You are missing the point of an embassy with your argument here. The embassy in Libya is already well secured -- it is the consulate that was not.
The building in Tripoli now being used as the US embassy is not up to the usual US embassy security standards - it is a temporary facility being used because
the embassy proper was wrecked by Gaddafi's thugs in May 2011.
So it is not only the Benghazi consulate that was not up to the highest security standards. The newly sent US Marines guarding the US Embassy in Tripoli will help a lot but something like a terrorist truck bomb could maybe still kill a lot of people so I am concerned that it is not safe to continue operating out of that building.
The President should -
- Close all vulnerable diplomatic embassies and consulates in countries with a war-on-terror connection, with an armed jihadi terrorist groups threat
- Establish new secure embassies and consulates within new or existing military bases
I have another option for my President's to-do list.
- Alternatively, anchor a suitable US Navy vessel offshore and designate it as an "embassy" and run diplomatic and consular functions from onboard.
Embassy Ship / Ship Embassy
For Libya with the major cities on the coast the embassy ship -anchoring a suitable US Navy vessel offshore and designating it an "embassy" - could be a good workable secure solution which could be up and running very quickly.
For Libya it would be possible to have two ships - a larger "embassy ship" anchoring 12 plus miles offshore off of Tripoli and a second smaller "consulate ship" anchored 12 miles plus offshore off of Benghazi.
I think for Libya the ship embassy solution is a good idea to try out and get some experience of how practical and useful operating a remote embassy some distance from the capital city might be. This experience could be invaluable to inform the design requirements of a remote fortress embassy within a special-purpose military base on land.
So long as the ship embassy wasn't anchored too close to land within missile, mortar or artillery range of the shore I would think it would be fairly safe. I assume it would be a US Navy ship with guns, missiles and marines of course.
Better still is over the horizon 12 miles plus offshore so that helicopters flying from ship to shore can initially fly parallel to the shore but unseen from the shore for an unpredictable distance before turning and heading inland.
If as I have read there are indeed a large number of ground-to-air missiles in the hands of terrorists in Libya then we need to bear in mind that travelling by helicopter can be vulnerable to those missiles or even machine gun fire so it is best security procedure to do things like change the route so that terrorists never know where to lie in wait, have an attack helicopter escort, equip the helicopters used with anti-missile devices etc.
Ambassador and diplomatic functions on an embassy ship
The ambassador would live on the embassy ship normally but could fly by helicopter onshore for private diplomatic meetings with the Libyan government and with others.
Public appearances by the ambassador or US diplomats in Libya should never be advertised in advance.
Even if the ambassador or another diplomat achieves surprise by arriving unexpectedly at a public event in Tripoli or Benghazi, remember that very quickly the word will get out and terrorists with ground-to-air missiles will be on their way to follow the diplomat leaving and to try to shoot down the helicopter when it departs. So don't wait around visiting for too long and lose the advantage of surprise. A quick landing, speech, wave, photo for the cameras, drive away, take off, back to ship - all before the terrorists have organised a response.
Routine embassy and consular services
There are a number of alternative methods of doing business these days which don't involve customer and business ever being in the same building or location. Information can be exchanged by telephone or by internet allowing the embassy officials on ship to provide some services as a mail order company would.
In the case of valuable original customer documents, such as passports, which embassy officials required to have hands-on access to, embassy customers or their couriers could drop those off somewhere secure, at the site of the former embassy perhaps, which could then be sent by secure courier to the embassy ship by armoured truck, boat or helicopter, in a diplomatic bag.
Documents could be returned from the embassy ship to the customer by similar methods.
But yes the more I think about it, the ship embassy concept looks good to go!
Then negotiations between the US and Libya can proceed in a more relaxed way thinking, planning and building a secure US embassy on land, perhaps a fortress embassy in a new US military base situated in the Libyan desert?
The idea that we are going to build a military base (complete with airfields) and call it an "embassy" is not going to fly almost anywhere in the world.
There are US military bases in UK, Germany, Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Bulgaria, Turkey, Greenland, Kosovo, Israel, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, Qatar, Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Guam, Brazil and Cuba.
Which one of those friendly countries would object if the US ambassador ran the embassy from the existing military base - just one additional function for the existing military base? No problemo.
It might look strange if there was no security threat to the ambassador but if there was a threat, an embassy military base would be no problem for a friendly country with a military base already to agree to.
The bigger issue is that some countries don't agree to have a US military base on its territory -
for any reason!
Libya has not yet agreed to have a US military base for any reason. If it did, if Libya was OK with the idea of a US military base in its territory, then I suspect the US ambassador staying there at that military base would be no big issue.
Also, there's no requirement to have airfields for an embassy military base. I propose helicopter travel for diplomats and you don't need a runway for that.
