Podcast Summary

Podcast: New Books Network
Episode: Gustav Meibauer, "The No-Fly Zone in US Foreign Policy: The Curious Persistence of a Flawed Instrument"
Date: October 12, 2025
Host: Dr. Miranda Melcher
Guest: Dr. Gustav Meibauer

Episode Overview

This episode explores Dr. Gustav Meibauer’s new book, The No-Fly Zone in US Foreign Policy: The Curious Persistence of a Flawed Instrument (Bristol University Press, 2025). The discussion examines why no-fly zones—despite their poor record in accomplishing stated objectives—persist as a recurring feature in US foreign policy. Dr. Meibauer traces the instrument’s historical usage, the politics and theory behind its adoption, why it often comes up in political discourse, and what its repeated invocation reveals about American foreign policy decision-making and political communication.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Origins and Motivation for the Book

• Dr. Meibauer’s interest in no-fly zones began with his PhD work at the LSE, focusing initially on the 2011 Libyan intervention (03:10).
• The book’s development was further motivated by the debate surrounding a proposed no-fly zone over Ukraine in 2022 after Russia’s invasion.
• Meibauer asks: "Why does this keep coming up as an option?"—given its unimpressive record (03:53).

2. What Is a No-Fly Zone?

• Defined as an area over which another country’s air power denies flights by the target state.
  "A physical area of one state patrolled using air power of another." (06:21, Meibauer)
• Supposed purposes: conflict management (buffer between warring parties) and civilian protection. In practice, it’s "meant to make a political problem go away" more than to achieve these military objectives (08:31).

3. Theoretical Lenses: Neoclassical Realism

• Meibauer uses neoclassical realism, which links international drivers (threats, incentives) with domestic political debates within administrations (09:24).
  • "Decision makers…try to deduce, interpret, perceive what it is that the US…can and should be doing when faced with a particular crisis or problem." (11:52)
  • Administrations often seek "quick fixes…incremental muddled solutions," with the no-fly zone being emblematic (13:43).
• This blends realist material factors with constructivist insights about beliefs and discourse.

4. Case Studies: Application and Political Logic

a) Iraq, Early 1990s (14:37)

• Context: Post-Gulf War, Saddam Hussein cracks down violently on uprisings.
• Dilemma: US wants to "do something quickly" due to media attention but avoid another costly intervention.
• No-fly zones become a political compromise: "It didn't really help on the ground, but also kind of didn't hurt. And it did ease this pressure..." (18:36, Meibauer)
• Set the precedent that a low-cost, quick action can create "the semblance that the US is leading" (19:35).

b) Bosnia, Early-to-Mid 1990s (20:28)

• Conflict more complex than Iraq; strategic suitability of a no-fly zone even weaker.
• Domestic politics: Bush tries to avoid involvement; Clinton attacks Bush for inaction in the election, promising leadership and a no-fly zone as a solution.
• Once in office, Clinton’s administration realizes "what this leadership [in Bosnia]...would actually look like is really unclear" (23:59).
• The no-fly zone is again a minimal, politically useful step rather than a strategic fix (24:44).

5. Why Are No-Fly Zones Not Used?

• Meibauer explores cases (Kosovo, South Sudan/Darfur) where no-fly zones were debated but not adopted (26:18).
  • If constraints or interests are clear (e.g., risks are too high, allied interests dictate another path), administrations sometimes agree to do more or less—not a muddled compromise.
  • "Even that rhetoric [of genocide in Darfur] is not enough to mask the calculus...that [the region] is basically...not worth it." (30:44)

6. The Obama Era and Libya (2011) (33:02)

• Despite changes in geopolitics (rise of China, "pivot to Asia"), the same political pressures persist.
• Allies played a key role, pushing for the no-fly zone and then depending on US capabilities.
• The administration seeks a "quick fix" but rapidly escalates to a broader air campaign (36:54).
• "We still see...the same decisional dynamics at play that we've seen for the earlier cases." (33:29, Meibauer)

