All the way back in December of 2009, President Obama received the Nobel Peace prize and I noted that conservatives were stunned that the President would advocate for the use of force in defense of this country and in limited times when the humanitarian call for action was too great. And I said way back then, that this was unveiling of the Obama doctrine. And I was right.
President Obama proved last night that he's a man of his word. He does not oppose the use of military force but he understands that military force alone cannot, and we as a country cannot, force political change. We can create conditions where mass violence is minimized, but we cannot through our military might form a brand new government for a country out of whole cloth. And for god sakes, we don't need to save the whole world by ourselves! It's OK to ask friends for some help. One of my favorite quotes during the 2004 Presidential campaign, John Kerry mused regarding Iraq, "Mr. President, it's not leadership if no one is following."
Some conservatives and liberals argue that by imposing the "no-fly zone" implicitly calls for regime change. I disagree. We are not taking part in a civil war. We are merely making it a fair fight. We have removed Gaddaffi's ability to attack from the air (which is imprecise and kills more civilians) and limited his ability to use mass artillery. The Obama Doctrine is essentially limited strategic force with a cooperative massive effort on the diplomatic end to ensure foreign policy goals. Last night, the President essentially said "Gaddaffi must go, but we don't have to kill him for that to happen." After the sobering lesson of Iraq, we've learned that the U.S. Armed Forces are really good at blowing stuff up. They are not good at making a government for a foreign country.
Meanwhile, France and the U.K. are taking the reins, because this is in their backyard and the conflict is a more vital interest to them. We are also supplying our high tech know-how with radar jamming and other advanced rescue capability.
I think it's a pretty sensible policy. We will stop mass murder where and when we can. We are in the business of stopping things from happening not making things happening. The military is responsible for destructive capability and constructive capability will be the purview of our state department and diplomatic efforts in the region, which by definition, includes partners willing to help and help pay for those shared goals.
The era of the superpower died in 1990 and really died on September 11, 2001. With actual threats that are so defuse and varied, no one nation will be able to fight it all by itself. The new era requires cooperation with friends and allies, which happens to be the best for security and fiscally. And if working with our friends is called weakness by some conservatives, than so be it. I'd rather have a stronger America that looks weak than a weak America that pretends to be strong.
Adjust contrast of a pdf free
6 years ago