Obama and Libya

Summary

History As It Happens: Obama and Libya
History As It Happens
Host: Martin Decker
Release Date: July 8, 2025

---

Introduction

In this compelling episode of History As It Happens, host Martin Decker delves into the intricate and controversial U.S. intervention in Libya during President Barack Obama's administration. Joined by notable guests Hillary Clinton and Dennis Kucinich, the discussion navigates the complexities of foreign policy decisions, the implications of the War Powers Resolution, and the long-term consequences of regime change in the Middle East.

---

The Libya Crisis Unfolds

The episode opens with a grim recount of the violence in Libya, where "140 people were killed overnight as dictator Muammar Gaddafi sent a sniper to crush protesters" ([00:34]). This brutal crackdown sets the stage for President Obama's pivotal decision-making.

Barack Obama expresses condemnation of the violence:
"Suffering and bloodshed is outrageous and it is unacceptable." ([00:42])

As protests escalate, rebel forces engage in fierce battles against government troops in eastern Libya. Martin Decker notes the involvement of French airpower in Benghazi, indicating the international dimension of the conflict ([00:50]).

---

Obama's Response and International Intervention

In response to the escalating crisis, Barack Obama states:
"I've also asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis" ([00:56]). This statement underscores the administration's preparatory steps for potential intervention.

Hillary Clinton adds urgency with a succinct:
"Now." ([01:02])

By the third day, Operation Odyssey Dawn gains momentum as more countries contribute aircraft to the mission ([01:02]). However, Barack Obama warns against expanding the mission:
"But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake." ([01:08])

---

War Powers Act and Congressional Dynamics

Dennis Kucinich criticizes the administration's unilateral actions, emphasizing constitutional requirements:
"He [Obama] was constitutionally required to make that case to the Congress and to get its authorization. He did not." ([02:01])

Hillary Clinton reflects on the post-Vietnam landscape, highlighting Congress's reluctance to constrain presidential power:
"We've come to a point post Vietnam, post War Powers Resolution, where Congress has been unable and unwilling to provide any guidepost to limit the President's ability to send force, massive force, around the globe with barely any consultation at all." ([02:21])

The discussion underscores a recurring theme of "mission creep" and the erosion of checks and balances in U.S. military interventions.

---

Historical Context: Gaddafi's Libya

The narrative shifts to the origins of Libya's turmoil, with Jeremy Suri providing historical background:
"In 1942, the third year of the Second World War, Muammar Gaddafi was born in a tent in the Libyan desert..." ([02:46]).

Dennis Kucinich elaborates on U.S. actions against Gaddafi's regime:
"The United States launched a series of strikes against the headquarters, terrorist facilities and military assets that support Muammar Gaddafi's subversive activities." ([03:17])

A pivotal moment is the tragic bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, which resulted in 190 American deaths, binding Libya more tightly into international scrutiny and sanctions ([03:39]).

---

Shift Towards Reconciliation and the Arab Spring

By 2003, Libya began to reposition itself on the world stage by relinquishing its nuclear weapons program and lifting UN and U.S. sanctions. Hillary Clinton recounts Gaddafi's attempts to rehabilitate his image, which ultimately unravel during the Arab Spring of 2011 ([04:44]).

Dennis Kucinich observes:
"There's still a revolution going on." ([05:22])

As protests ignite across Libya, fear of a massacre looms, prompting international intervention.

---

Military Intervention and Regime Change

On March 17, 2011, the UN Security Council authorizes military intervention through Resolution 1973 to protect civilians. The following day, Barack Obama announces U.S. and NATO enforcement of the resolution, emphasizing the threat of atrocities if left unchecked ([06:29]).

However, the mission rapidly transforms into an effort for regime change, deviating from its initial humanitarian intent. Jeremy Suri critiques this shift:
"This is a story about the unintended consequences of endless military adventurism." ([07:43])

The administration's legal maneuvering around the War Powers Act is scrutinized, with unclear definitions of "hostilities" allowing for extended military engagement without congressional approval.

---

Consequences of Intervention: Libya as a Failed State

The aftermath of the intervention is bleak. Despite Dennis Kucinich's assertion that Gaddafi's removal was necessary, Libya plummets into chaos. The impending massacre fears materialize partially with the tragic Benghazi attack in September 2012, resulting in American casualties and ongoing instability ([12:07]).

Hillary Clinton laments the failure to establish a stable government post-Gaddafi:
"They fought each other over power. Many of them were dominated by Islamic extremists." ([41:35])

This power vacuum mirrors the early stages of other Middle Eastern conflicts, highlighting the pitfalls of rapid regime change without strategic planning for reconstruction.

---

War Powers Resolution and Executive Authority

The episode delves deep into the legal controversies surrounding the War Powers Act. Hillary Clinton acknowledges that while President Obama attempted to comply by consulting Congress, many felt it was merely a briefing rather than genuine authorization ([33:14]).

Dennis Kucinich emphasizes the constitutional breach:
"Dropping 2,000-pound bombs and unleashing the massive firepower of our air force on the capital of a sovereign state is in fact an act of war." ([35:06])

The administration's argument hinges on the ambiguous definition of "hostilities," allowing extended military operations without formal congressional approval.

---

Broader Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy

The discussion broadens to encompass U.S. interventionism, with both Clinton and Kucinich critiquing the perennial involvement in the Middle East. Hillary Clinton states:
"The only historical lesson that's worth taking from this is that the United States needs to be less involved in the Middle East." ([47:13])

The conversation touches upon the "pivot to Asia" strategy, questioning its feasibility amidst ongoing Middle Eastern entanglements and highlighting structural challenges in prioritizing global interests.

---

Lessons Learned and Future Directions

Reflecting on Libya's trajectory, Barack Obama acknowledges the critical mistake of not swiftly rebuilding governance structures post-intervention, leading to Libya's descent into a failed state ([50:32]).

