Roger Cohen's "Be Ruthless or Stay Out": What Happened to Cohen's "Moral Bankruptcy of the West"?

How remarkable! After opposing the British and French proposal for a no-fly zone over Libya only three days ago, the Obama administration has now changed its mind, and not only supports a no-fly zone, but also wants Qaddafi's airforce, armor and artillery eliminated. Someone in the Obama administration has grown some cojones almost overnight. Or did Hillary threaten to resign over the president's "reflective" torpor?

Less remarkable is how Roger Cohen has flipped on a dime: In a March 7, 2011 New York Times op-ed entitled "Libyan Closure" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/opinion/08iht-edcohen08.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss), Cohen told us,

"There are many reasons I oppose a Western military intervention in Libya . . . But the deepest reason is the moral bankruptcy of the West with respect to the Arab world."

Today, in a New York Times op-ed entitled "Be Ruthless or Stay Out" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/18/opinion/18iht-edcohen18.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss), in stark contrast with his earlier directive, yet in keeping with the new Obama administration policy, Cohen is hedging his bet:

"What’s clear to me is that there is no halfway house. Spurn conscience-salving gestures. The case against going in prevails unless the West, backed and joined by the Arab League, decides it will, ruthlessly, stop, defeat, remove and, if necessary, kill Qaddafi in short order. I’m skeptical that determination can be forged. Only if it can be does intervention make sense."

What happened to "the moral bankruptcy of the West"?

In fact, what literally happened to "the moral bankruptcy of the West"? When I turn to Roger Cohen's New York Times "columnist page" (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/columns/rogercohen/index.html), there is no reference to his March 7 "Libyan Closure" op-ed. Surprise, surprise!

Meanwhile, the official Libyan news agency, JANA, is declaring that any foreign military action against Libya will jeopardize all Mediterranean air and maritime traffic, and opposing civilians and military will become targets of a Libyan counterattack.

Unlike Cohen, who opposed intervention on the basis of "the moral bankruptcy of the west", I recommended cratering Qaddafi's airfields more than two weeks ago, when "boots on the ground" would not have been necessary to topple Qaddafi (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2011/03/nicholas-kristofs-heres-what-we-can-do.html).

The rebels could not possibly oppose Qaddafi's helicopters, armor and artillery without assistance. I still believe that "boots on the ground" must be categorically avoided, but hope it's not too late to defenestrate this monster.