The 'No-Fly Zone' Test

[orangecrush]

Many are calling for a “no-fly zone” over Ukraine. Few appear to be grappling with the details required to make it an actual policy proposal. If you’re proposing an NFZ, here are some of the questions you need to answer first:

1. What are the historic cases of NFZ success that you seek to emulate?

2. How will your proposal work differently from the failed versions (Iraq, Bosnia, Libya), which didn’t alleviate most of the civilian harm, nor end the fighting, and ultimately led to participation in the ground war itself?



3. What organization will operate your NFZ? If the UN, how will you get past the certain Russian and Chinese veto? If NATO—whose current unity is a clear Russian target—how to handle the alliance division that it would spark, and likely non-unanimity in approving and then implementing it?

4. Does your proposal call for shooting down aircraft, but not suppressing the ground-based Russian radar, surface-to-air missiles, electronic warfare, and command-and-control units and systems that would endanger the aviators who are enforcing it? If you do propose to attack these Russian targets, what do you expect to happen next?


https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2022/03/no-fly-zone-test/363099/


More at link

[David__77]

1. Excellent questions. "No fly zone" is a political slogan not a strategy.

…

[Walleye]

2. People just want Putin to stop. I have yet to hear a rational way to do that

“No fly zone” just sounds good. What we really want is a no Putin zone

[Chainfire]

3. People want a magic bullet and they think a No-fly zone is it.

They don't want to be bothered with pesky details. They want to second guess their Commander in Chief because he doesn't understand the problem like they do. A no-fly zone equals more war, not less.

[orangecrush]

4. Thank you

Yes, there is a little more to it.