Libya-NATO: And if the U.S withdraws…

By on June 14, 2011
U.S. Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, has alerted the Atlantic Alliance members on their lack of military investment and political will to carry out the intervention in Libya.

Out of the 28 NATO countries, only 8 agreed to participate in air strikes. Half of the Member States do not contribute to the intervention. They are  apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources, and therefore military means are simply not there. Currently, the United States support for 75% all the alliance military spending, but in the future, “it will be increasingly difficult for Washington to maintain this level of commitment”, said Robert Gates. And supporting this declaration, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was backing Gates’ warning on NATO burden-sharing when she said: “We all have to step up and share the burdens that we face in responding to 21st century threats”.  All these statements are summing up a little more clearly that the U.S may be reluctant to fund more the intervention in Libya, and therefore urged the coalition to move quickly and come out from the Libyan case. That is all of the geopolitical and the military challenges that the NATO has to tackle quickly.         On the other hand, the organization was criticized for repeatedly attempting voluntarily to Colonel Kdhafi’s life  and his family, working outside the UN resolution;  but the Alliance, and for the first time, has confirmed the strikes that targeted Muammar  Kadhafi , stating that Resolution 1973 applies to do so, “because, as Chief of his  army, he has command  and control, making him a legitimate target”. In other words, killing the Colonel is one of the best alternatives and a free option to end the persisting situation in Libya, and reduce the risk, for NATO,   of sliding into a dark future that could back fire and reduce its legitimacy on the Libyan conflict.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *