Friday, April 1, 2011

Lieberman and McCain: Regime Change Should Be Goal in Libya

From my favorite senators, at WSJ, "In Libya, Regime Change Should Be the Goal." After laying out praise for President Obama's stirring words of support for Libya, and also identifying the military and communications requirements needed beyond airstrikes and humanitarian assistance, the senators indicate:
Some critics still argue that we should be cautious about helping the Libyan opposition, warning that we do not know enough about them or that their victory could pave the way for an al Qaeda takeover. Both arguments are hollow. By all accounts, the Transitional National Council is led by moderates who have declared their vision for (as their website puts it) Libya becoming "a constitutional democratic civil state based on the rule of law, respect for human rights and the guarantee of equal rights and opportunities for all its citizens."

If there is any hope for a decent government to emerge from the ashes of the Gadhafi dictatorship, this is it. Throwing our weight behind the transitional government is our best chance to prevent Libya's unraveling into postwar anarchy—precisely the circumstance under which Islamist extremists are most likely to gain a foothold.

We cannot guarantee the success of the Libyan revolution, but we have prevented what was, barely a week ago, its imminent destruction. That is why the president was right to intervene. He now deserves our support as we and our coalition partners do all that is necessary to help the Libyan people secure a future of freedom.

I love the robust moral vision, but after nearly two months of studying change in the Middle East, I'm much more skeptical of the prospects for Western-style democratization. Of course, the U.S. is fully deployed at this point, and despite announcements of a handoff to NATO, the U.S. will continue to play first among equals in this war, and despite Secretary Defense Robert Gates' assertions to the contrary, it's increasingly plausible the U.S. ground contingents could be sent in. Shoot, the CIA could be preparing covert operations as this post goes live. Lots of scenarios are unknown except to those in the highest ranks of power. And I'm not convinced that Lieberman and McCain represent the bulk of thinking on the conservative right. Ann Coulter penned an excellent critique of the administration earlier, and Victor Davis Hanson warns against the deployment at Pajamas Media, "Libya: The Genesis of a Bad Idea." (Hanson does indicate that by now we'd better get Gaddafi or look out for some major blowback.) And at Flopping Aces, "Arming Libyan rebels? The Deaf, Dumb and Blind errors of western leaders."

And to round it out, see Ron Radosh, who's not quite so skeptical, "Our Libyan War: What Position Should Skeptical Conservatives Take?"

More later ...

1 comments:

Dave said...

Why yes, let's get rid of Col. Daffy (who is mostly a threat to his own people) and pave the way for him to be replaced by a rabid Israel-hater who is not afraid to act on his convictions.

Islam is a brutal, primitive theocracy that is totally incompatible with any form of "self-government."

It is only spread through the displacement of infidels and/or by the point of a sword.

Little wonder the West is losing to these barbarians, as it has failed to heed the lessons of fourteen centuries.

-Dave