Iraqis Warn Libyans Saying, "Don't Do What We Had Imposed On Us"

It's through a tangled web of non-linear thought that Republicans and their candidates are able to to question the productivity and ability of the Obama administration. The big question during the campaign many moons back was "Who do you want picking up the phone at 3 A.M.?" Since then we have seen Obama implicated in any number of things having nothing to do with the answer to that question. Foreign policy has been eclipsed by our little economic hurricane, and what is out of sight is best left that way as far as Republicans are concerned, and especially when the reality defies your prophecy of events.

 The faint praise for our victory in Libya is thus expected. The approach there was the complete opposite of what was undertaken under Bush with our invasion of Iraq. In Bush's Gulf War we mustered every ounce of our strength (except the diplomatic State Department cerebral portion), and thought to remake Iraq in our image. I don't fault Bush that goal or doubt that Iraq's disregard of U.N. resolutions resulting from our first war could be ignored. Nevertheless the undertaking was badly staged and managed, and we were not welcomed in the manner we expected. It was a long-term mess, with a lot of unnecessary chaos and dying.

 With Libya, Obama took the prudent approach. He let our allies be allies, loaning our expertise in the background, but not needing to take the credit for "the win". That's probably a good thing. In this complicated world, there is no such thing as a "win", or an easy win. Often what looks like an obvious win--tanks rolling into the capital--turns out to be more complicated as time goes on.

 The New York Times includes a piece today where Iraqi citizens are interviewed and asked to give advice to their Libyan neighbors. What is notable is that much of the advice runs opposite what was actually done in Iraq, including this major, major gem: "And do not ostracize members of the former regime, as happened in Iraq under the so-called de-Baathification policy."

 While conservatives here lean on Iraq as an example of what Bush did right (and we do believe he gets credit for the act but criticism for the method), it is interesting to contrast that full blown war with what Obama accomplished. The result of Obama's Libyan policy--the creation of a moment in time where people can choose to be free--was accomplished without putting the full faith and credit of the United States on the line.

 Obama is smart enough to realize that a revolution does not necessarily bring democracy. It brings a moment where democracy can be born. Where Bush tried to guarantee an outcome and impose a result, it seems Obama is much more inclined to let the Libyans find their own way and learn as they go. And without the ongoing loss of American lives as they muddle through. They will muddle. We are not obligated to unmuddle them, since we didn't light the fire.

 The handling of the Libyan Revolution defies the story-line that both Republicans and Hillary Clinton presented about Obama. They projected that he would be weak, unaccomplished, naive, and not quite ready to handle situations. And yet, internationally, he is handling it. We managed to kill Osama. We managed to flip a government away from a dictator. We've killed any number of Al Queda operatives, while remaining aware that foreign commitments must end soon. We've NOT created new points of damage or friction. Mostly, we've not been hit with the type of terrorism that happened to us under Bush. Indeed it's ironic that Bush almost gets absolved for responsibility for the September 11th situation, as though it didn't happen on his watch. But nevermind all of this.

The political class is focused on the domestic problems, which is why all the candidates are pontificating over the economy and jobs, without offering confidence that they have the answers to shock a collapsed economy back to responsiveness.