• by Care2 Causes Editors
• October 22, 2011

Read more: arab spring, benghazi, gaddafi, gadhafi, libya, middle east, mideast conflict, misrata, muammar el-gaddafi, NTC, regional conflict, surt, tripoli

photo by Abode of Chaos

The death of Libyan strongman Muammar Qadhafi Thursday has sharpened the contrast between President Barack Obama’s recent successes on the foreign policy front and the scattershot criticism offered by his Republican challengers.

Qadhafi’s death came seven months after Obama and European leaders launched a military campaign, eventually headed up byNATO, aimed at preventing the Libyan leader from massacring his own people. The NATO effort eventually became closely integrated with rebel forces in Libya and carried out thousands of air strikes aimed at protecting them from Qadhafi’s regime and his loyalists.

Republican presidential hopefuls have criticized Obama from all sides of the Libya issue — arguing that he acted too slowly and deferred to U.S. allies, that he ramped up the effort without adequate explanation, and that he shouldn’t have acted at all.

But the death of the Qadhafi, following the triumph of rebel forces in overthrowing his government, allowed Obama to declare success in a statement in the Rose Garden. “Today, we can definitively say that the Qadhafi regime has come to an end,” he said, adding that “we achieved our objectives.”

Vice President Joe Biden, speaking in New Hampshire, argued that the decision to tackle the problem through NATO, with the U.S. in a supporting role, was a wise one. “NATO got it right. NATO got it right,” he said. “America spent $2 billion total and didn’t lose a single life.”

After enduring years of Republican attacks for a feckless and weak foreign policy, Obama has scored a couple of dramatic victories abroad in recent months. In May, U.S. Navy SEALs killed Al Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden in a daring nighttime raid inside Pakistan. And just last month, a U.S. drone strike in Yemen killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Islamic militant viewed as a key recruiter of terror operatives for Al Qaeda affiliates.

But on the campaign trail in Iowa Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, while welcoming the news of Qadhafi’s death, dodged questions about whether Obama deserved any creditfor the outcome.

“About time,” Romney told KSJC-AM. “This was a tyrant who has been killing his own people and of course is responsible for the lives of American citizens lost in the Lockerbie attack. And I think people across the world recognize that the world is a better place without Muammar Qadhafi.”

In March, however, Romney faulted Obama for “following the French into Libya.”

And in July, the former Massachusetts governor complained to a New Hampshire audience that Obama’s handling of Libya reflected “mission creep and and mission muddle.”

A Romney adviser, Eric Fehrnstorm, defended Romney’s approach Thursday and said Qadhafi’s death was no vindication for Obama.

“Mitt Romney has responded to the situation in Libya as it has developed. It is the president who has been completely unclear regarding what his intention was with respect to our military’s involvement in Libya,” Fehrnstrom said. “The fall from power and subsequent death of Qaddafi brings to end a brutal chapter in Libya’s history - but that does not validate the president’s approach to Libya.”

Texas Gov. Rick Perry issued a statement Thursday welcoming Qadhafi’s demise, but expressing no view on the process that led up to it.

“The death of Muammar el-Qaddafi is good news for the people of Libya. It should bring the end of conflict there, and help them move closer to elections and a real democracy,” Perry said.

Other Republicans, reflecting what has been criticized by some party elders as isolationism, have been against the Libyan intervention from the beginning. At a debate last month, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said flatly that “it was wrong for the president to go into Libya.”

At another debate Tuesday, she faulted Obama for military adventurism both in Libya and elsewhere.

“He put us in Libya. He is now putting us in Africa. We already were stretched too thin, and he put our special operations forces in Africa,” Bachmann complained.

Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman issued a statement Thursday calling Qadhafi’s death “positive news for freedom loving people everywhere,” but he suggested he was still opposed to U.S. participation in the NATO mission there.

“I remain firm in my belief that America can best serve our interests and that transition through non-military assistance and rebuilding our own economic core here at home,” he said.

While the 2012 GOP field offered no credit to the White House, one of the party’s major foreign policy voices, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has criticized Obama for not acting more aggressively in Libya, quickly bestowed such praise.