Hillary Clinton advocates for a more restrained U.S. foreign policy, emphasizing diplomacy over military intervention:
"The United States needs to be less involved in the Middle East. That doesn't mean not involved at all, but less is probably more." ([47:13])

---

Conclusion

This episode of History As It Happens offers a nuanced exploration of the Obama administration's intervention in Libya, highlighting the delicate balance between humanitarian intentions and the perilous consequences of regime change. Through incisive dialogue and expert analysis, the podcast underscores the enduring challenges of U.S. foreign policy-making and the imperative for constitutional adherence in matters of war and peace.

---

For more insightful discussions on historical events shaping our present, tune in to new episodes every Tuesday and Friday, and subscribe to the newsletter at historyasithappens.com or find us on Substack and Facebook.

Transcript

[Martin Decker]

I say this every election cycle and I'll say it again. The 2024 political field was intense. So don't get left behind in 2025. If you're running for office, the first thing on your to do list should be securing your name on the web with the your name vote domain from GoDaddy.com you'll stand out and make your mark. Don't wait. Get yours today.

[Jeremy Suri]

History as it happens. July 8, 2025. Obama in Libya.

[Martin Decker]

140 people were killed in Libya overnight as dictator Muammar Gaddafi sent a sniper to crush protesters.

[Barack Obama]

Suffering and bloodshed is outrageous and it is unacceptable.

[Jeremy Suri]

Obama spoke as rebels fought running battles.

[Dennis Kucinich]

With government forces in eastern Libya.

[Martin Decker]

As you may know, French planes are already in the skies above Benghazi.

[Barack Obama]

Also asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis.

[Hillary Clinton]

Now.

[Dennis Kucinich]

On its third day, Operation Odyssey dawn gathered steam as aircraft from more and more countries join.

[Barack Obama]

But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.

[Dennis Kucinich]

The vice chairman says, and I quote, I am announcing to the world the killing of Gaddafi by the hands of the revolutionaries. There is a very real possibility that.

[Hillary Clinton]

Libya could dissolve into chaos.

[Jeremy Suri]

When President Trump bombed Iran, it raised the possibility the United States was about to blund into another war in the Middle east with unforeseen consequences because wars are easy to start and difficult to end. Fourteen years ago, Barack Obama made this mistake. Intervening in a civil war during the early days of the Arab Spring, asserting executive war powers, excluding Congress from the most important decision any president can make. It was the same old story. Mission creep, regime change, and another failed state. That's next as we report history as it happens. I'm Martin Decker.

[Dennis Kucinich]

He was constitutionally required to make that case to the Congress and to get its authorization. He did not. We have an administration that has assumed for itself powers to wage war which are neither expressly defined nor implicit in the Constitution.

[Hillary Clinton]

Unfortunately, we've come to a point post Vietnam, post War Powers Resolution, where Congress has been unable and unwilling to provide any guidepost to limit the President's ability to send force, massive force, around the globe with barely any consultation at all.

[Jeremy Suri]

In 1942, the third year of the Second World War, Muammar Gaddafi was born in a tent in the Libyan desert. He graduated from a military academy at 23. And as he rose the ranks, he planned a military coup to topple the king. Gaddafi and his people succeeded on September 1, 1969. Over the next several decades, the colonel was a bad international Actor. His support for terrorism provoked Reagan to bomb Libya. In 1986, Air and Naval forces of.

[Dennis Kucinich]

The United States launched a series of strikes against the headquarters, terrorist facilities and military assets that support Muammar Gaddafi's subversive activities. The attacks were concentrated and carefully targeted to minimize casualties among the Libyan people with whom we have no quarrel.

[Jeremy Suri]

Two years later, December 21, 1988, Pan.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Am Flight 103 from London's Heathrow to New York's Kennedy airport was at 31,000ft and just 52 minutes into its flight when air traffic controllers suddenly lost contact.

[Hillary Clinton]

The Pan Am 747 jumbo jet with 255 people on board has crashed just north of debris that was strewn over 10 square miles of countryside.

[Dennis Kucinich]

And for bodies that were hurled to.

[Hillary Clinton]

The ground with it, they found plenty of both. The plane's cockpit crashed into a field beside a small.

[Jeremy Suri]

The bombing of pan AM Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. 190Americans were among the dead. So it came as a surprise when a decade or so later, Gaddafi turned over the alleged perpetrators. In 2003, Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program and UN and US sanctions were lifted. The dictator was trying to rehab his image and enter the community of nations. He repudiated terrorism and was welcomed in European capitals. Libya even served as a non permanent member of the UN Security Council from 2008-09. And it was in that year Larry King treated Gaddafi to a softball interview.

[Hillary Clinton]

Do you have thoughts on who might succeed you?

[Dennis Kucinich]

I gave up power or authority since 1977. Once this Jemahariya was established, the state of the masses was established.

[Hillary Clinton]

The people's authority was also established. Ever since that date, I am not in power anymore.

[Barack Obama]

So you are not the leader of your country?

[Hillary Clinton]

I am the leader of the revolution, not the leader of the country.

[Dennis Kucinich]

There's still a revolution going on.

[Jeremy Suri]

Riveting tv, huh? Well, Gaddafi did not evolve into Thomas Jefferson. His people still resented his terrible regime. And in early 2011, as the winds of the Arab Spring blew across North Africa, Libyans revolted.

[Hillary Clinton]

The protesters who took this video claim this man is a foreign mercenary, one of many brought in by Gaddafi regime.

[Jeremy Suri]

Government forces soon converged on the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi, and the world feared a massacre. February 23, 2011.

[Barack Obama]

I've also asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis. This includes those actions we may take and those we will coordinate with our allies and partners or those that we'll carry out through multilateral institutions like all governments, the Libyan government has a responsibility to refrain from violence, to allow humanitarian assistance to reach those in need, and to respect the rights of its people.

[Jeremy Suri]

President Barack Obama called on Qaddafi to step down and leave Libya. So here is the timeline. March 17, 2011 the UN Security Council passes Resolution 1973 authorizing military intervention in Libya to protect civilians. The following day, Obama announces the US and NATO will enforce the resolution because Gaddafi would commit atrocities if left unchecked. March 19, 2011 the US and NATO countries started military action in Libya, establishing a no fly zone and bombing Qaddafi's forces. Here's the President on March 29 just.