7. No-Fly Zones as Electoral Discourse and Political Symbolism

• Increasingly, advocating a no-fly zone has become more about signaling leadership and competence, not actual policy.
  • "Suggesting no fly zones and actually implementing them...become two separate things." (38:13)
  • "Saying a no fly zone would be a good idea makes you...sound smart and precise and competent..." (39:36)
• In the 2016 election cycle, politicians (including Hillary Clinton and Republicans) suggested no-fly zones over Syria, even though it was "not a realistic option"—it had become "shorthand for signaling" in campaigns (40:34).
• The no-fly zone's main value is increasingly "symbolic, this discursive function...about electoral politicking rather than actual policy solutions." (41:16)

8. Looking Ahead: Are No-Fly Zones Here to Stay? (41:56)

• Meibauer predicts actual use will become less likely, especially against nuclear-armed powers like Russia and China.
  • "Against these nuclear armed adversaries, you do not intervene ... you try to avoid the possibility of a shooting war." (42:29)
• But the pattern of suggesting no-fly zones in political debate will persist:
  • More uncertainty and complexity ("overlapping crises") creates demand for symbolic, quick-fix rhetoric.
  • US political polarization reduces chances for consensus on intervention, making "short term, largely symbolic policies" ever more attractive (44:29).

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Political Function:

  "No fly zones are not actually primarily used for these aims though... their primary function, in my argument, is political. They're meant to make a political problem go away."
  — Dr. Gustav Meibauer, (08:31)

• On US Decision-Making:

  "You need to do something that sounds like it does things... and perhaps ease the pressure back home. And this, I argue, is really the moment that the first no Fly zone is born."
  — Dr. Gustav Meibauer, (17:50)

• On Political Symbolism:

  "Suggesting a no fly zone basically becomes a way to signal expertise and competence and leadership to those voters who care for these things..."
  — Dr. Gustav Meibauer, (39:36)

• On Future Prospects:

  "Actual no fly zone use and implementation is...going to become less likely in the future... but... suggesting them is going to stick around."
  — Dr. Gustav Meibauer, (42:01)

• On Deception in Political Communication:

  "There is sort of deceptive intent almost behind suggesting no fly zones past 2016. And that deceptive intent is that you want to shield, you want to hide that you're primarily suggesting no fly zones, not as an actual policy option, but as something cool to say that makes you sound smart and competent."
  — Dr. Gustav Meibauer, (45:39)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [03:10] – How the project began and why the "no-fly zone" is a persistent policy idea.
• [06:14] – What is a no-fly zone? Military versus political purposes.
• [09:24] – Theoretical approach: neoclassical realism and decision-making.
• [14:37] – Iraq: The first no-fly zone and its real purpose.
• [20:28] – Bosnia: Political/electoral context and the no-fly zone's symbolic use.
• [26:18] – When are no-fly zones discussed but not used? (Kosovo, South Sudan/Darfur)
• [33:02] – Libya (2011): Similar political drivers and international pressures.
• [38:03] – No-fly zones as political rhetoric in US election campaigns.
• [41:56] – What listeners should watch for regarding future uses/discourses about no-fly zones.
• [45:16] – Meibauer’s upcoming work, especially on deception in foreign policy communication.

Conclusion

Dr. Gustav Meibauer’s analysis reveals that the enduring appeal of no-fly zones in US foreign policy is less about strategic effectiveness and more about domestic political dynamics, especially the need for quick, credible-sounding fixes to complex international problems. The tool's symbolic and discursive value in politics has become central, especially in electoral contexts, and is likely here to stay even as actual implementation grows rarer. Listeners are encouraged to be skeptical of campaign talk about no-fly zones, recognizing the political motives often at work.

Book Referenced:
The No-Fly Zone in US Foreign Policy: The Curious Persistence of a Flawed Instrument (Bristol University Press, 2025)
Host: Dr. Miranda Melcher
Guest: Dr. Gustav Meibauer