U.S. and Western Allies Confused Over Libya Objectives and Outcomes

by Peter Stern

What is really going on in Libya and why are western nations presenting a military presence and response to internal conflicts in that nation?

Since the United States, the United Kingdom and France initiated the use of force in Libya against the military of Col. Muammar Gaddafi, no short and long-term objectives have been made public and there is considerably confusion as to which western nation will be in charge of military operations after the U.S. withdraws its forces in the next week or so.

Why was President Barack Obama so quick to send U.S. jet fighters and other forces to Libya?  Was it for the humanitarian reasons he alluded to or are there economic and/or imperialist power-plays the true objective?  After all, Libya has rich oil fields and the U.S. needs more oil to fill the void and higher costs created by the political tensions in Egypt, Venezuela and other nations.  In short, we need to acquire a large supply of oil and gasoline to provide relief from tight availability and higher costs.  Is that the real reason we are there?

Despite the promise of more open government by the Obama administration and Congress, the American people may know less about our government and military objectives than they knew before the promises were made.

If Obama and Congress remain tight-lipped about our nation's priorities, actions and reasons for military response, we may have to wait until the end of fighting in Libya to gain some knowledge and perspective on why we are in Libya and how we will resolve our nation's oil problems.