Libya: Indispensable United States

When she was asked what the United States’ role in the world was, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright used to answer: “We are the indispensable nation.” The war in Libya proves that this is still the case — especially to Europeans.

The United States was indispensable at the beginning of the conflict. From the first night, Gadhafi’s anti-aircraft defenses were destroyed by a hundred U.S. Tomahawk missiles, which is something that neither France nor the United Kingdom were able to do in less than a week. A few days later, Obama demanded that his army not participate in the strike anymore — that it will respect the no-fly zone only. He does not want the United States to be distracted from its strategic interests because of Libya. He assured listeners that he would give the order to open fire again only in case of extreme necessity. Here we are.

As the war, led by France and the United Kingdom, has reached a stalemate (which is the word now used by the American chief of staff), NATO asked for help from the United States. It is going to provide the Alliance with sophisticated drones — Predators, which neither France nor the United Kingdom have in their arsenals.

Because there is a risk of a new Misrata-like massacre that France and the U.K. would not be able to prevent without causing casualities on Gadhafi’s side, Barack Obama could do anything but refuse.

Therefore, it is clear that the two most militarily powerful European countries are incapable of applying a U.N. resolution under Chapter 7 — i.e. a possible military intervention — alone, without the United States, even when the intervention takes place only at a few hundred miles from their shores and when they are confronted by a small, ill-equipped state army.