Uncategorized

Is Libya Really About Iran?

By Michael Crowley | @CrowleyTIME | March 22, 2011 | +

In recent days we’ve heard a variety of rationales for military intervention in Libya. One is the simple humanitarian impulse to save lives in imminent danger, which Obama officials insist is paramount. Beneath that are other unstated, or less-emphasized, motivations. One, as Massimo has explained, is the assertion of humanitarian intervention as an ideal in itself. Another is the principle of enforceable norms dictated by international bodies like the U.N. and the Arab League, as the president himself seemed to say yesterday. And there are some less noble theories, including the idea that the White House feared losing face if Ghaddafi were to survive after Obama called for his ouster, or the notion that once Sarkozy took the political lead (perhaps motivated by domestic political pressures), Obama couldn’t afford not to participate.

Today The Wall Street Journal‘s Jay Solomon throws another ingredient into the mix: Iran.

White House concerns that Iran’s hand is being strengthened by recent events in the Middle East is central to its response to the turmoil, say U.S., European, and Arab officials.

President Barack Obama’s decision last week to use military force against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s forces was made in part by his administration’s fear that Western inaction could further embolden Tehran, these officials say.

It’s not entirely clear from Solomon’s story how Obama’s Libyan intervention represents a challenge to Iran. But the idea seems to be that the U.S. is demonstrating that the world won’t tolerate repressive tyrants like Ghaddfi (or, if you will, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad). It certainly complicates matters that the U.S. is are not more vigorously opposing the anti-democratic crackdowns in Yemen and Bahrain. But the explanation in those cases also comes back to Iran: Obama officials say they believe that Tehran is meddling in both those countries, coloring the popular movements there in Washington’s view, and suggesting that the great Arab revolution of 2011 may be turning into something of a proxy struggle between the U.S. and Iran.

Related Topics: Uncategorized

  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images
    Closeup May 25, 2012

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    From our Partners

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA
    2012 Election May 25, 2012

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • fhmadvocat

    While Iran is a concern, it is not a concern in Libya. Iran’s influence only reaches as far as the Arab peninsula, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza. To my knowledge there are no pockets of Shiites in Libya, unlike in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.

    If anything, Iran has influenced our inaction in Bahrain and Yemen. I find it ironic that Iran should call on those governments to acknowledge the aspirations of their own peoples, while the Iranian government butally crushed the same movement in their own country.

  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    There comes a point when all the speculation beyond the stated reasons starts to lose its moorings. I’m not saying that the Iran notion isn’t true, or can’t be true, or isn’t partly true. Life’s full of nuance, after all.

    But I also kind of expect to check out Swampland tomorrow and to see one of you speculating that this was all meant to scare the Russians. Or the Martians.

    Obama and the UN might, of course, be doing this for lots of reasons. It’s also possible that they’re doing it for the primary, stated reason but that it has other benefits that are not reasons for action.

    For example: I just ate some unsalted peanuts as an afternoon snack. I did this because I was hungry. it will have the effect of making me work better for the rest of my day, and it will supply my body with proteins and some essential oils, and it was a better snack than a candy bar health wise. But I ate the peanuts because I was hungry. That was the motivation. Everything else might be true but they don’t explain why.

  • apr2563

    It seems to be habitual that the Swampers seem to flock to the same stories. Michael, is anyone there paying attention to what is happening in Yemen?

  • gysgt213

    Its getting to the point were its really hard to tell if journalists and opinion writers are genuinely reporting and speculating or just severing up what is fed to them by government authorities.

  • http://grapemusing.blogspot.com/ grape_crush

    Is US Involvement in Libya Really About Iran?

    Fixed.

  • kbanginmotown

    jinx, apr. I was thinking the came thing.
    .
    Yemen, Bahrain, Japan, DC, Wisconsin, Indiana, ring any bells?
    .

  • chupkar

    This.

  • newfreedomblog

    “Obama officials say they believe that Tehran is meddling in both those countries, coloring the popular movements there in Washington’s view, and suggesting that the great Arab revolution of 2011 may be turning into something of a proxy struggle between the U.S. and Iran.”

    .
    Clearly a hand-written talking point handed to Crowley for reprint in the Swamp / TIME.com.
    .
    Nothing amazes me more than the constant and continued shilling for this administration from those in the left-winged media and blog world.
    .
    Next up…Obama didn’t start that war in Libya, France made him do it.

  • formerlyjames

    Time to put a stop to Tehran meddling in other countries’ affairs. Total hypocrisy and idiocy (look up US meddling in Iran’s affairs), but one explanation is as good as another.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Um…WTF?
    .
    Scherer earlier today -”On a side note, this last claim may be true, but Griffin has not presented any evidence”
    .
    Crowley here-”It’s not entirely clear from Solomon’s story how Obama’s Libyan intervention represents a challenge to Iran.”
    .
    Have to give it to the right. They set the agenda. The mainstream media amplify. The left defends against the assertion

  • manuvaram

    If you take Libya out of the equation, all middle-eastern regime changes in 2011 affected US friendly dictators. Further, countries seeing no regime change and large upheavals are also US allies (Bahrain, Yemen).

    Iran is not a monolith. These events (sans Libya) help Ahmedinejad create a narrative in Iran that friendship with US is bad for the people – see how upset people in Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain and Yemen are.

    Aside from cross-country geopolitical ramifications, this revolution has negatively impacted US interests in Iranian domestic politics.

    Note recent outreach from Obama to Iranian youth (“we are with you”), etc.

  • wagedronenumber9

    Totally agree with this. All this hang wringing on the Time blog is simply the microphone amplification of the right wing noise machine. This is journalistic yodeling about what the right is saying.

    This decision isn’t such a complicated matter– Libya had civil war that was on its way of ousting a dictator that isn’t well liked by anyone until this dictator used military force to drive the rebels back. Enforcing a NFZ will (in theory) equal the playing field for the rebels.

    And I don’t think that you have to mental gymnastics to understand what result the countries enforcing the NFZ want— that the revolution gains back its momentum and that the Libyans themselves will get rid of this dictator.

    This is why there aren’t any long term plans being laid out in terms of defining what the mission is. There will be a waiting period to see what effect the NFZ has on the situation on the ground.

    Whether or not this will happen is another matter, and it maybe a wrong-headed, and possibly a simplistic approach, to the whole situation. But if you want to understand why this is being done you have to know what motivates France and England to want to do this. (And Michal Crowley , you haven’t done this when all you do is link to some right wing site.)

  • 53_3

    No, it’s all about smoke, mirrors, and shameless hatred for anything Obama.
    .
    Oh, and one cannot overlook PNNTO’s point at 7…

  • fbarkeshli

    It is now quite fashionable to relate any event in the Middle East to Iran and Iranians seems to be liking it a lot.It is true that Tehran plays a formidable role in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf but it is unlikely that it has already extended it real or virtual role into the Norther Africa.Iran is certainly at pain since Imam Mousa Sadr an eminent Shia religious figure disapeared in early 1980′s and Ghadafi has been accused of having kidnapped him.However, event in Tthat country seems to be shaping up independent of Iran.After the United States take over of Iraq, France remained uneasy with its hand cut-off from oil-rich Iraq.As such this time around France decided to loose no time to jump into Lybia in order to compensate for its inefficient policy in the Middle East heartland.

blog comments powered by Disqus