[Barack Obama]

As there are those who've argued against intervention in Libya, there are others who have suggested that we broaden our military mission beyond the task of protecting the Libyan people and do whatever it takes to bring down Qaddafi and usher in a new government. Of course there is no question that Libya and the world would be better off with Qaddafi out of power. I, along with many other world leaders have embraced that goal and will actively pursue it through non military means. But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.

[Jeremy Suri]

This is a story about the unintended consequences of endless military adventurism. The Libya mission became a regime change mission without much consideration given to what might happen in the power vacuum after 42 years of Gaddafi rule. Really, it was always about regime change. How did the Obama administration expect Gaddafi to leave unless he was driven out by the rebel forces supported by US air power? This is also a story about the US Constitution, executive war powers and a Congress unwilling to fulfill its war making responsibilities. When President Trump bombed Iran, he was roundly criticized by Democrats for failing to consult Congress and for violating the UN Charter. A handful of Republicans objected. A major Iranian retaliation could have provoked deeper US involvement. And we know there are groups in the US who want regime change in Iran. This is why we have the term mission creep. Well, as of this episode, a truce is holding and President Trump does not appear eager to waste his presidency on another ground war in the Middle East. Because US forces were not sent to Libya in 2011, the Obama administration argued the hostilities weren't actually hostilities and therefore the President was not violating the War Powers Act.

[Barack Obama]

But as everyone recognizes the legal trigger for the automatic pullout clock, hostilities is.

[Dennis Kucinich]

An ambiguous term of art that is.

[Jeremy Suri]

Defined nowhere in the statute.

[Barack Obama]

The legislative history which we cite makes clear there was no agreed upon view of exactly what the term hostilities would encompass Nor has that standard ever been.

[Jeremy Suri]

Defined by any court or by Congress itself. That was Harold Koh, a legal advisor at the State Department, testifying before Congress in June 2011. Now, if you read the War Powers act of 1973, you won't find the words, the President must receive explicit congressional authorization and up or down vote before introducing US Forces into hostilities. This is what the law. The constitutional powers of the President as Commander in Chief to introduce United States armed forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances are exercised only pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization, or a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces. Well, that sounds like the President does need prior authorization.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Now, the argument we hear against this resolution comes down to we're already committed. It's too late for Congress to order withdrawal without harming America's reputation or undermining its allies.

[Jeremy Suri]

That was what Tom McClintock, a California Republican, argued on the House floor.

[Dennis Kucinich]

If we fail to do so, we'll have destroyed the work of the American founders by fundamentally changing the legislative and executive functions on the most momentous decision that our nation can make. And we will take our country down dark and bloody roads that the American founders sought to avoid.

[Jeremy Suri]

Avoid. And Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich, who introduced a War Powers Resolution Congress, through the.

[Dennis Kucinich]

War Powers act, provided the executive with an exception to unilaterally respond only when the nation was in actual or imminent danger to repel sudden attacks. Mr. Speaker, today we are in a constitutional crisis.

[Jeremy Suri]

But as mentioned, the Obama administration's lawyers argued the President had the constitutional authority to bomb Libya because he could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest. And the hostilities weren't really hostilities. There were no American boots on the ground and they handed off the operation to NATO anyway.

[Barack Obama]

In this effort, the United States is prepared to act as part of of an international coalition. American leadership is essential, but that does not mean acting alone.

[Jeremy Suri]

Congress failed to pass a War Powers resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya in October, eight months after Libyan started their revolt.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Getting video in now from the Al Jazeera network.

[Jeremy Suri]

Gaddafi was dead.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Gaddafi's body after he was killed today, apparently in his hometown of Sirte.

[Jeremy Suri]

But Libya did not become a peaceful democracy. It was consumed by chaos, leading to violence that would haunt Hillary Clinton. The attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.

[Martin Decker]

The fact is, we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk? One night who decided they'd go kill some Americans? What difference at this point? Does it make sense? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again.

[Jeremy Suri]

Senator, today Libya is a failed state whose internationally recognized government does not control all of its national territory. Now, what if Congress, and by extension the American people, had really debated the pros and cons of intervention? Do we know anything about this country, its history and culture? What might happen if a dictator is toppled? Are there limits to US Military power? Is it counterproductive in the long term? The Obama administration had little time for these questions once the president became convinced he had to stop a massacre immediately. Jeremy Suri is a historian at the LBJ School of Public affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the co host of this Is Democracy podcast and the Mind behind the Democracy of Hope newsletter on substack. Our conversation Next History is defined by.

[Martin Decker]

The names that stand the test of time. Names that inspired, unite and lead. Now it's your turn to create a lasting legacy with a dot vote domain. Whether you're running for office, driving change or rallying support, a dot vote domain ensures your name is as memorable as those in the history books. Visit GoDaddy.com, type in your name. Vote and secure a web address that stands out. Claim your place in history with dot vote.

[Jeremy Suri]

Jeremy Suri, welcome back.

[Hillary Clinton]

Good to be with you as always, Martin.

[Jeremy Suri]

Here we are again debating the wisdom of military intervention in the Middle East. You know, when Trump bombed Iran, I saw some stuff. Social media, you know, Democrats criticizing the president for not consulting Congress. It was obviously a violation of the UN Charter as well. And then you would see things like, well, Obama did this with Libya. I mean, these two situations, not exactly the same. But of course are parents taught us that two wrongs don't make a right. Just pointing out hypocrisy. I mean, that gets old, especially here in Washington. I'm taking a wider view of this because there are some deeper issues here. Serious problems about US Interventionism, our role in the world, executive war powers, really. We're still in the era of the imperial presidency where making war is just too easy to do. Is that too simple a way of looking at it?

