Obama Gets Closer to Intervening in Libya

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright March 12, 2011
All Rights Reserved.                               

           Reading between the lines, President Barack Obama admitted March 11 that the U.S. would not rule out military action to save “defenseless civilians” from Col Moammar Kadafi.  Yesterday’s language was more nuanced as Kadadi retook the Mediterranean  port city of Zawiya, en route to a battle for rebel-controlled Benghazi, Libya’s second largest city.  Obama consulted March 9 with the British Prime Minister David Cameron, fashioning a plan to keep Kadafi from regaining power around Libya.  Today’s endorsement by the Cairo-based Arab League of a ”no-fly zone” assures that it won’t be long before Washington begins flexing its military might. So far, Obama and Cameron have been content to watch Kadafi massacre a ragtag group of civilian rebels, trying, like in Tunisian and Egypt, to pull off a revolution in North Africa’s most repressive regime.

            White House National Security Director James Clapper testified Thursday that rebel forces could not defeat Kadafi.  Clapper’s remarks exposed conflict in White House communications that officially seeks Libyan regime change.  Clapper simply said that if U.S. military doesn’t intervene, Kadafi would eventually prevail against the less armed rebels.  Obama and Clapper aren’t on the same page because Clapper isn’t sugarcoating the outcome without forceful U.S. intervention, including a carefully targeted bombing campaign.  “But obviously we’re going to have to look at what develops on the ground on a case-by-case basis,” said Barack, mulling his options but unwilling yet to commit specific military operations.  Obama knows Kadafi’s attempt to exterminate Libyan rebel forces.  Barack can’t wait too long without jeopardizing the Libyan revolution.

            Obama’s biggest worry takes stems from Iraq and Afghanistan where highly focused, well-intentioned military operations turned into unending nation-building projects.  U.S. officials “across the board, we are slowly tightening the noose on Kadafi,” said Barack, freezing Kadafi’s U.S. assets and working with Europeans to bring about regime change.  Barack knows that oil prices spiraled upward in response to the Libyan crisis, warranting expedient resolution.  Growing criticism points to the administration’s inaction, giving Kadafi too much time to seize control back from anti-Kadafi rebels.  “When it comes to military action,” said Barack.  “You’ve got to balance the costs versus benefits.  And I don’t take those decisions lightly,” adding, any decision must be “well thought-through,” raising a problem of undue delay and inaction harming Libya’s fragile revolution.

            With the stock market—and economy—fluttering because to the Libya crisis, Barack can’t wait too long before gas prices torpedo the nation’s fragile economic recovery.  While going after Kadafi can’t be about global oil prices, the president has more than ample justification like former Presdient Bill Clinton did in Kosovo.  Clinton wanted to stop Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic but couldn’t justify the bombing campaign until he accused him of genocide against Bosnian Serbs.  Endorsing a “no-fly zone,” Arab League President Amr Mussa recalls Kadafi’s support of Milosevic’s massacre of Bosnian Muslims.  Mussa knows that Kadafi is a good old Stalinist, willing to kill anyone or group that threatens his power, regardless of race or religion.  Getting the Arab’s League’s endorsement gives the green light for a targeted bombing campaign to save Libyan rebels.

            Since former President George W. Bush launched Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan Oct. 6, 2001, the U.S. military has been involved in no-win nation-building operations, costing some $1 trillion and 4,500 U.S.lives, leaving a disastrous legacy.  While the world is better off without the late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, the costs to U.S. and Iraqi lives have been staggering.  If Barack wants to assure a different outcome in Libya, he should follow Clinton’s model in Serbia with a pinprick bombing campaign.  Libyan rebels have asked for air support, not boots on the ground to pave the way to Tripoli.  Degrading Kadafi’s air force and ground operations should be just enough for rebels to topple Kadafi.  With the Arab League endorsing a “no-fly zone,” Obama has all he needs to begin a targeted military operation designed to liberate Libya from Kadafi.

            Barack has given Kadafi too much time to attack Libyan rebel, allowing the regime to retake key Mediterranean ports.  Without air support, Kadafi would eventually crush the rebellion promising to liberate Libya after 42 years of Kadafi’s brutal rule.   With the Libyan crisis causing spiraling oil prices, there’s no need for the White House to hype alternative energy.  Barack must do a better job of lecturing the oil industry from his bully pulpit about gouging U.S. consumers.  No one industry should exploit global events at the expense of the U.S. economy.  Libya’s revolution has nothing to do with the merits or drawbacks of fossil fuels.  Obama must deal with Kadafi to stop the dictator from sponsoring global terrorism and causing instability in North Africa and the Middle East.  Supporting Libyan rebels helps U.S. national security by ridding the region of one more unruly tyrant.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.