ANALYSIS: In Libya, US made Europe come of age on defence

By Alvise Armellini Aug 27, 2011, 11:01 GMT

Brussels - NATO's war in Libya was an 'unheralded triumph' for United States diplomacy, because Washington successfully managed to get European allies to shoulder most of the burden of the military effort, a leading British think tank said Friday.

NATO has often come under fire during its five-month engagement, as critics argued that the slow progress in toppling Gaddafi was proof that the alliance was ineffective when Americans were not in charge.

But once rebels supported by the British and French-led NATO action entered Tripoli on Sunday, the outlook changed.

'Libya is an unheralded triumph for US diplomacy. One of Washington's consistent aims has been to convince its allies to relieve the US military burden,' Thomas Valasek, from the London-based Centre for European Reform, wrote in a comment piece.

Valasek argued that 'Libya is the antithesis to Europe's failure to act in Bosnia,' where the continent had to rely on American intervention to end the 1992-1995 civil war that was raging its own backyard.

However, the analyst cautioned, 'that is not to say that all is well in NATO,' as Germany's refusal to join the fight meant that Europeans 'lacked the punch they would have had with the continent's largest country on board.'

Europeans' shoestring defence budgets, which former US Defence Secretary Robert Gates railed against at his last NATO meeting in June, also proved a constraint - with Italy withdrawing an aircraft carrier mid-conflict and others running out of munitions.

Valesek said the answer lies in more European sharing and pooling of resources - an area where progress has been made with bilateral deals, such as those struck last year between France and Britain, while it has remained a dead letter at European Union level.

While individual European capitals have taken a centre stage, the EU has been 'the main loser' in the Libyan conflict, Vincenzo Camporini, a former Italian Chief of Staff, argued in another commentary for the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) in Rome.

In March, several EU diplomats mourned the 'death' of the bloc's fledging Common Foreign and Security Policy, lamenting that it had been unable to provide even a minor military support role in Libya.

Early planning was made for the EU to take care of the Libyan naval embargo, but they were scuppered by Britain's insistence to leave the task to NATO and by Germany's refusal to countenance any military involvement, sources said.

Camporini urged the EU to take charge of post-conflict planning, but lamented that the bloc was still being bypassed.

'The initiative to call an international conference on the future of Libya was not taken by the President of European Council Herman Van Rompuy, nor by High Representative Catherine Ashton, nor by Poland, the Union's current presidency,' he said.

The meeting, due to take place on September 1, was called by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who had also chaired the meeting in March where an ad-hoc international coalition decided to start hostilities against Libya.

Read more about Europe

Read more about US