This article examines why the Obama administration in 2011 decided to commit U.S. armed forces into Libya and in 2013 decided to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force in Syria. This paired comparison illustrates how the combined effects of bureaucratic politics and the president’s leadership style contributed to the decision-making process of two different decision-making outcomes. The study finds mixed empirical support for the explanatory power of the bureaucratic politics model in both cases. The study also finds that the extent of presidential preeminence in the decision-making enables the understanding of yes in Libya and no in Syria
