Natalie Gonnella
Earlier today I posted on Ross Douthat's latest column in the New York Times, which highlighted the four key questions President Obama must address during tonight's speech on Libya
In keeping with the numeric theme, by way of Foreign Policy's Shadow Government blog, Peter Feaver has also outlined four imperative questions for this evening's remarks, shifting the focus instead to viewers and the key points they should ask themselves as they tune in to the president's speech.
With widespread confusion over current military operations and frustrations mounting due a lack of clarity from the White House, here's a look at the crucial questions Feaver says Americans should consider:
Did President Obama take responsibility for the outcomes or did he only commit to the inputs? Many observers have worried that the president has focused too much on inputs and not enough on outcomes...Perhaps the most important thing President Obama will say (or not say) is whether the U.S. mission merely involves conducting airstrikes (inputs) or whether the mission has more strategic objectives. If the latter, then it is very much on our shoulders how it turns out.
Has the administration done any serious thinking beyond the best-case scenario? So far, the administration has only sketched out a vision of what our role is under the best-case scenario. What is our commitment and obligation in scenarios where things do not live up to the rosy expectations?...What did Obama say to reassure us that the administration's public spin is not indicative of the quality of the planning involved in this military operation?
Did the president speak candidly about the conflict and the rocky road the coalition has traveled thus far? [T]he president can perhaps be forgiven the occasional rhetorical flourish, such as this one in Saturday's radio address...Perhaps one could say that the administration did a quick U-turn within a week's time...So far, the media have largely given the Obama administration a free pass on over-claiming but if events on the ground unravel, the media indulgence could end abruptly. Rather than recycle the radio address language, President Obama would be better served delivering new text that breathes the fresh air of candor into the public discussion.
Where is his gut? This is a war that he started. Let us listen to what the speech tells us about his commitment to this enterprise. Did the president demonstrate that he will do more to mobilize public and congressional support for the Libya mission than he has done to mobilize support for the Afghan and Iraq missions?
Peter Feaver's full post on key questions for tonight's address can be viewed here.
Comments