“It is a great day. I think the administration deserves great credit,” McCain said on CNN. McCain, who repeatedly pressed Obama to be more assertive in pressing for Qadhafi’s ouster and aiding the rebels added: “Obviously, I had different ideas on the tactical side but…the world is a better place.”

The fact that some in the GOP criticized Obama for leading from behind while others said he is too quick to send U.S. troops abroad suggests a growing lack of foreign policy consensus within the Republican Party, one Democratic foreign policy analyst said.

“The Republican Party right now has attacked both its ‘neo-con’ elite and its ‘traditional-con’ elite,” said Heather Hurlburt of the National Security Network. “They sort of don’t know what they think. They don’t listen to their own people…they just don’t have a coherent worldview.”

Still, some foreign policy experts said Obama’s ability to claim credit for Qadhafi’s downfall or the broader NATO success is limited because the U.S. was not at the forefront of those pressing for military action in Libya.

“They’re into the situation because the French and the British talked the United States into getting involved,” said Les Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations. “They had a stranglehold over us because they’re helping us in Afghanistan, which is not their favorite war.”

While Obama has been hit repeatedly for “leading from behind,” even the limited U.S. role in Libya required some assertive executive action on his part, particularly after Congress failed to bless the operation. Obama defied some of his legal advisers by continuing to provide American Predator drones to the mission despite language in the War Powers Resolution that calls for the U.S. withdraw its forces from hostilities if Congress doesn’t endorse such a mission within 90 days.

“Without putting a single U.S. service member on the ground,” Obama said Thursday, “we achieved our objectives, and our NATO mission will soon come to an end.”

But while the White House claimed some vindication for the president’s approach, it took care to keep the spotlight on the Libyan rebels.

“The president views this as a victory for the Libyan people,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said. “We believe — the president believes that the actions taken by his administration and by NATO have helped the Libyan people reach this day and that they now have an opportunity to secure a much brighter and more democratic future and that was the goal all along.”

Libyans “own what happened and they should be rightly proud of what they accomplished,” Carney said.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, traveling in Pakistan, said Qadhafi’s demise lifted a burden from Libya’s fledgling government.

“If it is true, then that is one more obstacle removed from being able to get on with the business of announcing a government and trying to unify the country. They have a very steep climb ahead of them,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Fox News during a trip to Afghanistan and Pakistan. “Having him out of the picture, I think, will give them more breathing space.”

Many Republican officials who welcomed Qadhafi’s demise seemed intent on offering credit to anyone other than Obama.

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who visited Libya with McCain, said in a statement: “Today marks the end of Qadhafi’s reign and a new opportunity for freedom, prosperity and a voice in the global community for Libyans. The Administration, especially Secretary Clinton, deserve our congratulations.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who also traveled to Libya, told Fox News on Thursday that Europeans were at the forefront of the effort and deserve most of the credit.

“Ultimately, this is about the freedom and liberty of the Libyan people. But let’s give credit where credit is due: it’s the French and British that led on this fight and probably even led on the strike that led to Qadhafi’s capture or, you know, to his death,” the Republican Senator from Florida said.

Rubio added that Obama “did the right things, he just took too long to do it and didn’t do enough of it.”

Carney suggested that many of the criticisms leveled at Obama were vague and opportunistic.

“What alternative action were they suggesting? Were they suggesting U.S. troops on the ground…unilateral U.S. action?” he asked.

After 42 years in power, Qadhafi went into hiding on August 21 with the fall of Tripoli to opposition forces. According to reports, several members of his family fled the country several weeks ago.

Charles Hoskinson, Ben Smith, and MJ Lee contributed to this report.

Read More Stories from POLITICO
Lobbyist cash for debt panel PACs
Labor lags in new fundraising world
Pundits, pols react: Qadhafi
LightSquared foe bias on GPS?
GOP scuttles justice review in Senate

As Libyan rebels sought to establish control of Tripoli on Monday, with three of strongman Muammar Qaddafi's sons in custody as clashes continue at his longtime command center, some are questioning whether Qaddafi's seemingly imminent downfall should be considered a victory for President Obama.

