The Odyssey is one of two major ancient Greek epic poems attributed to Homer. The poem is fundamental component to the modern Western canon. Now that odyssey is the code name of the latest US military operation in Libya-Odyssey Dawn. The present word odyssey is very much linked to the mythical hero Odysseus. International Relations, more specifically Strategic Studies, never got such a similar literary taste or dimension before this. The US may be assuming its operation in Libya is going to be a prolonged and protracted, one with hardship and tough resistance ahead. It is almost like a ten years long journey, which once was carried out by Odysseus way back to 8th century BC to get back to his beloved family after returning from Trojan War. Is Libya aggression going to be another "Odyssey journey" for the US and thus for other European partners?
More captivatingly, from the US perspective, this time the US successfully won a negotiation over Libya issue convincing European powers to set off a war and "leading them from the behind". On Iran issue it was revealed by some ex-security and military personnel that the US viewed Iran as a part of succession of military operations. Former NATO commander General Wesley Clark (1997-2000) said the Pentagon's military road-map consisted of a sequence of countries: beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan-a five year plan. Is Libya invasion not the continuation of the US belligerent policy?
Flurry of questions already has arisen why it was not the US but France that initiated the war followed by Britain. I think oil politics is very active here behind the aggression. There is a simple data table on Libyan oil and its relation with western powers. This will give us real clue to the causes of comprehensive involvement of European countries led by France and the US pushing from behind.
From popular perspective the war is totally unwelcomed by the Libyans even if they are repressed by Colonel Gaddafi. In one of the video footages on Al-jazeera (dated 20th March), day after the first aerial attack, I found people from Bengazi are outspokenly telling the true story of double standard, historically continued, shown by western powers. Once they gave weapons to Gaddafi and now Gaddafi is targeting those weapons against general people. The man was telling that the Libyans need no oil. If the westerns need oil Libyans are happy to give them but please let them live alone from those western war mongers and from war. Who is there on earth to listen to these innocents?
What is the reality or outcome of this ongoing war? The power parity between two parties is totally asymmetrical. Libya on the one hand lonely with poor military capability and western powers on the other hand with military state-of-the-art technologies. So it is going to be another one-sided monopoly business. Libya's navy is small and is of little consequence. The army has more than 40,000 troops, but half of these are conscripts and largely incompetent. The most effective unit is the elite 32nd brigade, with around 4,000 well-equipped and loyal troops. There are also mercenaries in varying numbers being imported, who however would depart rapidly in the face of any substantive reversals. Libya's air-force has over 300 combat-aircraft, but most are Soviet-era planes with a limited capability, and many are in storage.
The problem for Gaddafi is that he has enemies, more inside than outside. So it is going to be a double battle for him. The larger strategic issue is that the Gaddafi regime will only survive beyond the short term if it regains control of most of Libya's oil-and-gas industry. At this moment these are mostly under the control of rebellions. These resources are widely scattered; most of the energy fields are in the east and southeast of the country which accounts for around 80% of current production, with the remaining fields south of Tripoli in the west.
The western powers may have military superiority but the thing won't be easier in the ground battle. May be Gaddafi is holding his nerve for the coming days when the battle will come down from the air to ground. There is already a speculation that Gaddafi may have reserve of chemical weapons. And he may use it as weapon of last resort. But it is a speculation. And there are gulf of differences between reality and speculation. As per as reality is concerned we can say that the dusk of Gaddafi era is not far away.
More captivatingly, from the US perspective, this time the US successfully won a negotiation over Libya issue convincing European powers to set off a war and "leading them from the behind". On Iran issue it was revealed by some ex-security and military personnel that the US viewed Iran as a part of succession of military operations. Former NATO commander General Wesley Clark (1997-2000) said the Pentagon's military road-map consisted of a sequence of countries: beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan-a five year plan. Is Libya invasion not the continuation of the US belligerent policy?
Flurry of questions already has arisen why it was not the US but France that initiated the war followed by Britain. I think oil politics is very active here behind the aggression. There is a simple data table on Libyan oil and its relation with western powers. This will give us real clue to the causes of comprehensive involvement of European countries led by France and the US pushing from behind.
From popular perspective the war is totally unwelcomed by the Libyans even if they are repressed by Colonel Gaddafi. In one of the video footages on Al-jazeera (dated 20th March), day after the first aerial attack, I found people from Bengazi are outspokenly telling the true story of double standard, historically continued, shown by western powers. Once they gave weapons to Gaddafi and now Gaddafi is targeting those weapons against general people. The man was telling that the Libyans need no oil. If the westerns need oil Libyans are happy to give them but please let them live alone from those western war mongers and from war. Who is there on earth to listen to these innocents?
What is the reality or outcome of this ongoing war? The power parity between two parties is totally asymmetrical. Libya on the one hand lonely with poor military capability and western powers on the other hand with military state-of-the-art technologies. So it is going to be another one-sided monopoly business. Libya's navy is small and is of little consequence. The army has more than 40,000 troops, but half of these are conscripts and largely incompetent. The most effective unit is the elite 32nd brigade, with around 4,000 well-equipped and loyal troops. There are also mercenaries in varying numbers being imported, who however would depart rapidly in the face of any substantive reversals. Libya's air-force has over 300 combat-aircraft, but most are Soviet-era planes with a limited capability, and many are in storage.
The problem for Gaddafi is that he has enemies, more inside than outside. So it is going to be a double battle for him. The larger strategic issue is that the Gaddafi regime will only survive beyond the short term if it regains control of most of Libya's oil-and-gas industry. At this moment these are mostly under the control of rebellions. These resources are widely scattered; most of the energy fields are in the east and southeast of the country which accounts for around 80% of current production, with the remaining fields south of Tripoli in the west.
The western powers may have military superiority but the thing won't be easier in the ground battle. May be Gaddafi is holding his nerve for the coming days when the battle will come down from the air to ground. There is already a speculation that Gaddafi may have reserve of chemical weapons. And he may use it as weapon of last resort. But it is a speculation. And there are gulf of differences between reality and speculation. As per as reality is concerned we can say that the dusk of Gaddafi era is not far away.
This article was published in the Daily Star o 9th April 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment