“Not worth the camels” was the memorable phrase that one 19th century British military figure used to dismiss calls for his country to launch an attack on Khartoum, the capital of the Sudan.
The question before President Obama today is whether an attack on Libya is worth the camels. In weighing whether to intervene in Libya, the president and his advisors have to consider more than just the cost of camels:
(1) Intervention means a rapid rise in energy prices
A cynic may ask if the White House trial-balloon regarding using the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help lower oil prices means that the Obama Administration has already opted for military action in Libya.
Whatever form US intervention takes – imposing a no-fly zone, commando raids, landing Marines – it is sure to boost the price of oil, not to mention the price of gold.
Spreading the petroleum reserve story around is a helpful way of calming markets that the White House won’t let oil prices escalate too much higher, once that military action begins.
However, what will keep Wall Street calm is less helpful when it comes to easing worries about pump prices on Main Street. If the US intervenes, Obama had better have a convincing speech prepared to explain why the short-term economic pain is worth it, because the skeptics will be out in force.
(2) Politically, armed intervention is risky
This year is the 50th anniversary of the Bay of Pigs fiasco; it is also the 31st anniversary of Operation Eagle Claw, the failed US intervention in Iran.
We might think of these precedents as reminders that what look like carefully-planned military operations on a briefing room table can crumble in the face of factors that the planners left out of their scenarios. (A mild case of this has already hit the trigger-happy British government.)
Before he commits to intervening in Libya, Obama may want to phone up Jimmy Carter and ask about Eagle Claw, the failure of which helped doom Carter’s re-election bid.
(3) Intervention is easy to initiate, harder to exit
If the US intervenes in Libya, what is the end game? What is the exit strategy?
Is it to help the rebels topple the current government, and then pull back? To capture Gadhafi and bring him to trial?
Let’s not forget that the more the US does for the Libyan rebels, the more t heir appetite for US help will grow. Put another way: How many years does the US want to be in Libya?
It won’t win him friends on the pro-interventionist left (aka the “right to protect” crowd), but the more they press President Obama to opt for military action in Libya, the more carefully he may want to ask his advisors if it will all be “worth the camels.”
