Good Afternoon.
As I type this, Republicans in Congress, along with a few Democrats, are forming a bi-partisan panel to investigate the events following the tragic attack on the U.S. Consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. For those not aware, the attacks perpetrated by Islamic militants claimed the life of five men, one of whom was Ambassador Chris Stevens, our chief diplomat in the region. It was, and is, a tragedy that will not soon be forgotten by the American people.
Much has been said, written about, and argued over in the nearly two years since Benghazi happened; most of it aimed at assigning blame to one side of the American political aisle or another. Indeed, "Benghazi" has conspired to divide Republicans and Democrats quite evenly along party lines, as is the case with most issues nowadays.
On one side of this divide, Republicans, conservatives, Tea Partiers, and others closely associated with them are quick to assign blame to President Obama, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and other prominent figures within the Obama administration for their alleged lack of awareness and commitment to secure and protect the consulate and its personnel. Other arguments go even further in accusing the President and his cabinet of actually KNOWING IN ADVANCE about the attacks and refusing to do anything about it.
Not to be outdone, Democrats, liberals, and the like have been quick to redirect this criticism at the right-wingers by arguing that it's actually THEY who are to blame, given the alleged funding cuts authorized by Republicans in Congress. They argue that "draconian" spending cuts have affected base security in places like Benghazi and have made our embassies more vulnerable to attack.
I will not dedicate this space to lobbying for one camp's argument or for the other's. And my reasoning behind this is simple: per usual, both sides' respective arguments have completely missed the big picture and do not take into account the underlying cause of this tragedy and others like it.
What is the underlying cause of the tragedy surrounding Benghazi? My argument is simply that the chief responsibility for tragic events like Benghazi lie directly at the feet of our nation's foreign policy.
Documented sources abound of our involvement in the 2011 Libyan Civil War that saw the ouster of Col. Muammar Gaddafi, the nation's brutal dictator. Additionally, our efforts to gather intelligence and target al-Qaeda affiliated militant groups throughout the region during that time are also well-recorded. Some sources even point to our efforts to actively FUNNEL WEAPONS to other rebel groups of our own choosing during major hostilities taking place at the time.
Some questions: is it any surprise then that we would be attacked by those rebel groups who DIDN'T get weapons from us or otherwise benefit from our presence there? Is it any surprise that those groups who were in fact on the OPPOSITE SIDE of the one we picked in this conflict would seek to do harm to our personnel? Can any of this come as a surprise to anyone who considers that, on a larger scale, our military presence in the Middle East, consisting of over forty (40) installations, is an affront to those who consider the land we occupy to be "Muslim land"? Most reasonable people would say no.
Put simply, our involvement in conflicts that have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on our own national security interests should be opposed for these very reasons. Also, I personally cannot help but wonder what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot and it was the UNITED STATES that was embroiled in a Civil War that a foreign government was trying to influence. What if, on top of that, a foreign entity had placed its own intelligence operatives and warfighters on our soil to help pick and choose winners? Would there not then be a Benghazi-style attack on those entities as well?
I should point out here that it is not my intention to demean or trample upon the memories of Ambassador Chris Smith, Tyrone Woods, or any of the other honorable men who lost their lives that day. I question neither the purity of their motivations for action nor their patriotism. Rather, it is the political and corporate entities who profit from the very foreign policy that got men like Smith and Woods killed that I find fault with. It is the idea that the United States of America has an international obligation to serve as World Police that I oppose. And it is the notion that Benghazi is the mere result of either failed leadership at the top ONLY or lack of taxpayer dollars ONLY that I find most absurd.
Make no mistake: our continued presence in the Middle East and our involvement in conflicts that do not concern us is ultimately why Benghazi happened. And it's why we can expect it to happen again (somewhere) until real foreign policy reform takes place on the part of our elected officials.
And that starts with us. Let's continue to demand answers about what happened in Benghazi on that fateful September day, let's continue to seek justice and punishment for those who deserve it, and let's get to the bottom of it.
But let's also remember the root cause of the problem and seek to put real reformers into office during the next election; honorable men and women who will focus our national security resources where they belong; namely, on defending our borders here at home and not overseas.
Praesant Libero.
-Warren Brisbane.
No comments:
Post a Comment