President Obama’s response to Libya has been problematic for several reasons, and has in turn frustrated many on both the right and left. Ross Douthat suggests that we are seeing the way the left runs a war, but I hope for the sake of the Democrats that what President Obama is doing in Libya is not from their playbook and is just a consequence of a president in over his head.
His slow reaction and lack of clear explanation of our goals in Libya have not inspired much confidence in his leadership. It was France who stepped up to lead, and only after the U.N. passed Security Council Resolution 1973 did President Obama commit to supporting a no-fly zone. This sounds like a John Kerry global test.
In contrast to George W. Bush, President Obama committed to using force to support the U.N. resolution without first obtaining authorization from Congress. While it is debatable whether or not such a commitment needs Congressional authorization, it is likely that Congress would have supported the resolution, which could have given more credibility to the President’s decision. Why did the President not take such a simple step that would probably have had little downside? That decision is not only difficult to understand, but it is inconsistent with what candidate Obama said in 2007 (h/t John Hinderaker of Power Line):
The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.
So the President’s actions in Libya have been slow, unclear, and hypocritical. It is no wonder why both conservatives and liberals are frustrated with his handling of the situation in Libya.
0 Responses to “President Obama’s Fumbled Response to Libya”