The No Fly Enterprise

O.k, so President Obama has now laid out why
he deemed it imperative for the United States
to intervene in Libya. It is now appropriate
to seek clarity on other aspects of the Libyan
enterprise. First, what are the internal
dynamics in Libya? Second, who, beside the
rebels, benefits from the Libyan turmoil?

Libyan affairs are muddled, fractured and
wretchedly fragmented. Libya is anything
but monolithic. Thus, one wonders precisely
who are the Libyan rebels and anti-Qadaffi
voices? Indeed, U.S. Secretary Of State
Clinton rushed to admit: "We don't know
as much as we would like to know" about
the opposition.

There is ample evidence of al-Qaeda wanna-bees
and Hezbollah sympathizers among the Libyan
rebels. How numerous are they? How much
influence do they have? What other factions
and intolerable agendas infest Libya’s rebel
opposition? Would it simply replace the
Libyan tyrant with another dictator, another
Arab autocrat or a radical Islamist? It’s all
still quite unclear.

In fact, the entire focus on Libya is blurred.
The situation there remains decidedly opaque.
Assuredly, Col. Qaddafi is a grand master
at creating governmental opacity. Consider,
for example, that Qadaffi long ago planned
and created a purposely misleading system
of official titles and military ranks. The
system was expressly calculated to obfuscate,
confuse and conceal levels of responsibility,
ladders of authority and, especially, the
military chain of command.

Indeed, imagine the wonderment when one
learns that a Lt. Col. must report to a Captain
who then reports to an unranked public official.
In fact, one U.S.A.F. report caustically
observed that: “No one outside Libya -perhaps
even inside- knows for sure who controls what."

Such premeditated machinations are not the
meanderings of a madman. They are the
manifestations of masterful manipulation ala
Machiavelli. Of equal importance, said scenario
provides abundant insight into how Libya has
operated and how its people have been
controlled for four decades.

Qadaffi’s long tenure was abetted by the
existence of 140 different Libyan tribes.
Of these, thirty major tribes compete for
prestige and governmental preference in
placement and privilege. The current
disloyal, divided and dedicated opposition
to Qadaffi is a proximate result of carefully
cultivated tribal rivalries compounded by
demographic diversity and astute, but
tyrannical, leadership.

Official disclaimers notwithstanding, the
United States is still spearheading the
conspicuous support of a less-than-transparent
group of Libyan rebels. The White House is
even considering providing weapons to the
rebels. That continues to be a dubious scenario.

But, geopolitically speaking, other insidious
scenarios also surround Libya. Admittedly,
the United States did not intervene to avert
more massive humanitarian catastrophes in
Rawanda or Darfur.

Therefore, is the American intervention in
Libya solely attributable to this Oval Office’s
humanitarian concerns? Or is the Libyan
intervention more readily explicable in light
of the fact that Rawanda and Darfur are
devoid of the oil and gas upon which Europe
is so desperately reliant? Or is it that oil and
humanitarian concerns are both vital to a
functional and civilized society?

There is yet another concern which has been
rarely addressed. Precisely why did both
Russia and China strangely abstain and
willfully choose not to vote "No" on U.N.
Resolution 1973. That resolution encapsulated
the expansive wording which authorized the
No Fly Zone over Libya.

Both Russia and China normally abhor
outside interventions in any nation’s internal
affairs. Both Russia and China are customarily
aghast when any entity even contemplates
intervening to address unrest in their respective
geopolitical neighborhoods and/or spheres of influence.

Therefore, apparently both Russia and China
have unspoken agendas lurking behind the
scenes of U.N. Resolution 1973. Indeed, while
it is improbable, it is not geopolitically inconceivable
that they may have even colluded in their abstentions.

Consider one aspect of Russian motives
behind its No Fly abstention. Europe is
heavily dependent upon Russian oil and
gas. But Libya was also a major energy
supplier to Europe. As a result of the
Libyan turmoil, its energy is off the market.
That means enhanced Russian sales to and
dependency by Europe. Russia wins!

Is it too conspiratorial to suggest that
both Russia and China were delighted
to stand aside and watch America extend
itself into yet another potentially
indeterminate conflict? America’s foray
into Libya has further diluted U.S. military
strength across the globe. And the No Fly
adventure has also already cost Americans
over 600 million dollars. China loves owning
American debt and drools at an over-stretched
American military. China wins!

The foregoing well serves Chinese and
Russian interests. It deflects American
attention from aggressive Russian
nationalism in its near abroad. It diverts
focus away from Chinese adventurism in
the So. China Sea and its String of Pearls
strategy in the Indian Ocean. In addition,
none of the above is adverse to Chinese or
Russian interests. Their No Fly absentions
created a win/win scenario for both
China and Russia.

On the other hand, the Libyan escapade
harbors an unknown end game for the
United States. That end-game is beset by
significant known risks as well as by serious
unforeseen consequences for the U.S.A.
As such, Russia and China win again.

So, who stands to lose in the Libyan
No Fly enterprise?