Foolish nation building in Libya
James Dubik throws down the guantlet in the New York Times, arguing that the U.S. should not only hasten the overthrow of Gaddafi but plan on policing a post-war Libya with its own forces, as well as those from the United Nations. In other words, he wants to turn Libya from a limited engagement into a full blown nation building exercise ala Iraq and Afghanistan. Here is what he's proposing:
The responsibility for security, reconstruction and nation-building will likely fall to the United Nations, which would mean deploying a multinational peacekeeping force in Libya, including troops from the United States, NATO and Arab nations. Washington must start planning and preparing for this complex and expensive contingency and muster the substantial political will required to see it through. While there is no guarantee that such a project will be any more efficient or effective than in Iraq or Afghanistan, failing to plan for it would be disastrous.
This is a path with real costs in money, manpower, executive branch attention and lives. Now, here is the alternative path that Dubik hopes to avoid:
America could pull out, making a tacit admission that the intervention was a strategic mistake. But a resurgent Colonel Qaddafi would likely seek revenge against the rebels and those who helped them. Moreover, NATOâ??s resolve would be called into question, as would Americaâ??s. Whatever influence Washington might have in the region would evaporate and Al Qaeda would waste no time pointing out that the United States had abandoned Muslims on the battlefield.
This course of action involves the following costs to the United States: someone, somewhere would "question" our "resolve," our "influence" would "evaporate" and al-Qaeda would tease us.
Is that worth several hundred billion dollars to you?
