The Corner

‘What Outcome Do We Seek?’

Military professionals ask their civilian masters, “What is it you want to have done? What is the outcome you seek?” With that information the military can plan, resource, and conduct a mission. As long as the United States — and its allies — remain conflicted over whether Qaddafi has to go, can stay if he behaves, can stay as long as a ceasefire holds, as long as he pumps oil, or as long as he engages in negotiations, there is no mission to accomplish — no way to know when we’re done.

That makes Secretary of State Clinton’s announcement that NATO will take over operations disingenuous on two counts. NATO’s mission will be to “protect civilians, enforce the U.N. arms embargo, and support humanitarian aid efforts.” The NATO countries are agreed only on those points, and those points constitute an open-ended commitment. (The U.N.-approved no-fly zone in Iraq lasted 12 years; only the U.S. and Britain were there at the end.)

On the other hand, the bombing of Libyan military assets is a parallel effort that will continue to be done by the countries that have done it thus far — the U.S., France, and Britain — commanded from Naples by an American admiral. Which is inevitable: Philip Stephens of the Financial Times has written that the U.S. share of NATO countries’ defense spending has increased from 50 percent to 75 percent in a decade — not because we spend more, but because they spend less. In the past two years, spending by the European members of NATO shrunk by $45 billion, the equivalent of the entire German defense budget.

If there is fighting to be done, the United States will still have to ante up most of the planes, ships, and personnel. The question remains: “What is it we want to have done? What is the outcome we seek?”

Shoshana Bryen is senior director for security policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Demagoguery Is Not Leadership

The government of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand has, with the support of the opposition, decided to enact fundamental changes in the nation’s firearms laws less than a week after the massacre at two Christchurch mosques. This is the opposite of leadership. It is also an example of why ... Read More
White House

The Media’s Disgrace

There will soon enough be an effort to memory-hole it, but the media coverage of the Russia investigation was abysmal and self-discrediting — obsessive and hysterical, often suggesting that the smoking gun was right around the corner, sometimes supporting its hoped-for result with erroneous, too-good-to-check ... Read More
U.S.

Political Theatrics

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is Jonah Goldberg’s weekly “news”letter, the G-File. Subscribe here to get the G-File delivered to your inbox on Fridays. Dear Reader (Including all you whippersnappers under the age of 50), I’m writing this from somewhere over the Atlantic. At least I hope that’s ... Read More
Politics & Policy

What Was Trump So Annoyed About?

One of the stranger arguments that I heard throughout the Mueller saga -- and am hearing today, now that it's turned out to be a dud -- is that Donald Trump's irritation with the process was unreasonable and counterproductive. This tweet, from CNN's Chris Cilizza, is a nice illustration of the genre: Donald ... Read More