Some people are just ungracious:
Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi should have been killed in the early summer, former United Nations spokesman John Bolton said in the wake of his death on Thursday.
The Mad Dog of the Desert, as Ronald Reagan dubbed him, was killed in his hometown of Sirte on the Mediterranean coast the rebels announced…
…Bolton, a strident critic of the Obama administration, said the dictator should have been taken out in much earlier.
“If we had acted swiftly and decisively at the beginning of this thing instead of having it drag out for six months with a much higher toll in civilian deaths, we might have shattered Gadhafi’s government near the beginning of the conflict and brought it to a resolution sooner,” he told Fox News.
“It’s entirely appropriate that Gadhafi was killed this way but as symbolically important as it is, many of the big issues facing Libya remain.” Bolton warned though that some in Libya may now regard the tyrant as a martyr.
“This is certainly not the end of the struggle, it’s the end of Gadhafi – and that’s a good thing,” Bolton added.
To be fair, I made a similar argument in the spring. I argued that it would be risky to rely on the Libyan forces to remove Gaddafi because it would take many months to arm them up, that it would create a country filled with battle-scarred kids with a lot of weapons, and that prolonged conflict would create hard feelings that would be difficult to address. I think that the militias are going to be one of Libya’s biggest challenges. There was definitely a cost associated with doing this the slow way.
But there are many benefits, as well. It’s only fair to acknowledge them. First and foremost, it was much less expensive to restrict our military activities to air, naval, and intelligence assets. It’s also very important that the Libyans can claim this victory as their own, even if it was only possible because of NATO’s assistance. It was important to demonstrate that the U.S. can work with multilateral and international organizations like the United Nations, NATO, and the Arab League to accomplish specific and complicated goals. And the fact that we suffered no casualties is a major plus.
Finally, the president was able to maintain support for the mission for many months because of the small footprint and low budgetary impact of his strategy.
I recommended that the president not get directly involved in the Libyan civil war. I also believe his abused his power by not seeking Congressional authorization for the mission, which would have been forthcoming. And, I still remain concerned about how things will turn out in Libya. But the president smartly limited our role, showed patience, and now can rightfully take credit for the removal of one of America’s historic archenemies.
I’m gracious enough to give him credit, even as I am not happy about him ignoring the War Powers Resolution and remain worried about Libya’s capacity to end this war.
