Ineffective, indecisive, lacking leadership, cowardly. These are words I never thought to use to describe the President of the United States. Yet they are descriptive of his failure in the Middle East and North Africa. Many people (including myself) can talk of morality and the terrible horror that Gadhafi continues to visit upon his own people. We can draw comparisons dating back almost 80 years where we have dithered while people in foreign lands were massacred for having the temerity to stand for what they believed. We can talk about being caring human beings and concerned and “on their side.” But talk is cheap and for Obama it seems to be free. Even today in his press conference (was he expecting the first question to be about Libya? I was happy about that) he danced around the facts. He mentioned that “if” Gadhafi were to go door to door rooting out protesters he (Obama) would see that as an “overreaction.” Well, Mr. President, in Zawia yesterday it is reported that he was doing just that, going door to door and grabbing young men and hauling them off to unknown, and unseen, places. What will you do? Why did you not even acknowledge that he is attacking innocent civilians brutally and without mercy? Why didn’t you acknowledge reports of massacres already happening? Why didn’t you acknowledge that in the last 24 hours he has attacked his own cities with tanks, artillery and aircraft? In my own view it is because you have no passion, no knowledge and no guts.
But, if we step back from all the empty rhetoric, and from the personal tragedy, the central issue from a strategic and diplomatic perspective is that by our indecision, inaction and failure to lead, we are losing the youth of the Middle East. Which means we are losing the Middle East. Now, many would say that the Middle East hates us anyway. True, in some sense, but only because we have supported and continue to support oppressive, outmoded and stifling regimes. With the recent uprisings has come a unique, possibly once in a lifetime, opportunity to not only get on the right side of history but to endear ourselves to an entire generation of Middle Eastern, moderate, democratic, youth. And we are squandering it. Obama is not leading, he is trying to reach consensus. He is making a fundamental strategic mistake.
The Middle East is a developing part of the world, rich in oil reserves and not much else. It is also dominated by youth. It is predominantly Muslim and, as the idiotic hearings being held by Congressman King demonstrate, our relationship with Muslims at home, in the Middle East and throughout the world is at best strained. America has significant long term strategic interests in the region and in peace in the region and therefore in our relationship with Muslim youth. We also have a long term strategic interest in combating terrorism and hatred of the US.
Supporting these uprisings is one strategic opportunity we have to help ourselves with Muslim youth and to enhance our power in the region. We are squandering it by sending the message we are sending in Libya. Hosni Mubarak is probably sitting in his hotel room saying “Damn, why didn’t I just crush the protesters? The US wouldn’t have done anything and I could be sitting pretty.” That is certainly how Asad and Ahmadinejad will think and frankly that is probably similar to what the Saudis are thinking. Therein lies the rub. If we do nothing or if we do to little to late, we will have not only squandered the opportunity but emboldened our enemies. Gadhafi is a relatively easy target. Ahmadinejad is not and if he becomes emboldened he will not only crush his own opposition, he may become adventurous. Oman, Iraq could be targets. Is that the position we want – being forced to fight Iran, when we could have prevented the venture by defeating Gadhafi? That is just stupid. Another word I never thought I would call Obama.
The quality of life and security for the citizens has been largely restored and we are a large part of why that has happened.
Posted by: Dominic Caraccilo | August 30, 2011 at 03:50 AM
@mindsadrift Although you are probably right in the sense that it is hard to judge without the results, my view of the "stupidity" is that Obama (and everyone in the Administration) is apparently looking at the conflict very narrowly. If Libya was isolated or an isolated "incident" would our actions be foolish? Probably not, but given the broader context of the democratic uprisings in the Middle East, in my view the "smart" thing to do is to look at it in that context. According to all the speeches and talk shows, it appears that we are taking Libya on its own and not viewing it in the broader context. That seems very foolish to me. If we had considered the broader context, we would realize that our actions and appearance in Libya has affects in the other conflicts on both the "protesters" and the rulers of the region. That is why I believe we should have acted more quickly, with more leadership and why I don't believe it smart that we relinquish the leadership role. The goal should not only be helping the protesters, but the removal of Gadhafi and, most importantly, the demonstration to the rest of the Middle East that we are in favor of the democratic movements not only with our words but with our actions.
Posted by: JR | March 28, 2011 at 09:09 AM
I don't know if we can make any claims on this conflict and our involvement yet. Don't we need to see how this plays out before we know whether or not Obama was "stupid" in his handling of this situation? I think the administration wanted to make sure this was a clear departure from Bush strategies.
Posted by: minds adrift | March 27, 2011 at 11:51 AM
@ChatandPonder I feel the King hearings are idiotic because they are merely a political stunt pandering to a portion of the population that wants to blame all Muslims for terrorism. They prove nothing, they tell us nothing, they provide no real information on domestic terrorism, and they taint a portion of the American population that has been fiercely loyal (most of our information about domestic terrorist has come from Muslims living here). Like McCarthy's HUAC hearings, they are unjust guilt-by-association pandering and political grandstanding. In my view that is idiotic. And yes, they also hurt the relationship the US has with foreign Muslims, and plays into the hands of those who vilify the US for prejudice against Muslims.
Posted by: JR | March 23, 2011 at 05:45 PM
Loved this article. Well written. Just wondering why did you call the King's hearings 'idiotic'? Do you think that these hearings hurt our relationship with muslims even more, or are there some other reasons?
Posted by: ChatAndPonder | March 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM
@bailey No doubt that is the thought process. But in my view it is and has been completely myopic. This is completely different from Iraq and most other "interventions." We were asked, by the people on the ground, in the midst of the biggest democratic uprising in Mid-East history. We didn't take advantage of the situation early enough and we are not showing enough leadership now. Things change, paradigms shift. That is what is happening before our eyes in the Middle East and all the old hands are failing to see its strategic and historic significance.
Posted by: JR | March 20, 2011 at 08:27 PM
Like most of us Obama did not agree with the strategy of Bush going into Iraq. He is correct in keeping americas big interfering nose out of it.. At least that is how they are referred to when they do go in. In other words USA can't win.
Posted by: bailey | March 19, 2011 at 08:40 AM
With Libya our country has an opportunity to forge strong ties with the Muslim world at low cost. All we need to do is give the rebels the same anti-aircraft weaponry we gave Afghans to defeat Russsia. That would bring down nearly all attacking aircraft and make us good friends of the Libyan people.
Posted by: Rick Supplee | March 16, 2011 at 01:06 PM