[Hillary Clinton]

No, I think that's exactly the right way to look at it. Unfortunately, we've come to a point post Vietnam, post War powers resolution where Congress has been unable and unwilling to provide any guideposts to limit the president's ability to send force, massive force, around the globe with barely any consultation at all. And Democrats and Republicans have both been guilty of this. And we're also in an era of threat inflation where whenever this is done, whether it's Obama in Libya or Trump in Iran, the claim is made that this is essential for national security, though that claim is never explained why this is crucial for American security. So this is an old problem that we're just seeing kind of repeat administration after administration.

[Jeremy Suri]

Iran was not threatening the United States. It was not an immediate or looming threat. The Libya situation was a lot different. But I think there are similarities between the two cases or at least one theme. I'll touch on here with you now. Unintended consequences of getting involved in the Middle East. Again, these are structural issues. No matter what an individual president or candidate might say, we're not going to get involved in another war in the Middle East. They wind up getting involved in another war in the Middle East.

[Hillary Clinton]

Yes, it's almost as if every president says I'm not interested in the Middle east, but the Middle east says no, we're interested in you. And that's what happens. It's because of our long standing relationships in the region. It's because of the importance of oil to the world economy. Even though we produce plenty of oil, the oil prices in the United States and the global economy is still very dependent upon oil. And it's also because of the inevitable hubris of presidents believing, whether it's for humanitarian or economic reasons, that there's something we can do because we have so much power. And even those who oppose American activity in the Middle east, they will often blame presidents for not acting, just as they blame them for acting. So it is a very difficult position for presidents to be in. To have so much power is actually a real burden in this case.

[Jeremy Suri]

What about the so called blob that plays a role here too?

[Hillary Clinton]

Yes, because first of all, the Blob, the knowledgeable group of people, talking heads who discuss foreign policy on a day to day basis, there is an obsession with the Middle east because it's a long standing problem and because the Middle east is a topic that gets a lot of attention from non experts. And so it's very hard to get foreign policy experts and media not to talk about the Middle East. And then when it's a country like Israel or Iran or the population in Gaza or the west bank, there are strong organized groups within the United States that want to tell these stories. And there's a very heavy lobbying operation to get action in these areas. And that also draws politicians, the US.

[Jeremy Suri]

And Iran are, well, as I speak to at this very moment, not at war, but there's been a conflict since 1979. Sometimes it's been more intense than at other times. But a lot of American, we might call them neoconservatives, have never gotten over losing, losing our man in the Middle east, the Shah, to the Islamic Revolution in 1979. And of course the Iranian revolution was anti American and anti West.

[Hillary Clinton]

Yes, there's no doubt about that. Whether one believes we should take military action against Iran or not, no one should view the Iranian regime as anything less than hostile to the United States and explicitly hostile, insulting to the United States. And this is a really good topic for us to talk about as historians because one thing that was made evident in the last few weeks is that the historical memory of 1979 is alive and well. I've written about the historical memories of the Civil War. Many people have written about the historical memories of Vietnam. The historical memories of Iran in 1979 are alive and well. Many, many, many Americans have been commenting in the last few weeks about their anger and their memories of watching large number of our diplomatic personnel held hostage, held hostage in Iran, mistreated in Iran for 444 days. That's one of my first political memories.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Some 60Americans are now beginning their sixth day of captivity inside the US embassy in Tehran. The government of Iran must recognize the gravity of the situation which it has itself created.

[Hillary Clinton]

And that insult to the United States, that brutality towards Americans is still how a generation that came of age then views Iran. This is really important. Policy is not just made by analysis, it's made by emotion and memory.

[Jeremy Suri]

Ironically enough, Ronald Reagan wanted to try to get along with the so called moderates in Iran. The way he tried to do that though, didn't work out. Selling missiles through Israel to Iran.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Our government has a firm policy not to capitulate to terrorist demands that no concessions policy remains in force. In spite of the wildly speculative and false stories about arms for hostages and alleged ransom payments. We did not, repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we.

[Jeremy Suri]

But we're not going to talk about Iran Contra right here. You know, there's something else though. You talked about the Iranian regime. Part of this or part of the problem when I get into debates about the wisdom of intervening is the regimes in question are in fact indefensible. Iran's regime, Saddam Hussein was an sob. So you hear things like how could anyone really oppose getting rid of Saddam Hussein? It'll be better for the Middle East It'll be better for the world if there are fewer leaders like him. Muammar Gaddafi, another indefensible figure, although he toned it down a bit by the time in 2003 he gave up his nuclear and chemical stockpiles. Right. He wanted to reach an accommodation at long last with the West. Let's talk about Gaddafi as we transition here to Obama in Libya and the lessons or the warnings of the unintended consequences of military intervention in this part of the world. We'll also talk about the War Powers Resolution again in a little bit. Gaddafi comes to power in 1969, Jeremy. He rules for more than 40 years until protests erupt par the Arab Spring, early 2011. What happened in Libya? What caused those protests?

[Hillary Clinton]

So part of the cause of the protest was that Gaddafi was one of a series of leaders in the region who had begun as these charismatic figures. Gaddafi came from a very poor Bedouin family and like many of the other dictators in the region, he had risen through the military, then staged the military coup and promised to create a republic. He called Libya a republic that would actually serve the people better. And then it just became an authoritarian regime, a regime that was decadent in every way in serving his personal whims of one kind or another. In 2010, 2011, there was a region wide movement kicked off really in Tunisia and to some extent in Iran and in Egypt, of people taking to the streets and saying they were fed up, they were not going to tolerate this. The economic crisis of 2008, 2009 had contributed to this. But it was one of these things that we study as historians, a contagion of fed up people finally thinking once they saw that you could overthrow a long standing ruler in Tunisia and in Egypt, why can't we do that in Libya? And this became a civil war in Libya because unlike in Egypt and Tunisia, Gaddafi tried to use his own army to massacre those, quite literally massacre those who were rising up against him. And so Libya fell into civil war very, very quickly. And that was the context for the Obama administration and the United nations in United States, the NATO trying to take action in Libya in March of 2011.

[Jeremy Suri]

How do you spell Gaddafi?

