The general in charge of enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya swears that he's not actively aiding the rebels there. His pilots are just, um, blowing up Moammar Gadhafi's tanks. Get your razor blade out, because it's time to slice some answers mighty thin.
Gen. Carter Ham, head of U.S. Africa Command, told reporters at the Pentagon that he's interpreting the United Nations Security Council mandate -- ground Libyan aircraft; protect civilians -- narrowly. He's had "no official communication" with the Libyan rebels currently pushing west from Benghazi. "We do not provide close air support for the opposition forces," he said, even though his planes have attacked pro-Gadhafi loyalists. "We protect civilians... We have no mission to support opposition forces if they should engage in offensive operations."
But even Ham said it's not always easy to distinguish those missions. Some in the opposition are the civilians that the United Nations resolution authorizing the no-fly zone protects -- like those protecting "their homes, their families, their businesses." Deciding who's a rebel and who's a bystander is entirely up to the coalition pilot flying overhead.
Ham conceded that it's a "very problematic situation." Pilots supporting the no-fly mission are advised to be "very judicious" in when they'll fire on Gadhafi's forces below -- opening fire only when they're sure civilians are under threat. "Sometimes these are situations that brief much better at a headquarters than they do in the cockpit of an aircraft," Ham said.
That kind of murkiness sets up latitude for pilots to aid the opposition under the claim that there's an imminent threat to Libyan civilians if they don't fire their weapons. And that's been the logic of the air campaign: after all, the Obama administration only came around to supporting military action against Gadhafi when it looked like he was about to wipe out the rebels.
Indeed, Ham said that if Gadhafi's forces dug into a "defensive position" near civilian or rebel-held areas, they could become coalition targets -- even if they don't immediately attack any Libyans.
But if the opposition is looking to Ham to save them, they may have another thing coming. For one thing, he warned, it "can be very difficult" for coalition pilots or airborne surveillance to distinguish Gadhafi's forces from the rebels. (Though presumably the visible routes that each take to get to a skirmish can clear things up.) "There is no intent to completely destroy the Libyan military forces," he said.
And it "could be the case" that Ham's mission ends with Gadhafi in power (even though the stated policy of the United States, as articulated by the President and the Secretary of State, is regime change). "I have a very discrete military mission, and so I could see accomplishing the military mission which has been assigned to me and the current leader would remain the current leader," Ham said. "I don't think anyone would say that is ideal, but I could envision that as a possible situation, at least for the current mission that I have. I would reiterate that I have no mission to attack that person, and we are not doing so."
Ham said he doesn't see his mission changing, and he said his focus over the coming days is extending the no-fly zone westward to Tripoli, covering about 1000 kilometers of Libyan territory. But his successor might have a different... interpretation of when Gadhafi forces become legit targets. Over the next several days, Ham will transition command to an as-yet-unspecified multinational command entity. The French and British are already more gung-ho about taking Gadhafi down than the U.S. is.
And even before the next command takes over, Ham said that "well over half" of the 70 to 80 sorties that coalition aircraft flew over Libya on Monday weren't U.S. jets. Maybe those non-U.S. pilots draw less strict distinctions between rebel fighters and Libyan civilians.
Photo: Flickr/U.S. Africa Command
See Also:- NATO Places Unblinking Eyes Over Libya, 24-7 | Danger Room | Wired.com
