America’s Fear of a New Iraq Adventure

President Obama is trying to react discreetly to the Libyan crisis. He remembers another U.S. military adventure that began exactly eight years ago: the Iraq War.

As American missiles rain down on the Libyan government’s military forces, President Obama isn’t with his generals in Washington but in Brazil. In connection with his Latin American visit, he appeared briefly before the press in the capital, Brasilia, on Saturday and announced that he had just ordered the first military intervention of his presidency. At all costs, he wanted to avoid giving the impression that he is committing his nation to a long and drawn-out war far from its shores. At the back of his mind is another U.S. military adventure that began eight years ago to the day: namely, the invasion of Iraq.

In the White House on the evening of March 19, 2003, George W. Bush gave the pithy order, “Let’s go,” an action that resulted in a war that lasted for years and cost the lives of more than 4,000 U.S. military personnel. As U.S. bombers flew missions over Baghdad without benefit of a United Nations resolution authorizing the attack, Bush appeared on television to solemnly announce the onset of “Operation Iraqi Freedom.”

There are still nearly 50,000 U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq; they are scheduled to leave at the end of this year. And in Afghanistan, nearly 100,000 American troops are locked in a confused and bitter war that people have increasingly begun to question. The American public is tired of war, and that’s why Obama stressed three things in his Brasilia speech: The Libyan action is limited, the U.S. will send no ground troops into Libya, and the action is part of a broad, international coalition.

Use of Force Wasn’t the First Choice

The U.S. government took a skeptical stance concerning the French and British position that a robust response to Gadhafi was necessary. It wasn’t until Libyan forces were poised to overpower the rebel stronghold of Benghazi and the Arab League approved a no-fly zone that Washington supported military engagement before the U.N. Security Council.

“I want the American people to know that the use of force is not our first choice, and it’s not a choice that I make lightly,” Obama said in Brasilia. But in view of Gadhafi’s brutal treatment of the civilian population, Obama said, there was no other option, and added that he had therefore ordered a limited military action. The planned execution of the action also adhered to Obama’s careful approach to the situation: French aircraft rather than the U.S. Air Force would enforce the no-fly zone over Libya. Following that, cruise missiles would be launched from U.S. warships a safe distance from targets in Libya.

Protective Cover via U.N. Mandate

The American military obviously sees itself playing a backup role in the Libyan operation. According to the Pentagon, the first phase is designed to neutralize the Libyan air force so that the no-fly zone may then be overseen by other fighter aircraft. American planes will not participate in patrolling Libyan airspace, according to Obama, who emphasized the mission would be carried out by America’s international partners.

The president attaches great significance to the fact that, unlike the Iraq War, this action enjoys the support of a United Nations mandate and will be carried out in cooperation with America’s European and Arab partners, a fact in which he takes pride. Domestically, Obama has to assume his initial hesitation will be cited as proof of weakness on his part. Sen. John McCain, who already made an issue of Obama’s lack of military experience during the 2008 presidential campaign, has complained that, “America should lead.”

But Obama is betting that his fellow countrymen are tiring of wars in far away regions. He emphasized that point with one sentence he spoke in Brasilia: “As I said yesterday, we will not — I repeat — we will not deploy any U.S. troops on the ground.”