Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Many times (now) humanitarian interventions require the use of force.  A decision to stabilize a North African regime may require the use of force.  

It's been a transformation of the principle, certainly, but it has occurred.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Tue Oct 14th, 2008 at 10:56:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... the question was not the use of force generically, but the specific uses of force ... the amphibious assault, the extended series of air sorties from the deck of the heavy carrier.

A task force arriving somewhere, securing a port, with the government or forces contending for power unable to provide security in a volatile situation, then using the port to bring in material ... a light carrier with a mix of helicopters and jump-jets, some landing docks, some frigates for surface cover ... that's not hard to see.

But if it requires a heavy carrier and a squadron of amphibious assault vessels, that strikes me as war-making.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 12:46:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A decision to stabilize a North African regime may require the use of force.

[Neocon Moment Alert]

Yeah, like when we tacitly gave the Algerian military the go-ahead to suspend the elections and 10 years of civil war ensued.

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 03:18:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Miguel.

Acknowledgment of emperical existence does not signal normative agreement.

I think peacekeeping in general is often counterproductive.

Intervention is by necessity an agressive move.  It may be justifiable, but it should be justifiable as an act of war not with under the veil of "making" peace.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 10:43:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Peacekeeping in the sense of sending observers to the border in order to have a third party present to witness breaches of the peace or size-fire agreement is one thing. Of course those observers are first invited, often as part of the agreement. The UN has a lot of those going, and I think with some results.

Peacemaking, peace enforcement or whatever it is called nowadays - "we have to make war to make peace" - is an aggressive move.

I would like to keep those two seperated.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 11:04:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Peacekeeping is not peacemaking.

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 12:08:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Most of coastal North Africa is well within range of land-based fighter-bombers operating out of Malta, Spain, the Greek archipelago or Sicily. I don't see a particularly pressing need for carriers, even in a case where a full-up amphibious assault would be needed (and frankly I find such a scenario a little hard to imagine in the first place, but maybe that's just me).

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 07:40:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Too damn expensive to rotate so far. Think of the fuel. Think that you have to maintaint a deterrent presence on a continuous basis, it must be very cost-efficient.

Besides, you wouldn't want to do this with a fighter bomber. What you need is a few propeller patrol aircrafts to monitor the area, and a flotilla of armored multi-role helicopters like CH-53G for the actual interventions. Even a frigate is not appropriate against the kind of very light boats used by the pirates.

Ain't nothing we do not already have. Even the support bases (think Djibouti). It's only a question of political will and funding.

Pierre

by Pierre on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 08:13:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Huh? I was talking in the context of securing a bridgehead in the event of a colonial war stabilisation effort, not a routine anti-piracy operation. Pirates in the Med aren't that big a problem, AFAIK.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 01:29:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series