Back

The Bush administration has on many occasions implied that Libya’s recent efforts to disarm result directly from the military invasion of Iraq. Anyone asserting this position must rely on simple conjecture (i.e., disarming occurred after the Iraq invasion, therefore Iraq caused the disarming) rather than an understanding of the facts and circumstances surrounding the diplomatic negotiations between Libya and the United States. Granted, the Bush administration deserves credit for continuing the peaceful discource with Libya that started with Clinton (despite the neocons reluctance). However, it is a fundamental misrepresentation and outright lie to imply that the military aggression in Iraq impacted Libya’s decision to disarm. The Republican position also implies that the Iraq aggression is somehow justified after the fact, which is also profoundly disengenous.

Libya – Diplomatic Negotiations, not Military Actions, Lead to Libyan Cooperation

After years of international isolation and economic sanctions, Libya decided in the late 1990's to lift United Nation sanctions. Clinton made clear that no movement toward better relations was possible until Libya met its responsibilities regarding the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988. As a result of these discussions, Libya turned over two intelligence officers who were tried in 1999. Prior to September 11th, the Bush administration continued diplomatic relations and led Libya to satisfy its requirements and accept responsibility for Pan Am Flight 103.

While Libya first offered to surrender its weapons of mass destriction facilities in May 1999 in return for ifting US sanctions (as opposed to UN sanctions discussed above), the Clinton and Bush administraions made clear that US sanctions would not be discussed until the Pan Am issue was fully resolved.

It was within this peaceful context that Libya came to America before the Iraq invasion to dismantle its weapons program. As noted by Flynt Everett:

Libya was willing to deal because of credible diplomatic representations by the United States over the years, which convinced the Libyans that doing so was critical to achieving their strategic and domestic goals. Just as with Lockerbie, an explicit quid pro quo was offered: American officials indicated that a verifiable dismantling of Libya's weapons projects would lead the removal our own sanctions, perhaps by the end of this year.

As Al Franken as argued on his Blog:

Every reporter should know this. Every time Bush trots out Libya, stories should appear explaining that he's distorting history for political gain. To their discredit, the mainstream press is almost wholly silent on this. But whether or not the press is willing to do its job, the Bush administration should stop claiming that Libya's disarmament vindicated Bush's invasion of Iraq. Bush and his cronies are misleading the American people, and we can't let them get away with it.

Quotes – From Resources

by linking shifts in Libya's behavior to the Iraq war, the president misrepresents the real lesson of the Libyan case. This confusion undermines our chances of getting countries like Iran and Syria to follow Libya's lead.
Flynt Leverett, Why Libya Gave Up on the Bomb, New York Times, 1/23/04

The fact that Mr. Gadaffi was willing to give up his WMD programmes and open facilities to inspection four years ago does not detract from the Bush administration's achievement in securing Libya's nuclear disarmament. However, in doing so, Mr. Bush completed a diplomatic game plan initiated by Mr. Clinton. The issue here, however, is not credit. Rather, it is whether Mr. Gadaffi gave up his WMD programmes because Mr. Hussein was toppled, as Mr. Bush now claims. As the record shows, Libyan disarmament did not require a war in Iraq.
Martin Indyk, The Iraq War did not Force Gadaffi's Hand, The Financial Times, March 9, 2004

An unusual exhibit of centrifuges from Libya's nuclear program this week in Tennessee has again raised discussion about what the Libyan example represents in the battle to control weapons of mass destruction. Libya's decision to abandon its WMD program is indeed a victory for the United States and its allies. But rather than supporting the idea that the use of pre-emptive force in Iraq will serve as an impetus for change within regimes that harbor WMD programs, the case of Libya presents a compelling example of the transformative power of containment, sanctions and diplomacy.
Ray Takyh, Libya’s Decision

Never mind that Libya's decision was preceded by years of painstaking diplomacy and that its cooperation led to the lifting of stifling economic sanctions. American Progress

Libya was virtually isolated from the world because of UN economic sanctions since it orchestrated the Pan Am 103 bombing. Desperate to re-enter the international community, the North African country has been trying for at least 10 years to have those sanctions lifted.
LA Times

The agument that the Iraq war compelled Libya to disarm displays little knowledge about cause-and-effect politics and even less about recent history. Changes in Iranian and Libyan policies resulted from the astute efforts of several European nations and the skilled work of the International Atomic Energy Agency. In other words, international cooperation brought on the thaw not fear of U.S. military action. The White House is now trapped by axis-of-evil rhetoric and content to let threats of pre-emptive strikes substitute for serious policy," meaning it refuses to "recognize similar multilateral chances in dealing with Syria or North Korea.

