A Silver Lining in Libya

With the NATO campaign in Libya growing ever more thorny (and tragic), the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mike Mullen, conceded that the fight between the rebels and pro-government forces is “moving towards stalemate.” And it’s not clear how that stalemate will be broken. Western countries don’t want any substantial escalation of their role, a few European military advisors and a couple of U.S. drones notwithstanding. Defense Secretary Gates said yesterday that he sees “no wiggle room” in President Obama’s vow that American ground troops won’t be sent to Libya, and despite John McCain’s declaration of the Libyan rebels as “my heroes,” President Obama seems unready to supply them with more than mostly non-lethal military equipment like radios and body armor.

But Mullen’s comments included an important bright spot. Before Obama chose to intervene in Libya, some of his advisers fretted that regime change in Libya might benefit Islamic radicals whom Gaddafi had long repressed. Today Mullen said that scenario has not played out:

Mullen also said the United States is watching for any al-Qaeda involvement in the Libyan opposition but has not detected anything significant. “In fact, I’ve seen no al-Qaeda representation there at all,” he said.

A stalemate between Gaddafi and fighters whom we basically see as good guys is a policy headache. A stalemate between Gaddafi and a group with radical Islamist influences would be a searing policy migraine.

Related Topics: Libya
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of  a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty number two), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay marriage advocates—as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus