A Few Comments on Libya
I think I saw the guy on the left working the door at a nightclub once.
It looks like the most likely outcome at this point in Libya is a protracted stalemate between government forces and the opposition, which will take the form of a civil war. Obviously, this will be a humanitarian catastrophe and many Libyans will die. Should Gaddafi regain the upper hand in the battle, a possibility given that he is still able to sell oil to fund his military crackdown, then a brutal reprisal will also follow. There are really no good solutions for Libya now; this isn't Tahrir Square in Egypt, it is far worse.
It's only natural to want and expect the United States to intervene in the conflict by providing military support to the Libyan opposition. Nobody wants to stand by and watch a lot of innocent people die, but at the moment a military intervention by the US or NATO would be a serious mistake for several reasons.
First, whatever happens in Libya is likely to have little effect on American national security. According to this chart, Libya isn't even one of the top fifteen oil exporters to the United States, so while events in the country may affect global oil prices they don't constitute a grave threat to the American economy like, say, a similar situation in Saudi Arabia would. Libya's importance to the US isn't zero- Gaddafi was considered something of an ally in recent years on the counter-terrorism issue- but any outcome in the civil war will not change American grand strategy for the region.
Secondly, any intervention would have costs. First, mobilizing troops to invade Libya and repel Gaddafi's forces would incur high financial costs at a time when the US military is least able to afford them. I personally don't approve of the current occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan but since neither will end anytime soon compounding them with a Libya operation would be highly irresponsible. Then there's the issue of human costs. For every US intervention like that of Kosovo in which no American lives are lost, there are five Somalias. Would an American be willing to sacrifice his or her daughter to the Libyan civil war? This is only considering death, not physical and mental injuries that scar veterans, quietly, long after their war-time experience ends.
Third, a US intervention would play into Gaddafi's hands by allowing him to paint the opposition as a foreign conspiracy. He's been doing this anyway, bizarrely blaming the protests on drug-crazed al Qaeda converts and claiming fatuously that all Libyans love him. But the opposition has its legitimacy from being a wholly domestic force. A U.S. intervention would rob the movement of its credibility.
Finally, there's simply no reason to think that pushing Gaddafi out would be a net positive for the U.S. in either the short or the long term. Libya lacks a civil society on par with Egypt's and it is not known who would have the capacity to govern should Gaddafi exit the scene. Any Libyan leader would be faced with the same chessboard conditions that Gaddafi faced- a fractious, tribal society without any pluralistic constituency. From the U.S. point of view, the best option for Libya would be a stable government that cooperates on issues like nuclear proliferation, anti-terrorism, and regional peace. As clownishly villainous as he may be, Gaddafi in recent years behaved as well as an American might expect.
This doesn't mean that the US should support Gaddafi unconditionally and for good reason President Obama has called on him to step down. It would be wonderful to see Gaddafi removed from power, a civil war averted, and a new Libya born with a decent, representative government. The Libyans have certainly put up with enough tyranny. Yet whatever happens there simply won't be a time when U.S. invasion will do any good.
