A Half-Cocked Operation in Pursuit of Half-Formed Goals. What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

So NATO will now “lead” the Libyan intervention. That makes everything fine and dandy, right? Well, no. There’s no need for anyone unpersuaded by the wisdom of this operation to make a case against it. Not when its supporters do such a good job pointing out its shortcomings. Take my friend Brother Korski, for instance. Yesterday he wrote:

The Libya intervention goes on, with as many question marks hanging over the operation as airplanes in the sky. What is the aim? Who will run it? Can the United States, Britain and France keep allies such as Turkey on board?

Realistically, the UK should in the first instance work towards establishing a stalemate between loyalists and rebels. From such a stalemate a political process can then begin, which, though it may take many years and continue during the fighting, can help create the foundations for a new Libya. Ideally, that future would not contain Colonel Gaddafi and his family; but, unless the UK is willing to target him specifically, which seems unlikely, or he is toppled, which also seems unlikely, it is best to work off the assumption that he will play some kind of role.