Another week, another war

Well, it seems we’re at war again.

Because that’s what our intervention in Libya is: war. Perhaps it’s a legitimate war under international law. Perhaps it’s even admirable from a moral standpoint. But war it most assuredly is. Attempts to mince words — to imply, somehow, that we are discussing anything but the expert application of violence on a major scale — are simply disingenuous. Whether we as individuals support these efforts or not, we should at least be honest about what they comprise. And that’s war and all the death and destruction that it entails.

A special kind of war, too: a civil war. We are not assisting peaceful protestors here. We are helping armed groups that seek to seize control of Libya. Again: their cause may be just. And their ultimate goal may be to create a democratic Libya, at peace with its neighbors and friendly with the United States. Let me stipulate: Muammar Gaddafi is a brutal tyrant. But that does not alter the fact that the United States and our allies have picked sides in a civil war.

Which gets us to the really important question: Why?

I confess that I am left scratching my head. Is this war about protecting Libyan civilians from the predations of pro-Gaddafi forces? Is it about providing air support for the military groups arrayed against Gaddafi? Is it about deposing Gaddafi? Is it about bringing peace to Libya? Or, for that matter, is this about democracy? The answer, it seems, is “all of the above,” depending upon whom one asks. Even the Obama administration seems to have a hard time getting the story straight.

Some of this confusion is due, no doubt, to the urgency the administration faced when it became clear that Gaddafi was close to stamping out the rebellion. President Obama and his team have very much been making policy on the fly. Another source of confusion has been the typical give-and-take involved in coalition building; even in the best of times, getting international agreement on military action can be a bit like herding cats.

Nonetheless, there has been a certain haphazard quality to the way the Obama administration embarked on war. And, more importantly, there remains a dangerous disconnect between the general goal of our policy — the removal of Gaddafi — and the specific military mandate authorized by the UN – the protection of civilians.

Things may sort out well in the end. I certainly hope so — for the sake of the Libyans and for our own.

Perhaps President Obama will clear thing up when speaks tonight. He’s got a lot of explaining to do.

Joe Barnes is the Baker Institute’s Bonner Means Baker Fellow. From 1979 to 1993, he was a career diplomat with the U.S. Department of State, serving in Europe, Africa, the Middle East and South Asia.