New York Times: U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadis’ Hands

Another consequence of President Obama's purposely anti-Bush, arms length, deferred to surrogates, but still interventionist Libya policy: U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadis’ Hands.

Money quote:

The Qatari assistance to fighters viewed as hostile by the United States demonstrates the Obama administration’s continuing struggles in dealing with the Arab Spring uprisings, as it tries to support popular protest movements while avoiding American military entanglements. Relying on surrogates allows the United States to keep its fingerprints off operations, but also means they may play out in ways that conflict with American interests.

The elephant in the room that pundits are studiously ignoring is that current events justify President Bush's choices in the Middle East. However, that admission by the media would open the door to re-evaluating Bush's record in a positive light that casts a contrasting critical shadow on Obama's Middle East policies, which would be a reversal of the punditry's dominant narrative. Bush merely applied the logical means necessary to achieve a liberal foreign policy, while Obama's histrionic rejection of Bush's methods (except for drone assassinations, which Obama has expanded dramatically) has invited failure in our foreign affairs.

It seems the Obama administration believes that a cheaper hedging failure and defeat of America on the world stage is preferable to a deeply invested commitment to victory and success.

Eric