No Sign Of Easy Solution To Libya Conflict

France has reportedly begun supplying weapons on the quiet to the rebels in Libya, in an attempt to help them break the apparent stalemate in their battle against Colonel Gaddafi's forces. According to a source quoted in Le Figaro, France took the action without consulting its partners in the NATO bombing of the regime, because "there was no other way to proceed."

It's been slow going over the past three months for France, Britain and their allies. Forced to intervene to prevent a possible massacre when Gaddafi's forces reached the gates of the rebel-held Benghazi, the notion that Gaddafi's regime might fall quickly under pressure from the rebel forces on the ground and the NATO warplanes in the air now looks wildly optimistic. The popular uprising against Gaddafi which western leaders undoubtedly hoped for has not materialised, and instead of being on the side of the Libyan people, NATO rather appears to be merely on one side in a civil war. And the weaker side at that.

How NATO extracts itself from the conflict is less clear. But for a lesson from recent history, we can look a little further to the north in Bosnia. There, although the country's borders have remained in tact, largely separate administrations exist for the Serb-dominated areas, and those populated by Muslims and Croats. Critics say it's a solution which has put the conflict into deep freeze rather than solved it, but at least nobody's killing each other anymore.

Diplomats are reluctant to encourage the break-up of any nation, for fear that could spread instability to neighbouring countries, and the preferred option for those looking at Libya from both near and far would undoubtedly be it to remain in one piece. But when the internationally-brokered peace deal finally arrives, as surely it must, don't be surprised if it's a horribly complicated mess of regional assemblies and bureaucracies, that keeps everyone more or less apart, and just about happy enough to avoid reaching for their guns.

For Obama, Afghanistan Is More Important Than A Missile Shield

President Obama's decision to abandon US plans for a missile defence shield in eastern Europe has made big news around the world over the last couple of days. The shield would have involved putting facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic from where any missiles heading towards western Europe or the US could have been shot down. The official reason for getting rid of the scheme is that Iran, purportedly the likeliest place from which those missiles might have been launched at the west, isn't as far ahead in its weapons development as had been thought.

As is usually the case in international diplomacy though, that's not the real reason for Mr Obama's decision. In fact, there are plenty of reasons, and the decision has all sorts of consequences which may not be immediately obvious. But the main theme is the sense that Afghanistan is now by far the most important international challenge facing the US, and all its foreign policy decisions are made in that context. In weighing up whether to go ahead with the shield or not, Mr Obama will have thought hard about the impact the decision would have on Afghanistan.

It's been widely said that the decision to scrap the scheme will ease tensions between the US and Russia. This is important because the US needs Russia's help in Afghanistan, and will do for years and probably decades to come. In the short-term, Moscow can allow NATO forces to use both the land and airspace of Russia and some nearby former Soviet republics, which will help their fight against the Taliban. But more significantly, in the long-term, once the Americans, British and the rest have gone, Russia will have a more important role in Afghanistan. The Kremlin likes to have control of countries in its 'backyard' and in future it'll be deals between Russia and local Afghan tribal leaders, rather than guns and air strikes, that keeps Afghanistan stable.

So President Obama's decision will have an impact far into the future. But there are lots of people who aren't happy about it, and those people are mostly in eastern Europe. Countries such as Poland and the Czech Republic want to avoid slipping back into Moscow's 'backyard' and wanted the missile shield as an extra guarantee of their independence from Russia. Not because the Kremlin was about to fire missiles at Warsaw or Prague, but to emphasise that they have American backing and that Moscow shouldn't try any funny business, like shutting off power supplies. That fear is multiplied many times over for Ukraine and especially Georgia, which are desperately trying to resist being sucked back into the Kremlin's orbit. If Russia's price for helping out in Afghanistan is the withdrawal of the missile shield, don't be surprised if they also manage to thwart those two countries' hopes of joining NATO.