They spent days trying to drive home the idea that the US was not in charge of what the administration likes to call our most recent “kinetic military action.” President Obama made it perfectly clear that the United States was “supporting,” not leading, an international coalition. Our reasons for joining the fight were nebulous and our ultimate goal was never articulated, but one thing was certain. The United States was absolutely NOT spearheading the operation. We were just along for the ride.
Except, apparently, we weren’t. “Tonight,” President Obama said in his Monday night address, “I would like to update the American people on the international effort we have lead in Libya.”
So now, according to the President, we’ve been leading since the beginning. Gone is the claim that we’re just bystanders, called in to help out with the cause. No longer are we a loaner military, offering missiles and planes upon request. Magically, we’ve been in charge all along.
Like a soldier who spends a battle hiding at the back of the line, only to run out front when the shooting dies down, the most powerful man on Earth has decided it’s time to lead retroactively.
What we’re leading is still difficult to determine but officials have been careful to avoid the word “war.” According to the commander in chief, our military is there to protect a people and oust a brutal, murderous dictator. Other such killers earn a free pass because the task of removing them would demand boots on the ground. Libya, Obama said Monday, requires no US troops. Gaddafi will realize he’s fighting a losing campaign and resign. If you take the President’s speech at face value, American missiles are raining down on Libya – a country that poses no direct threat to the United States – because it’s easy.
If you’re a politician, that’s the best reason to do anything.
Obama was still light on details regarding the post-kinetic military action period. We know Gadhafi will be gone because we’ve been assured he’s going to walk away. Beyond that, we have no specifics. What of the rumors that Gadhafi is hanging on to stockpiles of chemical weapons to use in a last ditch scenario? Who will be in charge of the new Libya? Are we handing a free, oil rich, country to rebels funded largely by Al Qaeda members? We’re getting no answers.
Fortunately, those problems will belong to someone else. As quickly as Obama announced our newfound leadership position, he voiced our intent to abandon it. In the next few days, the United States intends to hand over control of the operation to NATO. The President claims we will still “play a supporting role — including intelligence, logistical support, search and rescue assistance, and capabilities to jam regime communications.” However, beyond tech support, we’re ready to wash our hands of the affair.
Obama has always been a man who seemed supremely uncomfortable with US military might. From Miranda rights for enemy soldiers, to the incredible delay as he agonized over the Afghan troop surge, every military decision he’s made since taking office has been a series of slow, uncomfortable, half-measures. The image that’s emerged is that of a disinterested, distracted, President who prefers to let his staff take the heat, always choosing the course of action that presents him with the least danger of political blowback.
Monday night’s explanation of our position regarding Libya was simply a repetition of this pattern. It was a defensive, platitude ridden mess, and however much President Obama may claim otherwise, in no way does it qualify as leadership.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.