Winning in Libya: By Design or Default?
The 2011 insurgency in Libya brought about the demise of Supreme Leader Mouammar Qadhafi. A NATO-led coalition operated to meet a unique United Nations mandate including an arms embargo, no-fly zone, and the requirement to protect the population from armed attack.
While the United Nations Security Council resolutions did not direct regime change, many key political leaders saw it as a highly desired outcome of the conflict. This divergence in objective led to a lack of clear political guidance at the strategic level, which often translated into somewhat inconsistent military planning at the operational level. The authors contend that this confusion tends to demonstrate that the means as well as the final result were reached by default rather than by design. The gap that was experienced between policy and military operations may impact NATO’s future operations and political cohesion. In turn, the Libyan case, which underlines the need to develop consistent strategy and military plans, may deliver insights for strategists and planners, especially for the air component.
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Winning in Libya: By Design or Default?
Author(s)
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
A Transatlantic Defense Industrial Base? Two Contrasting Views
The evolving landscape of global defense cooperation has brought the transatlantic relationship between the United States (US) and Europe into sharp focus. As geopolitical tensions rise and the threat environment becomes more complex, the question of how Europe can best ensure its security while navigating its relationship with the United States has become paramount. This double feature report offers two contrasting views on the dynamics of US-Europe defense industrial relations, highlighting the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for both parties.
Deep Precision Strikes: A New Tool for Strategic Competition?
Reaching deep into the enemy’s system to weaken it and facilitate the achievement of operational or strategic objectives is a key goal for armed forces. What capabilities are required to conduct deep strikes in the dual context of high-intensity conflict and strengthened enemy defenses?
From Cuba to Ukraine: Strategic Signaling and Nuclear Deterrence
Strategic signaling—the range of signs and maneuvers intended, in peace time, to lend credibility to any threat to use nuclear weapons—is back.
Return to the East: the Russian Threat and the French Pivot to Europe's Eastern Flank
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, has flung Europe’s Eastern flank into a new phase of strategic confrontation. It has had a major effect on France’s position, which was previously somewhat timid, leading it to significantly reinforce its deterrence and defense posture in support of the collective defense of Europe, in the name of strategic solidarity and the protection of its security interests.