I absolutely hate Vietnam analogies. It gets trotted out every time the United States goes into military action. They said it in the 1980s about Lebanon, Grenada, and Nicaragua. In the 1990s they said the same about Iraq/Kuwait, Bosnia and Haiti. When George W. Bush sent US forces into Iraq, “Another Vietnam” was the cry!
But this time, as it relates to Libya, they might be right. What was behind our slow, agonizing defeat in Vietnam? A couple of things: unclear goals and objectives, a strategy that was not designed for victory, and a lack of confidence by American elites in American values and virtues. It was not a military defeat for the United States in Southeast Asia. It was a political defeat that led to a military defeat.
In the previous cases running from the 1980s through the George W. Bush Administration, those elements were lacking. But Barack Obama’s Libya policy has all the hallmarks of the Vietnam failure. What is the actual goal in Libya? Who specifically are we backing? No one seems to know–least of all the Obama Administration. What about the strategy? There is no coherent strategy. The assumption was that airpower would do the trick, when that didn’t work they shifted gears to issuing demands. Now we see the slow creep of new initiatives, including adding more advisors to help the rebels. But what exactly is the strategy? Again, no one seems to know–least of all the Obama Administration. The final element, a lack of confidence in American values and virtues, is also present. One gets the sense that President Barack Obama overseas is at times uncomfortable being an American. By that I mean standing up and being proud of what his country represents and stands for. If you don’t have faith in your country’s virtues, you are going to have a hard time imposing your will on the enemy.
I guess the one saving grace for the Obama Administration is that the French and the Brits are in deeper than we are.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.