As the battle to oust Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi winds down, one thought (among many) has occurred to me: the U.S. policy and action in Libya has been a success.
This is not to say that the conflict is over, or that Libya is going to have a smooth transition to a democratically run country, or that Libya will even turn into a peaceful prosperous country. It's completely possible that once the dust settles the Libyan rebels will begin to fight amongst themselves (an outcome we all hope to avoid). It is also possible that they will seize power and rule in a decidedly Gadhafi manner.
Despite this I maintain that the course of action taken by the U.S. and NATO in Libya has been a success in that it has allowed Libyans to decide the future of Libya. Had NATO not intervened before Gadhafi massacred Benghazi, thousands and thousands of Libyans would have been killed and the revolution would have been violently suppressed. Thanks to the NATO air campaign, this crisis was averted and the rebels were able to continue their movement.
While many have criticized President Obama's policy, originally for being too slow to react, and then for being too interventionist (make up your minds, please people), it appears now that the U.S. and NATO provided just enough support. By providing air support we protected Libyan civilians while reducing Gadhafi's military to rubble. This fell right in line with the request for support from the Libyan rebels, the Arab League, and the African Union. By NOT sending in ground troops, we have stayed just far enough out of the conflict that we are not seen as an occupying power or controlling hegemon (unless you listen to Hugo Chavez). Now that the battle is waning and Libya nears the point of beginning to rebuild itself as a country, we have been involved enough to where we can pledge support for the Libyan Transitional National Council (the rebel leadership/government) and give assistance as needed, but we don't necessarily have to take part in costly, controversial and sometimes unwanted nation-building.
Note the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan, and Libya. We've been in Iraq for eight years, Afghanistan for 10. We've been in Libya for a few months. The Afghanistan and Iraq wars have cost the US over $1 trillion dollars together, with no real end in sight. The Libyan operation has cost a bit under $1 billion, and while it isn't over, and more costs are sure to come, the lack of US forces on the ground puts somewhat of a limit on that price tag.
I think that the biggest difference is in the post-war circumstances. Post-war Iraq has seen instability, ongoing violence, and increased anti-american sentiment shown especially through attacks on American troops. Post-war Afghanistan, well, we're pretty much still fighting there, but it seems like even the Afghan government is getting sick of the US, despite the fact that they would likely crumble and lose power without us. Meanwhile, Libyan's are thanking the US and NATO for their support, as evidenced by this poster in Benghazi Square, Tripoli, where thousands celebrated the end of the Gadhafi regime, including a poster of Obama, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, British Prime Minister David Cameron, and US ambassador to the UN Susan Rice with the words across the top "FANTASTIC FOUR" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/22/libyans-thank-obama-poster_n_933396.html?1314051885&ref=fb&src=sp)
Also, as Libya goes forward and tries to transition, it will do so on its terms. Sure we may give advice and support, but it will be a Libyan government built by Libyan people, not a government built by Americans, protected by American military, with Libyan people in the positions of power.
So whether Libya turns into the thriving democratic country it has the potential to be, or another poor, unstable African country, the US and NATO's actions in this conflict have given Libyans the freedom to make that decision on their own, through (mostly) their power. We have not forced democracy on them, we have merely protected them as they fought to free themselves from the grasp of a violent dictator, and for that I say our policy was a success.