[Hillary Clinton]

That's, you know, I used to use a Q, but I, as I was preparing for this episode, I looked and it seems the standard has become a G, G A D, D A F.

[Jeremy Suri]

I AP style is G H A D, A F, I. Okay.

[Hillary Clinton]

Oh, okay, there we go.

[Jeremy Suri]

Let's get back to the serious stuff we're talking about here. So we don't Distract folks. You mentioned NATO and why? You know Obama, who came to power in 09, a critic of the Iraq war, but not of all wars. He supported the US project in Afghanistan, decides in 2011 to get involved in Libya and then hand it off to NATO. First of all, NATO is a defensive alliance in Europe. It was designed to of course, prevent Soviet hostility or Soviet belligerence against Western Europe. Why is NATO operating in Libya? There was no Article 5 violation there.

[Hillary Clinton]

Absolutely. There was no obligation for NATO to operate. But NATO had established a tradition of out of area operations in Afghanistan, for example. And the leader of France at the time, Nicolas Sakorzy, was very committed, I love saying Sarkozy. He was very committed to getting involved and really for a while drove discussion among native leaders because this was an area of traditional French activity and this was an opportunity for the French in removing, if they could, Gaddafi to reestablish influence in the area. There were two concerns that really affected Europe directly. First was the concern about immigration. The Arab Spring created throughout the Middle east, from Syria through Libya and elsewhere, a huge pool of people who were fleeing from conflict and coming to Europe. And of course this transformed German politics because it was Angela Merkel as the leader of Germany, who took in a lot of these individuals, which upset a lot of Germans and led to a sort of right wing revolt in Germany. So the concern was, first of all, if there was an order brought to this region, this would be an immigration problem. France has a big problem of this too. And second, there was a concern that if Gaddafi was able to repress these people who were rising up in Benghazi and elsewhere, this would mean the repression of the Arab Spring. In other countries there was a concern about a reverse domino. And so the hope was that by protecting those who were seeking to transform Libya, this would continue the process of what was seen as democratization or some form of it in the Middle East.

[Jeremy Suri]

This was a war of choice, though, not necessity. Obama was against it at first, wasn't he? And then Hillary Clinton and some others convinced him that he had to do this. And what is do this? Libyan or Gaddafi's forces were coming in on Benghazi, the city of Benghazi, and it was feared there'd be a massacre there. But some have said, you know, it's not clear there would have been been a massacre, that the state or government forces would have attacked the rebels, but not necessarily killed everybody else.

[Hillary Clinton]

So here the legacy was not 1979 in Iran. Here the historical memory was Rwanda, 1994.

[Dennis Kucinich]

In Africa today a plane carrying the.

[Jeremy Suri]

Presidents of two African nations has apparently.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Been shot down as it was coming.

[Jeremy Suri]

In for a landing in the capital of Rwanda.

[Martin Decker]

Within hours, mass ethnic killing strike erupt.

[Hillary Clinton]

Across the country targeting members of the.

[Martin Decker]

Tutsi minority and moderate Hutus.

[Dennis Kucinich]

The flow of refugees across Rwanda's borders has now created what could be the world's worst humanitarian crisis in a generation. It is a disaster born of brutal violence and according to experts now on site, it is now claiming one life every minute.

[Hillary Clinton]

And you had Samantha Power, who was on the National Security Council for Obama, who had written about Rwanda, Susan Rice, who had been in the Clinton administration and deeply regretted that the United States had not stopped the massacre of 800,000 people in Rwanda, and Hillary Clinton, who of course had been first lady at the time. All of them believed that if the United. And they sincerely believe this, whether right or wrong, if there wasn't action taken, that you would have another Rwanda, that you would have hundreds of thousands of people massacred by Gaddafi. And they believe, first of all, that was bad, especially Samantha Power, human rights activists. Second, they believed it would have enormously bad strategic consequences for the region. And number three, and this is, I think, what convinced Obama, they told him, you will have blood on your hands and the Republicans who are telling you not to intervene will be the first ones to blame you for this. As happened for Clinton at the very end of his time in office, they convinced Obama that the least bad solution, he was reluctant from the start, the least bad solution, was not to put American force on the ground, but to use American air power. There's always the allure, the attractiveness of air power as this kind of clean solution. Use American air power to act as the air force for the rebels and provide them protection, a no fly zone and then attack the Libyan military forces that are going after the rebels and then let the rebels deal with the dirty work on the ground.

[Jeremy Suri]

Was it supposed to be regime change from the start or did Obama come around to that afterward because it didn't take him too long to come around to that position?

[Hillary Clinton]

I don't think it was for him. I think he was again reluctant. But I think it was regime change. Yes, for Hillary Clinton and for Susan Rice and for Samantha Power and back to our European allies. And the Europeans were very important in this too. For Sarkozy in France and others, this was about regime change. Yes.

[Barack Obama]

Secretary Clinton, President Obama says the worst mistake in office that he made a over these past seven and a half years was not preparing for Libya after Muammar Gaddafi was removed. You were as Secretary of State, aren't you also responsible for that?

[Martin Decker]

Well, let me say I think we did a great deal to help the Libyan people after Gaddafi's demise. And here's what we did. We helped them hold two successful elections, something that is not easy, which they did very well because they had a pent up desire to try to chart their own future after 42 years of dictatorship. I was very proud of that. We got rid of the chemical weapons stockpile that Gaddafi had, getting it out of Libya, getting it away from militias or terrorist groups. We also worked to help them set up their government. We sent a of lot, lot of American experts there. We offered to help them secure their borders, to train a new military. They at the end, when it came to security issues, Wolf did not want troops from any other country, not just us, European or other countries.

[Dennis Kucinich]

In Libya, regime change often has unintended consequences.

[Jeremy Suri]

What a terrible idea.

[Hillary Clinton]

It certainly turned out that way. But it is also true that if Obama had not acted, he would have been blamed. If he had not acted and there had been another Rwanda style massacre, he would have been blamed for that and we'd be sitting here and saying how weak he was and what an insult it was to American power. That's the problem in this region. You're usually stuck between two bad solutions.

