Obama doctrine, Reagan doctrine
A few months later, Charles Krauthammer dubbed this “overt and unashamed American support for anti-Communist revolution” the Reagan Doctrine in a Time magazine essay. Its essence was use of proxies rather than direct American intervention. If a legitimate popular uprising was taking place against a communist regime in the developing world, Reagan reasoned that it was both morally right and in America’s interests to help it with arms and material support.
President Obama has quietly adopted a similar strategy, one using NATO allies, France in particular, as a proxy. First, we had the March 2011 intervention in Libya, in which American forces played a heavy role in the initial strikes, providing our “unique capabilities,” but then quickly transitioned to a supporting role, providing suppression of enemy air defense; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; and air-to-air refueling assets to enable the mission. We appear to be on a similar path in Mali, quietly providing combat enablers in a mission with France in the driver’s seat.
Unfortunately labeled as “leading from behind” by a staffer during the Libya intervention, critics have charged the president with weakness—ceding America’s rightful leadership role to others. Viewed through the lens of the Reagan Doctrine, though, it’s prudent risk management.
While Republican neoconservatives and Democratic liberal interventionists alike urged Obama to take decisive action early on in Libya, Syria, Mali, and other cases the fact of the matter is that the United States simply does not have vital interests in those conflicts that would justify putting American troops into harm’s way. On the other hand, even realists have to admit that getting rid of Gaddafi and Assad and preventing Islamist takeover of a West African country would be good outcomes for the US. So, if France and other allies want to bear the brunt of fight but can’t pull it off without American communications, intelligence and logistical assets, there’s a strong argument to be made for providing that assistance.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Obama doctrine=surrender and appeasement.
Reagan doctrine=strength and no fear.
nazo311 on January 19, 2013 at 6:35 PM
Mali, but no Darfur?
Where is this line in the sand of moral precedent being drawn?
John the Libertarian on January 19, 2013 at 6:42 PM
Obama doesn’t have doctrines. He has syndromes.
flataffect on January 19, 2013 at 6:51 PM
Reagan Doctrine = Build Up America
Obama Doctrine = Destroy America
The Rogue Tomato on January 19, 2013 at 6:52 PM
OT: look at the picture on Drudge. Hillary looks absolutely terrible. Wonder what she’s going to look like in another 4 years.
The Count on January 19, 2013 at 7:01 PM
“Quickly”? Surely you jest. Obama dithered for weeks until French and British made him look bad by doing something.
Count to 10 on January 19, 2013 at 7:09 PM
Reagan freed people!
Obama has merely changed the tyrant!
OldEnglish on January 19, 2013 at 7:22 PM
What a clown.
besser tot als rot on January 19, 2013 at 7:28 PM
Libya was not without the loss of a single American life. The lives lost at Benghazi were a direct result of Obama’s non-interventionist “light foot print” doctrine.
jffree1 on January 19, 2013 at 8:09 PM
The Time Bomb In Obamacare?
Resist We Much on January 19, 2013 at 8:13 PM