Obama administration assesses implications of regime’s overthrow

THE dramatic advance of Libyan rebels over the forces of longtime strongman Muammar Gaddafi offers vindication, at least for now, for President Barack Obama’s decision to refrain from using US troops on Libyan soil and to let Nato take the lead in degrading Gaddafi’s military power.

But there are still hazards for the White House.

How the country moves from turmoil to stability presents a new challenge for Obama and could determine how the public views not only his foreign policy but, in some measure, the economy as well.

Yet the news for Obama could not have been better. The Libyan streets were euphoric, Gaddafi was in hiding and the price of oil — a contributor to dangerous economic lethargy — was dropping.

“The Libyan intervention demonstrates what the international community can achieve when we stand together as one,” Obama said from his holiday in Martha’s Vineyard.

Obama was careful to emphasise that uncertainty remained and that Gaddafi’s regime could still pose a threat. What is more, it will take several months, even under a stabilised Libya, before its oil fields are producing enough crude to start exporting again. But any extra shipments could lower the price of gasoline, which has already come down more than 40 cents a gallon from its peak in May.

Back in March, Obama gambled that the way to confront a potential civilian catastrophe in Libya was to build a coalition of Nato and Arab countries to use airpower ostensibly to protect Libyan citizens from a Gaddafi crackdown. But his intent was clear all along: Gaddafi had to go.

The Libyan leader was deemed a sponsor of terrorism, and his regime in 1986 was found responsible for bombing a Berlin disco frequented by US troops. Three people died in the explosion. Two years later, a Libyan bomb blew up Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.

The uprising in Libya follows the death of Osama bin Laden at the hands of US special operations troops, a major achievement for the Obama administration and one that solidified the president’s standing with the public on his handling of terrorism.

But Gaddafi’s removal has additional implications. A stabilised Libya would mean the country’s oil production could go back online, potentially reducing the cost of oil, which spiked globally in February as the flow of oil from Libya dried to a trickle.

Time and again, Obama has cited the uprisings in the Arab world and the increased cost of oil as “headwinds” that have imperilled the economic recovery in the US.

Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa. Before the uprising, it was the world’s 12th largest exporter, delivering more than 1.5 million barrels per day, mostly to European markets.

The news of the rebels’ success was affecting Brent crude, which is used to price many international oil varieties.

“If oil prices continue to head south, that’s a real plus for the economy,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.

“We can take all the plusses we can get at this point.”

So could Obama. While the president’s overall approval with the public is above 40% in most polls, the number that approve of his handling of the economy dropped to a new low of 26% in a Gallup poll last week. By contrast, 53% approved of his handling of terrorism.

Still, the joy expressed in the streets of Tripoli this week overshadowed two lingering questions: What is next, and could a more aggressive US involvement have dislodged Gaddafi much sooner?

Republican senators John McCain, of Arizona, and Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina, said they regretted that “this success was so long in coming due to the failure of the United States to employ the full weight of our airpower”.

“Ultimately, our intervention in Libya will be judged a success or failure based not on the collapse of the Gaddafi regime, but on the political order that emerges in its place,” the two senators said in a statement.

Texas Governor Rick Perry, a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, expressed a similar view.

“The lasting impact of events in Libya will depend on ensuring rebel factions form a unified, civil government that guarantees personal freedoms, and builds a new relationship with the West where we are allies instead of adversaries,” he said.

Former Obama adviser Robert Gibbs, who is assisting his re-election campaign, said the achievement was already evident.

“The American people will see this as a success because we didn’t need to send troops in, didn’t lose American lives and it involved others in the world who also had big interests in Libya’s stability taking a bigger role,” Gibbs said.

But the administration remains aware that today’s successes could turn sour. Obama called on the rebel leadership to work toward a transition that “is peaceful, inclusive and just”.

“True justice will not come from reprisals and violence,” Obama said on Monday night. “It will come from reconciliation and a Libya that allows its citizens to determine their own destiny.”