends into anarchy.
__________
Các anh chị nghĩ thế nào về bài viết trên ?
Các anh chị nghĩ thế nào về chủ trương của nhiều người cứ mở miệng là lập đi lập lại như vẹt mấy câu "đấu tranh bất bạo động", "dân chủ hóa toàn cầu", "diễn biến hòa bình" .. ???
Và Ngọn Lửa Cách Mạng Lật Đổ bè lũ cầm quyền độc tài bạo ác trên thế giới đã và đang lan rộng thành công, được sự ủng hộ của thế giới tự do là "bất bạo động" ???
Cụ thể, "cuộc chiến" đã và đang xảy ra tại Libya, trong đó có Anh, Pháp, Mỹ, Ý .. Nato là "bất bạo động" như nhiều ông bà "chống cộng" hằng ngày ra rả trên các diễn đàn như VẸT ???
Những người VN bị mất nước vào tay bè lũ phản quốc CƯỚP NƯỚC DIỆT CHỦNG BÁN NƯỚC ĐỘC tài ĐỘC đảng csVN, vẫn còn tiếp tục tranh đấu giành lại đất nước từ tay lũ Việt gian csVN này, học thêm được bài học kinh nghiệm gì từ cuộc chiến tại Libya ???
Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog"
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .
conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
23052011
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment