The other day, something excruciatingly ordinary happened to me: something on Twitter pissed me off. The tweet in question was sponsored (and therefore bullied its way into my feed) and proclaimed, “It’s been 2 years since the Benghazi attack & Obama still won’t tell us the truth. It’s time we demand answers!” The cherry on top was the patriotic video that showed a young boy waving an American flag before turning to the “unanswered questions” of Benghazi.
It’s been 2 years since the Benghazi attack & Obama still won’t tell us the truth. It’s time we demand answers! https://t.co/Nsr1mr7oJW
— Secure America Now (@SecureAmerica) September 4, 2014
In case you’ve been living under a rock, the allegation of a “Benghazi cover-up” has been one of a handful of consistent Republican talking points for the last two years. And this video stokes that flame. A more recent tweet by the same organization, Secure America Now, claims former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “is responsible for the Benghazi attack.” Why does the social media activity of a political action committee interest me so? The Secure America Now Foundation was the driving force behind launching a Select Committee on Benghazi. This committee, chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy, is about to hold its first hearing, just in time for the mid-term elections.
But why am I so frustrated? Is it because all of the “unanswered” questions have, in fact, been answered or are based on false information? After rounds of hearings held by multiple committees and full-throated investigations by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the House Armed Services Committee, the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and, of course, the U.S. State Department, there are no unanswered questions about the attack of note. But that’s not why I’m angry. Is it because Benghazi is being used as a political prop in an election year? That’s closer to it, but it’s not the real problem. Being against rough-and-tumble electoral politics in America is about as productive as being against gravity.
So what’s my problem? The myopic, non-stop, constant focus on Benghazi since the day of the tragic September 2012 attack angers me so because it carries with it a massive opportunity cost for congressional oversight. Congressional Republicans, with a few exceptions, have missed many opportunities to show they have a serious interest in foreign and defense policy. It is time for Republicans in Congress to show they are interested in more than obstruction, peddling unsubstantiated allegations, and throwing temper tantrums.
Contrary to the impression I may have given so far, I have a big problem with President Obama’s foreign policy record and approach. And I see several issues that deserve, and in fact demand, congressional investigation far more than the Benghazi attacks do.
To be clear, I do not think the Benghazi attacks were insignificant. Aside from the obvious human tragedy involved in losing American lives, the initial furor over the attack – largely led by Republicans – accomplished three important things. It laid bare the incompetence and cynicism of President Obama’s national security communications apparatus. It tanked the hopes of Susan Rice, known to be intemperate and undiplomatic, to head the State Department. And – most importantly – the attacks revealed that America’s ability to project power from the sea at short notice had atrophied, in large part due to the ever-smaller size of the U.S. naval fleet. But Benghazi was still not even close to one of the most strategically significant events of the last few years.
And a cover up? Give me a break. After extensive congressional investigation, dark suspicions and conspiracy theories of nefarious orders given (or not given) by senior administration officials have been dispelled. Susan Rice’s comments on national television after the attack were uninformed and mired in the narrative the Obama administration had been peddling about al-Qaeda’s so-called strategic defeat (more on that below). In the days that followed, the president also equivocated on whether or not it was a terrorist attack. The incident was a coordinated attack by militant groups, America was unprepared to respond to such a contingency with appropriate military force, and the White House’s initial characterization of the events was misleading. But senior officials did not issue any “stand down” orders. All of this was clear within a few months, if not earlier, and did not necessitate the cacophony of committee investigations now entering their third year.
So what should the U.S. Congress be investigating that could actually have a positive impact on the American foreign and defense policy processes? Here is one suggestion that would also show the American people that the Republican Party is truly interested in leadership: the Obama Administration’s failure to understand the jihadist threat.
After President George W. Bush left office, the Obama administration, from the start, aimed to redefine the problem by focusing more narrowly on the organizational elements of al-Qaeda, rather than the broader jihadist movement, networks, and the ideas behind it. In part, this came from a good place – a desire to walk back some of the more expansive rhetoric and the damaging “war on terror” frame of the Bush Administration. But President Obama overcorrected. According to this new framework, if a group wasn’t called al-Qaeda or allied with them, they weren’t a part of the war. As soon as Osama Bin Laden’s body was dumped into the sea, if not before, this administration began making noises about the end of al-Qaeda. In July 2011, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta even said, “I’m convinced that we’re within reach of strategically defeating al-Qaeda.” The “Arab Spring” was seen by many American leaders as a rejection of jihadism. Of course, the jihadist movement didn’t agree with any of this.
The movement’s biggest enemies, such as Hosni Mubarak, were removed from power and saw their security establishments weakened. Today’s threat has emerged from the broader jihadist movement, where the U.S. government wasn’t looking as closely. It has taken the form of militias calling themselves “Ansar al-Sharia” across North Africa, or “the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.” It no longer emanates purely from the ranks of the al-Qaeda organization.
The Obama administration’s counter-terrorism strategy and view of the threat needs to be reassessed without returning to the panic and hyperventilation that defined the Bush years. Congress has a key role to play. But first, it’s time to drop Benghazi.
Ryan Evans is the editor-in-chief of War on the Rocks.
Photo credit: Peter Stevens (adapted by WOTR)
Concerned American 
JORGE BARROSO 
JR 
Hank 
Mike 
Ed 
ted danson 
InfantryOfficer 
Matt 
John Shaw 
Dave Perry 
John Duvall 
C-Low 
YoYoTheAssyrian 
Terrence 
Jay Reardon 
John Haas 
It matters to me. Anybody’s name left out if that little summary? Liars, thieves, and crooks run our country
I am not talking from the partisan side because I am not a politician. The truth is that even though all the stupid thing talked about, it is still a cold case. Then, what I would like to get is all the people involved in that mess punished as it requires. Crimes always must be punished, in federal, civilian and military courts, and it was a crime from whatever point of view you want to look at it. This is America, not a Banana Republic (even though sometimes she looks like that)
Matters to me as well. Its sad the administrations continued strategy of deny and delay is so successful. They will turn over thousands of documents, and withhold the ones requested. they will have ‘investigations’ headed up by political allies and then cite these things as proof they were always telling the truth. The select committee, the only investigation with real power, is just starting and already there is new info such as the deliberate destruction of documents. We will find out the truth eventually despite the efforts of people like Ryan Evans
Looks like this writer is trying to pave the way for Hillary by trying to set the tone that all the questions have been answered.
What does it matter? It matters that our Government tried to cover up the truth with a BS story about some video that no one had heard of until they brought it to everyone’s attention.
This post = bad timing. See: Sheryl Attkisson. If true, there was a cover-up.
Still waiting to hear from all those on the ground that managed to survive the fiasco give testimony in front of the house and senate committees. So far Fox has seemed to be the only place you can get that and it took two years.
You have to blind not to see that our leaders were involved in lies and a coverup of what happened at Benghazi. I’m not sure what Ryan Evans has to gain by promoting this coverup. Someone needs to be held accountable although it would be better for Hillary if we all just pretended it didn’t happen.
It matters because Benghazi demonstrates that the administration will lie about foreign policy in order to gain leverage or advantage in domestic political battles. So you can’t debate a foreign policy unless you know what it actually is. The Obama administration’s refusal to acknowledge that they lied about Benghazi to protect the president in his re-election campaign means that there can be no good faith debate on his current foreign policy, because there is no belief that it might actual be true. The fact that the President’s true enemy is the republican party and not foreign threats renders all bi-partisan foreign policy debates invalid.
It all boils down to accountability. Obama is a done deal and we all know he is a failure. Its Hillary that will rightly be accountable for this. Its time for repercussion, and if that is the total embarrassment of Hillary, then it is well deserved.
Don’t you think the families of the fallen, the gravely injured and the survivors who have been on TV demanding answers take exception to the lie that only Republicans care about this issue?
Sorry Ryan, not buying it. Pres and Sec of State and this administration and democratic crony’s stonewalled and lied to the family, then the public, then investigators. The Truth must come out, this can’t be allowed! If I was killed in duty, my wife must know the government will not lie about the conditions of my death regardless of how embarrassing it is to the politicians or military leadership. It took time with Pat Tillman’s death for the truth. These families deserve the Truth. LTC Shaw
Sorry bub, it matters to me. Why the administration insisted the impetus was a video when it was clearly not has not been answered (by them). You are helping them obfuscate and delay, which is pathetic. CDR Perry
“After rounds of hearings held by multiple committees and full-throated investigations by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the House Armed Services Committee, the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and, of course, the U.S. State Department, there are no unanswered questions about the attack of note.”
One of the most uninformed pieces on WOR I have ever seen. Either the author knows nothing about the story, or he is a shill for those who wish to cover it up.
Matters to me and NO the questions have not been answered by any means.
Benghazi proves the pres and his team will deliberately lie to the American people to hell with the facts and or consequences. i.e. Rice, O himself, Hillary and all being sent to deny Benghazi was terrorism and instead just some random event from some irrelevant video that was a lie that went against all his known intelligence but it was politically expedient. It also qualifies a pattern that has been bared out in the IRS, fast and furious, etc…
No one has been punished reprimanded or fired to date. We lost a Ambassador for gods sake no minor event.
Un-answered questions
1. Were was the great O. Was a US pres unavailable for hours? Was his staff to scared to wake the king? Did he freeze up? Did he brush it off as not worthy? Remember a US embassy was under assault at risk of being overrun and we had an ambassador plus staff in immediate threat.
2. Who was in charge that night who made the decision to not or, or if no choice was made who was in command but froze up unable to make a decision leaving the military without directive?
3. Why have the survivors been hidden away? Is that to cover the already known lie about the unplanned riot based off a video, or something more?
4. Why has NO ONE of rank been held accountable. When leaders fail this spectacularly heads are supposed to roll.
Again the capture of a US embassy with the capture and death of a US ambassador is no minor event. Again this is just one of a now growing pattern that shows this administration is so partisan and political that they will go to all manor of lies and direct use of the gov to change perceptions and attack political enemies. These are very serious charges not seen in the US since Nixon.
IT IS A VERY BIG DEAL.
Here, Here!
the new round of benghazi hearings are a waste of time and taxpayer dollars. Time to move onto something that’s not aexhausted subject only believed by low information voters.
All of these comments are a testament to how effective the Benghazi campaign has been in convincing even otherwise smart people to see some “there” where there isn’t.
Pfffft. Derp. 2 points: Where were all these outraged commenters when there were 12 attacks and 80 or so killed in attacks on US Embassies during the Bush Administration (after 9/11)? And the supporting the Mubaraks of the Arab world is a BIG part of the problem (you know, all those exceptional Murkans whining “Why Do THEY hate us? What Did We Do?”).
Not sure how “otherwise smart” the commenters here are.
If you don’t know that attacks on diplomatic facilities–with loss of life–is a tragically common phenomenon; if you don’t understand that “fog of war” almost always accompanies these events, such that,even decades later, we don’t always know exactly what happened (we still don’t know if Arnold Raphel was assassinated or not, eg); and if you don’t know that the facility in Benghazi wasn’t an embassy–well, you’re not exactly a glowing advertisement for America’s educational system.
I would encourage the WOTR editors (as I have done with other publications) to seriously consider moderating the comments. There are worthwhile conservative voices out there, and worthwhile discussions being had (see Front Porch Republic and the American Conservative, eg), but it only works when comments are moderated, and the idiots culled.
If you don’t, you will harm the blog. It’s like a proprietor of a restaurant who tolerates misbehavior from his customers. You acquire the reputation of your commenters, and people who have standards will avoid you. Gresham’s Law, and all that.
It also harms America. People who are misinformed, hyper-emotional, possibly mentally ill, drag down the national conversation, and damage the collective understanding of consequential issues–and there’s nothing more consequential than war. No good can come of that.