[Jeremy Suri]

We'll get back to how Congress handled this and the War Powers Resolution in a second because that is a big part of this story, how both Republicans and Democrats actually objected to the process. And then there's also the substance of the issue, whether we should get involved in Libya anyway. But here's a commentary piece at Cato, the Cato Institute, which is a libertarian think tank on foreign policy. They are very hands off. They oppose interventionism. Doug Bandao wrote this piece in 2020, so five years ago, but Libya is still a mess today. It's still a failed state. The title of his piece, the Obama administration wrecked Libya for a generation. Fears of a massacre were fraudulent. He says Gaddafi was no angel, but he hadn't targeted civilians and his florid rhetoric cited by critics only attacked those who had taken up arms. He even promised amnesty to those who abandoned their weapons. With no civilians to protect, however, NATO, led by the US bombed Libyan government forces and installations and backed the insurgents offensive. Now, I'm not defending Gaddafi here. What I'm doing is questioning whether this was really necessary. Well, how do you feel about that analysis? I just read.

[Hillary Clinton]

I think that's ridiculous, honestly. So here's the thing, right when we're saying that interventions didn't work. We shouldn't go the other way and say, and minimize the threat. It's I think probably right that the prescription, the effort to stop Gaddafi did not work. But Gaddafi was certainly capable and had proven a willingness to be a cold blooded killer, as has the Iranian regime. Right. The Iranian regime might not have directly massacred Israelis, but they have supported Hamas's efforts and Hezbollah's efforts.

[Jeremy Suri]

So.

[Hillary Clinton]

And Gaddafi had done the same. He had actually tried to assassinate the President of the United States.

[Jeremy Suri]

He was a bad international actor, a supporter of terrorism. But by this point though, Jeremy, hadn't he. Well, I don't want to say reformed himself, but he wasn't doing that anymore. He gave up his nukes in 03, right?

[Hillary Clinton]

Well, that's a different story. He gave up his nukes, but he didn't give up power nor his claim to be the ruler who had no limits. And he had a track record. He said he was going to massacre them. I think it's very reasonable for people to assume that would happen. And because it didn't happen, because he was overthrown doesn't mean it wouldn't have happened if he had stayed in power.

[Jeremy Suri]

I was working for the Associated Press when this happened and I do remember the fears about a massacre taking place in Benghazi and watching Obama's news conferences where he went up there and had to explain why, after all of his talk of not wanting to get sucked into another situation in the Middle east, we're going back into the Middle east now.

[Barack Obama]

Here's why this matters to us. Left unchecked, we have every reason to believe that Qaddafi would commit atrocities against his people. People, many thousands could die. A humanitarian crisis would ensue. The entire region could be destabilized, endangering many of our allies and partners. The calls of the Libyan people for help would go unanswered.

[Jeremy Suri]

Did Obama consult Congress? According to the letter of the War Powers Act?

[Hillary Clinton]

Yes and no. This is one of the disputed elements. He did have a scheduled meeting before the bombing where he brought some members of Congress in and others on the tele. It was bipartisan insofar as he had people like Mitch McConnell involved in these conversations. And so technically, by the letter of the law, he consulted. But many members of Congress felt that they were not being consulted, they were simply being briefed. And so it really is a question of what does consultation mean? He was telling them the war plan when the war plan had already been approved. He did at least as Much if not more than Lyndon Johnson did on a day to day basis with members of Congress.

[Jeremy Suri]

Isn't there an understanding that although the War Powers act does give the President authority to enter into hostilities, enter US Forces into hostilities, that it still has to be for something that's of national interest, The United States has been attacked or it's an imminent attack, some discernible threat to our national security. Well, which Libya was not. I mean this was a war of choice.

[Hillary Clinton]

That is how people interpret it who are opposed to the action the President takes. Usually those who support the action the President and takes. Don't say that. We've just seen that with Iran Republicans. I found one of these. You can find so many of these quotes. Martin. One of the Republicans on the Armed Services Committee at the time of the Libya intervention said, the United States is a Republican. The United States does not have a King's Army. President Obama's unilateral choice to use US Military force in Libya is an affront to our Constitution. But yet no Republican that I could find with maybe one or two exceptions was willing to say that about Trump and vice versa. So I mean, your view of whether the President has acted legitimately in the last 50 years has basically been not about process. It's been whether you agree with the decision or disagree with it.

[Jeremy Suri]

Dennis Kucinich, the left wing Democrat, I think introduced a resolution.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Dropping 2,000 pound bombs and unleashing the massive firepower of our air force on the capital of a sovereign state is in fact an act of war. And no amount of legal acrobatics can make it otherwise. It is the arrogance of power which former senator from Arkansas, J. William Fulbright, saw shrouded in the deceit which carried us into the abyss of another war in Vietnam. My generation was determined that we would never see another Vietnam. It was the awareness of the unchecked power and arrogance of the executive which led Congress to pass the War Powers Act.

[Jeremy Suri]

Now there was unhappiness on both sides of the aisle, maybe not a majority of Democrats, but some certainly did take issue with the way Obama was going about doing this. You know, I read the War Powers act and it's not a long piece of legislation. Nowhere in there does it say the President must get prior authorization, which would be tantamount to a declaration of war. It does say though that within 60 days, if US forces are still involved in hostilities, then you need Congress's authorization or you have to pull out. But the Obama administration said these weren't hostilities.

[Hillary Clinton]

Right?

[Jeremy Suri]

Not hostilities. I mean, are you kidding?

[Hillary Clinton]

They called it a police action in the way that, you know, we have force in the South China Sea on a day to day basis and we get into, you know, near air skirmishes with Chinese aircraft on a day to day basis. Obama tried to make the case he was following the letter of the law, though he did report to Congress within 48 hours, as he's required to do. And he did claim that there were gonna be no American forces on the ground and that we were not engaged in direct hostilities more than 60 days. Again, perhaps that's wordsmithing. This is the issue. Right. The War Powers Resolution is written in such a way that it gives presidents enormous leeway. Many had argued, by the way, before Libya and after Libya that drone strikes were also a violation. Right. I mean, the President and with his legal team was making decisions about taking out people, killing people without consulting Congress. And so this was part of the same thing.

