Obama can appease critics of his anti-Gadhafi stance

There are people in this coun- try, especially Republicans in Congress and conservative commentators, who will continue to criticize Democratic President Obama’s decision to join European allies and members of the Arab League in the aerial assault on Libya, even if U.S. involvement in the military action is limited.

But the president can blunt some of the criticism by doing what his predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, failed to do: Require the beneficiaries of America’s might to help pay for the costs of the military campaigns.

Since 2001, when Bush ordered the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan — he then sent forces into Iraq in 2003— the United States has spent more than $1 trillion. Most of the money has gone to Iraq, where the goal was to topple Saddam Hussein and install a democratically elected government.

American troops are still in that country, but President Obama has implemented a draw down.

In Afghanistan, soldiers are trying to strengthen the government of President Hamid Karzai by ridding that war-torn nation of the Taliban, the extremist Islamic organization that ruled Afghanistan until a decade ago, and al-Qaida, the world’s leading terrorist group.

Although the Bush administration insisted that revenue from Iraq’s oil fields would help defray the cost of the occupation, the U.S. treasury continues to churn out dollars.

The expenditure in Afghanistan and Iraq, along with the deaths of thousands of our soldiers, have made Americans weary of this country getting involved in another conflict. Thus, the division in public opinion over involvement in Libya.

Republicans, who were mostly silent when Bush ordered troops into Afghanistan and Iraq without saying where the money would come from for the two wars, are now arguing that America cannot afford a third.

But President Obama has a trump card to play that would take the wind out of his critics’ sails.

In his speech Monday — it was designed to explain to the American people why the military assault on Libya was necessary — the president listed the steps that have been taken to respond to Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi’s aggression against his own people.

“We froze more than $33 billion of the Gadhafi regime’s assets. Joining with other nations at the United Nations Security Council, we broadened our sanctions, imposed an arms embargo, and made it clear that Gadhafi had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and I said he needed to step down from power,” he said.

Escalated attacks

Instead, the military strongman, who is a colonel in the Army, escalated his attacks on Libyans demanding an end to his dictatorial rule and seeking the creation of a democracy in the oil-rich country.

The $33 billion in assets — cash, real estate holdings and other investments — that has been frozen should be used to pay America’s tab once Gadhafi is out of power.

Unlike Afghanistan and Iraq, where the decision to invade was made by Bush, U.S. involvement in Libya was prompted by Gadhafi’s opponents begging for a no-fly zone and asking that the United States be involved.

America’s allies, especially Britain, France and Canada, along with Arab countries such as Qatar and the United Arab Emirates urged Obama to send fighter jets to put the zone in place.

On Wednesday, NATO took control of the no-fly zone and the military campaign against Gadhafi’s forces, with European and Arab countries now bearing the burden.

It is not unreasonable for the taxpayers of this country to expect the post-Gadhafi government to agree to a reimbursement for the costs from the frozen assets.

It has been estimated that the price tag will hit $1 billion. Gadhafi has billions stashed away in Switzerland, Britain and the United States. That money belongs to the Libyan people, and they should demonstrate their appreciation to the United States by picking up the tab.