Deadly statecraft

There must be accountability for Benghazi and it should start with President Obama.

By FRED GEDRICH
Libyans take to streets against violence 370 (photo credit: REUTERS/Esam Al-Fetori)
Libyans take to streets against violence 370
(photo credit: REUTERS/Esam Al-Fetori)
It took nearly four years into the Barack Obama presidency to know how the president would react when confronted with an unexpected international crisis demanding immediate action to save American lives.  Americans got their answer when al Qaida-inspired terrorists overran and torched the US mission in Benghazi, Libya, killing the US ambassador and three other Americans.
The Benghazi attack horrified Obama’s White House and reelection team. For over a year, the Obama administration had presented the UN Security Council-approved, NATO military operation in Libya as a successful model of international cooperation. The achievements of such an operation included freeing Libyans from a tyrant and bringing democracy to the people. To further bolster President Obama’s national security credentials, they also claimed al Qaida was on the verge of defeat after Bin Laden’s killing. In doing so, they forgot the hard lesson of history which shows that seeing things as you wish them to be, rather than how they really are, can be deadly.
After newly appointed US Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, arrived in country on May 22, he reported the situation there as “unpredictable, volatile, and violent.” During the post-Gaddafi period and up to the attack which coincided with the anniversary of September 11th, the US documented over 200 in-country security incidents. These included gunfights and bombings, attacks in Benghazi on the British ambassador, the International Red Cross Office, and the US mission.   An August 2012 report, “Al Qaida in Libya: A Profile,” produced by a Department of Defense counter-terrorism office and published by the Library of Congress, further documented the rising al Qaida threat. 
Benghazi confronted our government with the need to have a more comprehensive strategy in place in order to respond to attacks on American interests abroad. Within five points, the US government can be better prepared for situations like this in the future and can try to rectify the gross negligence that resulted in the tragedy of Benghazi.
First, the US should not engage in a military conflict unless US national security is threatened and it is approved by the US Congress. This was not the case in Obama’s Libyan military intervention. The American system of checks and balances in our government between the Legislative branch and the Executive branch should not be superseded by  a small group of administration officials and foreigners at the United Nations and elsewhere with varying security interests and agendas.
Second, the US should have military security details, such as the Marine Corps Embassy Security Group, assigned to US overseas missions where there is documented evidence of significant danger to American diplomats.  Their sheer presence could deter and/or repel attacks like Benghazi.  The US currently has Marine details in 148 State Department posts overseas, except Libya.  Inexplicably, the State Department removed a 16-person US military security unit over the objections of the late ambassador about a month before the attack.
Third, the US should never hesitate to use US military might to save American lives, even when the host governments object.  US military rapid deployment forces and airborne gunships, from US bases in Sigonella, Italy and elsewhere, could have arrived to Benghazi in less than two hours.
Fourth, the American people deserve to hear the truth from President Obama.  He has an obligation to tell the country whether he or any appointed administration official denied military assistance to those under siege in Benghazi.
Fifth, an independent investigator should be appointed to examine all aspects of the Benghazi attack.  The current investigation run by the State Department,and touted by the president, will not satisfy many Americans because of conflicting interests within the administration. State Department officials like Secretary Clinton, UN Ambassador Susan Rice, American Foreign Service Association President Susan Johnson (representative of all active and retired Foreign Service Officers) and others publicly perpetrated the administration myth that an obscure anti-Muslim video served as the catalyst for the attack. 
Finally, the situation in Benghazi demanded courage, swiftness, decisiveness, and good judgment to save American lives.  Sadly, President Obama didn’t display any of those qualities on that fateful day, choosing instead to turn his back on pleas from under-secured and out-gunned Americans for help.  Come election-day, Americans may turn their backs on him.
The writer is a foreign policy and national security analyst, and served in the Departments of Defense and State, traveling to more than 50 overseas missions on official US government assignments.