[Jeremy Suri]

And successive administrations have argued the War Powers Resolution's unconstitutional.

[Hillary Clinton]

They have, but surprisingly it hasn't been challenged yet. So we'll see. It's been more ignored is what I would say in our politics and in.

[Jeremy Suri]

The Libya situation, despite some grumbling on both sides of the aisle, ultimately they did not pass a War Powers Resolution to rein in the US involvement in Libya. It failed.

[Hillary Clinton]

Right. Just as they haven't for Trump in Iran. Tim Kaine, Senator Tim Kaine proposed one and it went down pretty, pretty quickly.

[Jeremy Suri]

And the Obama people said, well, we handed it off to NATO, so it's not our problem anymore.

[Hillary Clinton]

Right, right. And I think Obama was serious about that. He didn't. Whether one agrees with this or not, he didn't want this to be an American war. In his eyes, the problem with Iraq and to some extent Afghanistan is these became American wars. He did not want this to be an American war.

[Jeremy Suri]

Yeah. I have in front of me the testimony that a Justice Department attorney at the time delivered to Congress. And it's a lot of legalese what the term hostility means, what the meaning of the 60 day authorization pull out rule means. You know, you get lawyers involved. War is not war anymore. It's whatever we want it to be, you know?

[Hillary Clinton]

Yeah, well, that's the problem. Presidents have stretched this. But on the other hand, there also is a point that the United States is globally engaged in military operations every day. And so what is the line again? Every day there is air conflict and sea conflict between the US And China. Are we at war or not at war? Most of us would say they were not, but actually that is A hostile space. Right. And so what's the line? Where do you cross that line?

[Jeremy Suri]

I would say there's definitely a line when you're getting involved in a place you hadn't been involved in already, like Libya. So let's just say for argument's sake, everything Obama did was legal. Congress did not. They had an opportunity. They did not pass a war powers resolution to stop. Still was not in US interests. And that's another piece of this I want to tackle with you. We already discussed it a little bit about the unintended consequences of getting involved in these countries because, well, who would possibly oppose getting rid of Muammar Gaddafi? That S.O.B. well, look what happened. Pick it up from there. Jeremy. We know obviously the Benghazi situation that haunted Hillary Clinton. What happens to Libya after Gaddafi is gone because he's murdered, he was found in a drainage pipe and killed by the rebels. Then what happens?

[Hillary Clinton]

So what happened then is what a historian would say most often happens when you have a long serving dictatorship that's overthrown rapidly. You get a period of chaos, chaotic violence, and you often get some kind of extreme violent group that takes power, because that's how they take power. And in the case of Libya, we had a series of violent groups that basically took different kinds of power, shared power, then fought each other over power. Many of them were dominated by Islamic extremists. And so we had groups that were associated with ISIS in control of Libya or in control of parts of Libya. Maybe the way to think about it is a series of warlords that are able to take control when the big warlord is overthrown. And then the next year, when we came to September 11, which is a big anniversary, they used the anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attacks on the US to launch an attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, which led to the murder of the American diplomat. What really opened a period of, of great chaos and violence in this society. So things did not go in an orderly direction. They went in an opposite, disorderly direction. What happens?

[Jeremy Suri]

Yeah, civil war for several years, then it died down. But recently there was some more violence there. There was another truce just last month that was reached. But Libya is still a failed state. The prime minister or the president of the recognized government in Tripoli, Abdul Hamid Dabebe D B E I B E H But there's a second government right on the eastern half of the country still, isn't there?

[Hillary Clinton]

That's right, that's right. And I think there still are pockets that are not governed by either. And we know There are terrorist groups operating there. So it has become to some extent what Afghanistan was before 2001. Let's hope not with the same implications. The point needs to be made that when we consider the these actions, we shouldn't only ask is the guy in charge really bad and should we overthrow him? The question we have to ask is what comes next? That's what bothers me about the Iran operation too. I abhor the Iranian government as well, and everyone should. But will it be better if they're overthrown? Especially if they're overthrown by force by the United States and Israel. It seems to me all you're going to get is like what you have in Libya, an extremist regime that's even more hateful of those that overthrew the prior regime.

[Jeremy Suri]

Well, there are people who oppose negotiating, even though we know that negotiations always happen with regimes like the one in Iran. They oppose negotiations for a number of reasons, but in my view, that's what diplomacy is for. You talk to your enemies, you try to bring Iran, insofar as it is possible, back into the community of nations. Right? I mean, this was the idea behind Iran Contra, or at least the Iran part of Iran contrast etc. Reagan thought that he could reach. He was mistaken. Moderates associated with the Iranian regime to try to get the hostages freed and also, as he said, to bring peace to the Middle East. He said it wouldn't be possible to have peace in the Middle east without Iran.

[Dennis Kucinich]

Without Iran's cooperation, we cannot bring an end to the Persian Gulf War. Without Iran's concurrence, there can be no enduring peace in the Middle East.

[Hillary Clinton]

We have a long historical record of negotiations to prevent or remove nuclear and chemical weapons. And they usually work only when you incentivize the regime to get rid of its weapons, not when you overthrow the regime and Gaddafi himself had negotiated away his weapons. I fear that the lesson people have taken from the bombing of Libya and now the bombing of Iran is don't give up your nukes, make sure you get them. North Korea has not been bombed, but Ukraine, Libya did not develop nuclear weapons. They gave up their weapons. And look what's happened. And look what's happened to Iran when it didn't have nuclear weapons. I don't see how another Iranian regime doesn't think they better secretly get these weapons fast.

