Although Congress resisted Kucinich’s attempt to stop the war immediately, it can’t be long before someone more mainstream takes up the cause. Deficit-conscious Republicans are already noticing that large sums are being spent on a war that nobody is winning and that isn’t even a war as such. At some point, populists of all sorts are going to notice it, too.
I suspect that Obama knows this and that this is why he so rarely talks about Libya in public. The less attention drawn to the stalemate, the smaller the chance that someone will ask questions. Here is his gamble: that Gaddafi will fall before Congress has focused on the costs of the war, that the war will be over before the public questions his tactics — and that no one will notice that there isn’t a Plan B. Does he double down or quit?
The problem is, this isn't just a matter for Congress:
[The] Guardian newspaper estimates that the Libya engagement will have cost Britain $1.5 billion by September. It recently quoted a defense analyst who says that the British military had spent $500 million by the end of April and that ongoing operations are costing some $50 million a week.
That's just Britain. They are already straining to support the ground war in Afghanistan while they slash defense spending. How long can they keep this up? France has already said they can't see fighting for more than a few months more. Italy has already passed the time they think NATO should be fighting. Germany still doesn't like the war. If the countries actually pulling triggers in the war (or providing the bases) decide that the objective is no longer worth the price, it won't matter much what our Congress does.
The commitment of attack helicopters by the French and British smells of worry that the steady pressure won't crack the loyalists soon enough. So too does this tactic:
Low-flying NATO military craft hit Tripoli at least a dozen times Tuesday in rare daytime strikes on the Libyan capital that were designed to step up pressure on Moammar Gadhafi to leave power.
I think this is only the second time that NATO aircraft have carried out low-level daytime raids over Tripoli. Why? I don't think it is because they are trying to save precious precision bombs by flying low to use dumb bombs. You'd still need to fly higher since at low altitude and high speed, you aren't going to be accurate with dumb bombs. So even if you want to attack in daylight, you'd use smart bombs and you can drop them above anti-aircraft fire range.
So the low-level, high-speed runs can have one purpose--to freak out the loyalists with the sound and sight of planes screaming low right above you. That would be scary. The bombs are just something the pilots might as well drop as long as they are there. If bombing was the point, they'd do it from high altitude.
But at some point, the Libyans will prepare flak traps for such attacks. Put up a barrage of automatic weapons fire and even hand-held SAMs, and if those low-level attacks keep up eventually the loyalists will down a plane and maybe have a pilot to parade in front of cameras. If the price alone might be too much for NATO's European states to bear, when the price is more than Euros and Pounds, how will NATO will to fight be affected?
At what point does NATO have to make the choice between sending in a good division's worth of troops to capture Tripoli or settling for a ceasefire that leaves Khaddafi or his regime in power with a divided Libya the result?
UPDATE: NATO is keeping up the day raids, although apparently not low level attacks:
Bombs have been striking the city every few hours since Monday, at a steadily increasing pace. On Tuesday they began before 11 a.m. (5 a.m. ET) and were continuing five hours later.
Air strikes were previously rarer and usually at night.
Yet there are voices calling for a ceasefire with Khaddafi still in power:
In a report on Monday, the International Crisis Group (ICG) urged the rebels and their NATO allies to propose a ceasefire, arguing that demands that Gaddafi step down as a pre-condition and threats of war crimes charges had forced him into a corner.
The ISG is simply an NGO, so it isn't like it is authoritative. But it is another voice to add to the pressure to win soon or end the war short of victory.
Khaddafi certainly voices no desire to leave Libya:
We only have one choice: we will stay in our land dead or alive[.]
Of course, the NATO hope is that the people around Khaddafi are the ones to choose to flee or defect. But as I've said before, I'm not sure whose will to win will break first.
UPDATE: This report says that aircraft are flying low over Tripoli.