Some say taking out the brutal and destabilizing regime in North Africa with little U.S. sacrifice vindicates Mr. Obama's strategy (called "leading from behind" by some) which amounted to getting off the ground and supporting a NATO-led mission. Others, meanwhile, are criticizing the president for failing to take more decisive action and failing to topple the Qaddafi regime more swiftly.

Politically, the events there help bolster the president's foreign policy record as he fends off attacks from his Republican rivals. But with the U.S. economy still lagging, it's possible the public may not give a second thought to events abroad.

Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons told Hotsheet the president "still needs to show a lot more leg on trying to fix the economy," but he called the fall of Qaddafi important for the nation and "an unmitigated success for the president."

"He said Qaddafi must go, and despite the short term focus of most American media and pundits, Qaddafi is going without the loss of one American life," Simmons said.

Shadi Hamid, director of research at the Brookings Doha Center, also noted to Hotsheet that Mr. Obama helped avert a humanitarian catastrophe at little expense to the American people, citing estimates that U.S. engagement there cost around $1 billion.

Photos: The battle comes to Tripoli
Complete coverage: Anger in the Arab World

"Obama did the right thing, however belated it was, to intervene in Libya," he said. "I think there was a real concern we were stuck in three quagmires, in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya -- now we can say, at the very least, one of those wars has a been a relative success."

However, he added, "That doesn't mean Obama's strategy of leading from behind was the right strategy. If anything, I would argue it prolonged the inevitable... The rebels themselves were complaining about [insufficient U.S. support] throughout the process."

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., gave a similar critique on CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday.

"I grieve a bit because this conflict didn't have to last this long," McCain told CBS' Norah O'Donnell. "The United States' air power could have shortened this conflict dramatically. Unfortunately we chose not to. We led from behind."

Peter Feaver, a political scientist at Duke University who served on the National Security Council staffs of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, argues at Foreign Policy magazine that it's too early to declare Mr. Obama's strategy a success, in part because it's unclear what will happen with Qaddafi gone. The National Transitional Council will essentially start from scratch as it aims to build up democratic institutions in Libya, and it's possible attempts at governing could devolve precipitously.

"If the Obama team's planning for post-Qaddafi Libya is up to the task, that will go a long way to vindicating their approach," Feaver writes. "But as the George W. Bush administration ruefully knows, as hard as it is to topple a dictator, the really hard part is what comes after."

Some of the president's supporters argue the administration's limited involvement in Libya will help Libyans as they try to establish a democracy.

"What Obama's intervention accomplished was giving Libyans an opportunity to own the outcome,"wrote Steve Clemons, Washington editor at large for The Atlantic magazine. "Obama kept the US military footprint relatively small... This is the same kind of approach that the international community needs to take as Libya takes its next steps."

Regardless of what happens in Libya, the fact remains that the economy is of paramount concern to voters.

A CBS News/New York Times poll revealed in May that Mr. Obama's overall approval rating jumped by an impressive 11 percentage points in the wake of the U.S. military mission that killed Osama bin Laden. Yet by August 4, the president's approval rating was back to 48 percent, largely unchanged from CBS News findings throughout the year.

Meanwhile, Gallup polling from Aug. 8 - 14 showed that Mr. Obama's job approval rating for that week dropped to 40 percent -- the lowest weekly average of his administration. From Aug. 11 - 14, just one in four voters approved of the president's handling of the economy.

Simmons argues that success in Libya will still help the president politically.

"Most Americans aren't focused on foreign policy today but everyone one of these wins undergirds Obama's leadership standing," he said. "The killing of Osama bin Laden, the deaths of terrorists due to drone strikes and the fall of Qaddafi make it hard to marshal a national security argument against President Obama and that removes a major arrow from the Republicans' quiver."

Mr. Obama himself said in an interview which aired yesterday on CBS Sunday Morning that the economy will be one of voters' top priorities. "I expect to be judged a year from now on whether or not things have continued to get better," he said.