George Lopez, Notre Dame Professor


Examples of the Bush Administration Touting Libya
There are many, many examples, I’m too tired to report them all.

Because we acted in Iraq, Saddam Hussein will never again use weapons of mass destruction against his people or his neighbors, and we have convinced Libya to give up all its weapons-of-mass- destruction-related programs and materials.
Rice, Statements before 9/11 commission 4/8/04

Because our coalition acted, Saddam's torture chambers are closed. Because we acted, Iraq's weapons programs are ended forever. Because we acted, nations like Libya have gotten the message and renounced their own weapons programs.
Bush 3/31/04

Similar “becuase we acted” language by Bush and Cheney on
3/20/04
4/5/04
4/1/04

The success in Libya is directly related to the strong leadership the President provided in policies that we've pursued in Afghanistan and Iraq, and has had a decisive result.
Cheney, 1/14/04

It's no accident that the negotiations with Libya began shortly after we launched military operations in Iraq, and that they were concluded five days after Saddam Hussein was dug out of his spider hole outside Baghdad.
Cheney 2/17/04

It's no accident that when it came time to consider what he would do in the future with respect to his weapons of mass destruction, that Colonel Ghadafi watched what we'd done in Afghanistan, saw what we were about to do in Iraq, and decided that the wise course of action was to work with the United States and Britain to dismantle his massive weapons of mass destruction program
Cheney 2/24/04
Cheney 2/23/04 04 (similar "no accident" statement)

Because of American leadership and resolve, the world is changing for the better. Last month, the leader of Libya voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime's weapons of mass destruction programs, including a uranium enrichment project for nuclear weapons. Colonel Qadhafi correctly judged that his country would be better off and far more secure without weapons of mass murder.

Nine months of intense negotiations involving the United States and Great Britain succeeded with Libya, while 12 years of diplomacy with Iraq did not. And one reason is clear: For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America.
Bush 1/20/04 State of the Union Address

[T]he civilized world has provided a concerted response to the ideology of terror -- a series of powerful, effective blows. The terrorists have lost the shelter of the Taliban and the training camps in Afghanistan. They've lost safe havens in Pakistan. They lost an ally in Baghdad. And Libya has turned its back on terror. . . .
We've had some success, Bill, as a result of the decision [to invade Iraq] I took. Take Libya, for example.
Bush 4/14 Press conference

America continues to wage a relentless campaign against terrorists who threaten our country. We're fighting this war on the offensive, denying terrorists refuge, identifying and seizing their secret finances, and holding terrorists and their sponsors to account. These terrorists are still dangerous, and we will stay on the hunt until they are destroyed. . . . The leader of Libya has now pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his weapons of mass destruction programs.
Bush 1/17/04 Radio Address

“Talks leading to this announcement began about nine months, ago”
We obtained an additional United Nations Security Council Resolution requiring Saddam Hussein to prove that he had disarmed, and when that resolution was defied, we led a coalition to enforce it. All of these actions by the United States and our allies have sent an unmistakable message to regimes that seek or possess weapons of mass destruction.
-Bush, 12/19/03

In December, after nine months of intensive diplomacy, Colonel Ghadafi voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime's weapons of mass destruction programs
-Dick Cheney, 1/24/04

About two months ago, Libya's leader voluntarily agreed to end his nuclear and chemical weapons programs, not to pursue biological weapons, and to permit thorough inspections
Bush, 2/11/04

In December, after nine months of intensive diplomacy, Colonel Ghadafi voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime's weapons of mass destruction programs.
Cheney, 1/26/04