World leaders, such as French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, have acknowledged that a safe zone would be impossible without implementing a no-fly zone over that area.
Implementation would require backing from countries like France and the US. The US has shown little interest in providing the military support needed to enforce a no-fly zone, Reuters reports, although Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said earlier this month that it was an option.
The reticence likely has to do with the fact that implementing a no-fly zone comes with the implicit threat of military action if it is violated. It is “tantamount to war,” Andrew Exum of the Center for New American Security wrote last week.
As I explored in a piece for the United States Naval Institute, imposing a no-fly zone in Syria would likely mean conducting intensive Suppression of Enemy Air Defense to destroy Syria’s air defenses and air force. Even a partial no-fly zone would likely require some strikes outside its limits in order to degrade Syrian airfields, early-warning radars and mobile or semi-mobile air defense systems.
Imposing even a partial no-fly zone would be tantamount to war, just as arming Syria’s rebels would be an act of war, and constitute foreign engagement in the Syrian civil war, and their success would rely on the combustible cocktail of passion, reason, and chance that all wars do.
As Mr. Lynch wrote in his briefing, a no-fly zone is a military action, and it is a commitment to further military action.
Additionally, any proposal for military action needs to be understood in a fully comprehensive manner. A no-fly zone (NFZ) cannot be established without some air strikes to eliminate air defenses. Any air strikes would require an NFZ that would allow freedom of action by the forces involved. Supporting ground forces or protecting safe areas or humanitarian corridors would also require an NFZ to provide the necessary mobility and operational support. None of the options usually proposed are truly discrete policy choices. While no prominent policy expert is currently proposing the deployment of Western ground forces into Syria, the debate over military action cannot ignore the prospect that the failure of less direct forms of intervention would lead to calls for an invasion.
