by Smitty
John Yoo at the National Review:
Obama did the right thing to order U.S. forces in [to Libya], but it was done reluctantly, with the administration claiming it was not really at “war,” limiting the U.S. and its allies to enforcing a no-fly zone only, and then trying to reduce our participation in airstrikes. Obama’s foot-dragging prolonged the Libyan civil war and will reduce our ability to influence the post-Qaddafi regime, which may well have strong extremist elements.
But I think the new Republican isolationists in the House (and among the presidential candidates) will come out looking even worse. They opposed the president’s constitutional authority to use force abroad to protect U.S. national-security interests, yet they failed to put forward any serious proposals of their own for U.S. foreign policy in the region (aside from pulling out wholesale, I suppose). They not only contradicted the consistent position of Republican administrations on the war-powers issue, but they had no alternatives to put forward on what to do about Libya. These House members had plenty of company from the Democratic party’s antiwar Left, of course — but if they all thought the war was illegal and a bad idea, do they want to give Libya back to Qaddafi now?
There are ditches on either side of the foreign policy road:
- Isolationist
- The Team America: World Police, i.e. Hegemon
Picking WWI as a pivot point, or the Spanish-American War if you like, the U.S. moved toward the latter from the former, and picked up steam after WWII. After the fall of the Soviet Union, TAWP is looking rather threadbare.
Given the context of this Administration’s creepshow foreign policy, starting somewhere around Mel Zelaya in the Honduras and stumbling forward erratically from there, a lack of confidence in the President would seem mere prudence, a protection of the slupee from the ditch, not a source of embarrassment. Also, given this Administration’s flaunting of Congress on much of domestic policy (budge, anyone?), and the ongoing economic crisis, asking after the bills is due dilligence. OK, it scores points with the Tea Parties, too.
So the question to the Really Smart Folks like Yoo might be: is there a better operating point, around the crown of the road, between these ditches?
I think neither isolationism nor full forward presence is workable, especially in the globalized environment. Also suffering badly: the U.N. Anyone who thinks the U.N. should just fix stuff is probably a Left, or mad, but I repeat myself.
Is there really a level of effort below hegemon? Can you draw down forward deployments and economize, without ensuring a follow-on war? I’m guessing no.
At any rate, grant BHO his victory lap. As with Osama, you can’t both deny Obama the kudos and hold the man accountable for the rest of the economic disaster we face. Well, you can, if you’re a Lefty ingrate. That said, the War Powers act of 1973 bears review, as a part of the hegemony question. The fact that there has been dissent is patriotic, not a cause for embarrassment.