[Jeremy Suri]

I've covered this subject at length in recent episodes. I encourage all listeners to go back and catch some of those with Gregory Brew and Joe Cirincione about the whole logic of proliferation. Another historical Period. To bring into this about the importance of diplomacy with your enemies. In 1991, the Madrid Conference and George H.W. bush riding high after the Gulf War and with the Cold War winding down to invite Iran to the Madrid conference. Well, the hawks overrode that idea and Iran was not invited to the Madrid Conference. So, again, not defending Iran, but you have a better chance of getting what you want out of the regime when you try to bring them in to the concert rather than keep them out.

[Hillary Clinton]

Your listeners will know that I'm usually not someone to praise Donald Trump, but I actually think he understood this about Iran in the lead up to the Israeli attacks on Iran. And Donald Trump was trying to do a Nixon goes to China for Iran. He recognized it would be a big political victory for him to show up in Tehran and sign an agreement. That's probably what his main motivation was. But he understood just what you said, that it is far better to negotiate a deal with an odious regime to get them to give up their weapons than it is to go to war with them. The Israelis pulled him into this war and he allowed himself to be pulled into this war. But I think his inclination was actually just what you described, Martin.

[Jeremy Suri]

It's not in Iran's interest to pursue this any longer. It has backfired badly. They miscalculated badly. We don't need to get into that entire subject here as we wrap up. But yes, I agree, Trump was right. Diplomacy was the right way to go. Libya today. You're familiar with the group Freedom House, Jeremy?

[Hillary Clinton]

Yes, I am, of course.

[Jeremy Suri]

Do you regard them as very highly?

[Hillary Clinton]

I think Freedom House and I know some of the people who work there. I think they do serious analytical work on whether societies are free or not free.

[Jeremy Suri]

Libya. According to their most recent report, Libya has been racked by internal divisions in intermittent civil conflict since a popular armed uprising in 2011, as we've been discussing here, depose a longtime dictator, Gaddafi. International efforts to bring rival administrations together in a unity government have repeatedly failed, preventing long overdue elections. The proliferation of weapons and autonomous militias, flourishing criminal networks, interference by regional powers and the presence of extremist groups have all contributed to a persistent lack of physical security. So Freedom House gives these scores. The Highest score is 100. Lowest score, I guess, is 0. Libya is in the not free category. Out of a possible score of 100, it has a 10 for political rights. It scores 2 out of a possible 40 for civil liberties, 8 out of a possible 60. Whatever one thinks of these scores, I think the point is Libya is a failed state. We can't blame everything on President Obama because this did happen 14 years ago. But that's the start of it.

[Hillary Clinton]

We have to own up to the fact that across Democratic and Republican administrations over the last 50 years, the United States has expended enormous military and economic effort in this region and throughout the region. Those results are pretty standard.

[Jeremy Suri]

Regime change is a disaster. And it's not just Obama. I mentioned at the beginning, I don't like the term the blob. I don't think people know what it means. But part of this is structural. We have a structural problem here.

[Hillary Clinton]

I think that's exactly right. I think the only historical lesson that's worth taking from this is that the United States needs to be less involved in the Middle East. That doesn't mean not involved at all. But less is probably more from our point of view and maybe even for those in the region. And that's not to condemn the United States. Look, there's some places where we're more effective than other places. I think we're actually pretty effective in a place like Ukraine in protecting what we believe in in Europe. We're less effective in a place like Iran or Syria or Libya. And we just need to own up to that.

[Jeremy Suri]

The so called pivot to Asia. Obama wanted to do it. He never did. I think in large part because of affairs in the Middle East. I think Trump wants to do a pivot to Asia as well. I mean, they wanted to prioritize great power competition. Do you think that's gonna happen? I know predicting the future is very difficult, but what are the obstacles in the way of Trump making this pivot?

[Hillary Clinton]

Well, the obstacles are that there are crises in other areas that are immediately important to American politics, the American economy and our allies that we care about. And so it's very hard to pivot to one region when you're involved in so many other regions. This is the problem. A global power has primacy.

[Jeremy Suri]

We're addicted to primacy.

[Hillary Clinton]

That's right. And the Chinese have an easier go because they're really concerned primarily with just one region. And so that's. Yeah, that's the challenge we have. That's why foreign policy leadership is so difficult and why we need people who are experienced, knowledgeable, and willing to make tough decisions based on the facts, not just on what's popular.

[Jeremy Suri]

And we ran out of missiles, so Ukraine's not getting more missiles because we're all over the place. This is another issue we've discussed in many of our past conversations. Figuring out the difference between core national interests and peripheral ones. We still can't do it.

[Hillary Clinton]

I agree with that. And I also just add on to that figuring out what we can do and what we cannot. Just because we have fancy machines and incredibly well trained military doesn't mean we're actually capable of doing everything we lay out to do. We cannot put a better regime in power in Iran that is not in the power of the United States. And we have to recognize, of course.

[Barack Obama]

There is no question that Libya and the world would be better off with Qaddafi out of power. I, along with many other world leaders have embraced that goal and will actively pursue it through non military means. But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake. Those who now argue in retrospect we should have left Qaddafi in there seemed to forget that he had already lost legitimacy and control of his country and we could have instead of what we have in Libya now, we could have had another Syria in Libya. Now the problem with Libya was the fact that there was a failure on the part of the entire international community. And I think that the United States has some accountability for not moving swiftly enough and underestimating the need to rebuild government there quickly. And as a consequence, you now have a very bad situation.

[Jeremy Suri]

And one more for good measure, candidate Obama in 2007 talking about the War Powers Resolution.

[Barack Obama]

We thought we had learned this lesson after Vietnam. After Vietnam, Congress swore it would never again be duped into war and even wrote a new law, the War Powers act, to ensure it would not repeat its mistakes. But no law can force a Congress to stand up to the President.

[Jeremy Suri]

On the next episode of History As It Happens, the Battle of Gettysburg took place in July 1863. Today there's a new battle for Gettysburg taking place for its future. And over the materials that visitors will see the history, the education that is next as we report History as it Happens. New episodes every Tuesday and Friday. My newsletter every Friday. You can sign [e-mail] or just go to Substack and search for History As It Happens. And we're also on Facebook now.