One year ago this December 19, Libya announced it was abandoning its nuclear
weapon and missile programs after over two decades of trying to build a bomb.
Since then, Libya has permitted international officials to inspect 10 previously
undisclosed nuclear sites and to remove and destroy all key components of its
programs. Libya is a model for how to end a nation’s nuclear weapon program by
changing regime behavior rather than by changing the regime.
U.S. efforts to end Libya’s weapon programs spanned four presidential
administrations. For thirty years, Libya’s mercurial leader, Col. Muammar
Qadhafi, had ambitions to become the leader of the Arab world and to raise
Libya’s prestige among Islamic and other Third World countries. As part of that
effort, Qadhafi sought to obtain nuclear and chemical arms and remained defiant
on non-proliferation and arms control issues, especially those related to
Israel’s nuclear capability.
These pursuits, and Qadhafi’s support for terrorist groups in the 1970s and
1980s, led to the United Nations and individual countries imposing economic
sanctions on Libya. The UN imposed sanctions in 1992 in response to the downing
of an airliner over Lockerbie in Scotland in 1988. Some U.S. sanctions were
already in place by then, having been imposed in 1986 by President Ronald
Reagan. More U.S. sanctions followed in 1992 and 1996.
Decades of sanctions finally had their impact. In the late 1990’s Libya
approached the second Clinton administration with hopes of ending international
isolation. The Clinton administration made Libyan cooperation in the Lockerbie
bombing case a prerequisite to normalizing U.S.-Libya relations. Libya turned
over two intelligence officers implicated in the Pan Am 103 attack and the
United Nations suspended its sanctions in 1999. The U.S. sanctions remained in
place. U.S. officials made clear that Libya would have to address concerns over
its weapons programs before U.S. sanctions would be lifted. These discussions
continued in the Bush administration.
In March 2003, shortly before the Iraq War began, Musa Kussa, President
Qaddafi’s chief of intelligence approached British M16 officials seeking to
conclude negotiations for the end of its unconventional weapon programs in
exchange for normalization of ties. Some officials and experts link Libya’s
decision to President Bush’s national security strategy and the invasion of
Iraq. The presence of 250,000 U.S. forces in the region undoubtedly had an
impact, but it does not seem that President Qaddafi feared an U.S. invasion of
Tripoli. More likely, Qaddafi had concluded that he needed Western contracts and
markets more than he needed chemical or nuclear weapons. Whether by design or by
chance, the U.S. and the UK struck the right combination of force and diplomacy.
Prime Minister Tony Blair seems to have been a decisive influence on President
Bush, overcoming opposition from the US Department of Defense to any "deals with
dictators." Former State Department official Flynt Leverett, who was involved in
these negotiations, notes, "The lesson is incontrovertible: to persuade a rogue
regime to get out of the terrorism business and give up its weapons of mass
destruction, we must not apply pressure but also make clear the potential
benefits of cooperation."
Libya’s Compliance, Qaddafi’s Complaint
Over the past year, British, US and IAEA officials visited 10 previously
secret facilities and removed 55,000 pounds of
documents and components for Libya’s nuclear and missile programs, including
uranium hexaflouride, centrifuge parts, and guidance devices for long-range
missiles. The United States also removed Scud-C missiles and their launchers, as
well as more than 15 kilograms of fresh highly enriched uranium. Libya destroyed
3,000 chemical munitions, consolidated and secured their stocks of chemical
weapons agents and precursors for destruction, and joined the Chemical Weapons
Convention. IAEA and U.S. officials have verified that Libya’s
disarmament was transparent and almost complete.
In return, the United States lifted all remaining sanctions on Libya in
September 2004. President Bush lifted the travel ban on Libya and unfroze all
Libyan assets (amounting to $1 billion). Washington and Tripoli have resumed
diplomatic ties, although the process of restoring full relations (including an
embassy) has slowed down. However, in November 2004, Qadhafi, voiced his disappointment that Libya had not
been properly recompensed. This, he noted provided little incentive for
countries like Iran and North Korea to dismantle their nuclear programs. He said
he needed more security guarantees from the United States, Europe and Japan, as
well as "civilian-use technology in return for abandoning military
technology". The world now has two very different models for how to
eliminate a threatening nation’s nuclear and missile capabilities. The Iraq
model of regime change has been enormously costly, chaotic and uncertain. The
Libyan model of changing regime behavior has been efficient, effective and
almost cost-free. Officials should not stop their efforts now. A little more
investment in the transformation of Libya could pay dividends throughout the
region for decades to come.