More

Obama Doctrine On Military Intervention Tested In Libya

Libya Intervention

BEN FELLER   03/ 9/11 07:41 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's top national security aides emerged from private talks Wednesday with a growing sense that imposing a no-fly zone over Libya would have a "limited impact" on halting the kind of violence raging in the North African nation, senior administration officials said.

That position, sure to shape the international debate about potential military intervention in Libya, came as Obama's principal security aides reviewed potential recommendations for the president during a White House Situation Room meeting.

The officials underscored that the creation of a no-fly zone over Libyan airspace was not off the table from the U.S. perspective if the facts on the ground change, chiefly Moammar Gadhafi's use of air power to attack the rebels threatening his grip on power.

The administration maintains that planning for such intervention should continue, particularly at a pivotal NATO meeting in Brussels of defense chiefs on Thursday, and that the no-fly zone also remains in consideration as a way to increase pressure on Gadhafi.

Yet for now, the no-fly zone option is not seen as having high impact in ending the violence, said the officials, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the private strategy discussions.

The officials familiar with the meeting would not elaborate.

But other officials have noted that the no-fly zone tactic may be ineffective in part because Gadhafi appears to be using his planes sparingly in his crackdown on rebels. Military experts say the use of jets by Gadhafi loyalists poses less of a threat than the deployment of attack helicopters, which can get around flight prohibitions because they are harder to detect.

Even before Wednesday's talks, the Obama administration has had little enthusiasm for military intervention in Libya or for the no-fly zone in particular. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that beginning the flights would require an assault on Libyan air defenses, a step tantamount to war. And Obama officials have consistently warned of the costs and the risks.

In order to ground the Libyan air force – thereby providing air cover for the rebels – U.S. and partner aircraft would first attack Libya's anti-aircraft defenses. Freed of the threat of being shot down, U.S. and partner planes could then patrol Libya's air space and down any planes that got airborne.

The prospect of a no-fly zone has come to dominate attention even as the White House has consistently held that it is just one option that could be used to try to protect civilians and pressuring Gadhafi to give up power. Obama says he will not be "hamstrung" by ruling out options but has never publicly given it the attention in this crisis that other world leaders have.

Obama did not attend Wednesday's meeting, and the White House said no action was imminent. Officials set no timeline.

"We're not at a decision point," Obama's spokesman, Jay Carney, said as the White House sought hard to inject perspective into a fast-changing conflict.

Gadhafi's forces pounded rebels with artillery and gunfire in at least two major cities on Wednesday, adding more pressure on nations and international bodies to figure out what to do – and whether they can agree.

The NATO alliance said it was planning for any eventuality in the Libyan crisis. But with Gates preparing to join Thursday's NATO meeting to discuss military options, there was little sign they would agree to set up a no-fly zone.

The United States held to its right to show its military might unilaterally, including potential naval maneuvers closer to Libyan shores. But Obama's admonition for international action – not go-it-alone-force – remains a driving principle of any military intervention.

That approach offers broader legitimacy and shared burden, but also more complicated politics.

"We believe it's important that this not be an American or a NATO or a European effort; it needs to be an international one," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Wednesday on CBS. She conceded divisions within the United Nations Security Council but said that a "good, solid international package" was being considered.

Obama's aides cast the Situation Room meeting as one in a series of discussions as the president's top security advisers sought to rally around recommendations for him.

Carney said he did not want to even suggest that more action will be taken. He offered a broad defense of what the United States has already done on its own and with the United Nations in response to the crisis, from freezing assets to imposing sanctions, and insisted no such response has ever happened faster.

Still, the deepening and bloody standoff in Libya, combined with Obama's tough declaration that Gadhafi must go, has kept the pressure on the president to do more.

Gadhafi has seized the momentum, battering the rebels with airstrikes and artillery fire and repulsing their westward march toward the capital, Tripoli.

A no-fly zone has become the best-known response option and the one that European allies, in particular, consider an effective international response.

Britain and France are pushing for the U.N. to create a no-fly zone over the country, and while the U.S. may be persuaded to sign on, such a move is unlikely to win the backing of veto-wielding Security Council members Russia and China, which traditionally object to such steps as infringements on national sovereignty.

"There are individuals and countries within the UN who question the efficacy of a no-fly zone, the need for a no-fly zone, what it would entail. I think those are somewhat justified questions," State Department spokesman Mark Toner said. "We're still evaluating the option." Meanwhile, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told reporters Wednesday that "NATO is not looking to intervene in Libya."

He said the alliance, however, was doing the planning for "all eventualities." The NATO chief said the alliance will extend its surveillance of Libya's coastal area by keeping an airborne warning and control plane on patrol 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell indicated Wednesday that the U.S. was unlikely to make a decision this week on any military action.

U.S. military officials are providing Obama with options that can range from humanitarian assistance and a show of force to war-fighting tactics. Military action could include creating and enforcing the no-fly zone, using Air and Navy forces in the region to jam and take out Libya's air defenses, and ramping up intelligence and surveillance in the region.

There are at least five major U.S. warships in the Mediterranean, including the USS Kearsarge with its Marine contingent on board. And there are Air Force fighters, bombers, tankers and electronic warfare aircraft easily available from bases in Germany, England and Italy.

___

Associated Press writers Matthew Lee and Lolita C. Baldor in Washington and Robert Burns and Slobodan Lekic in Brussels contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's top national security aides emerged from private talks Wednesday with a growing sense that imposing a no-fly zone over Libya would have a "limited impact" o...
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's top national security aides emerged from private talks Wednesday with a growing sense that imposing a no-fly zone over Libya would have a "limited impact" o...
Filed by Cara Parks  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 204
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
guveqzero
Inventor and Innovator
10:04 AM on 03/11/2011
Smarter than Bush. Obama knows it's harder to get out than it is to get in. Let's save a few of our children's lives and watch for a while.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrBlueBoyBlitz
04:35 PM on 03/10/2011
Shame on America just standing by and watching - total lack of decisive leadership and with thousands dead and more and more counting, what does it take to call it genocide, a hundred thousand? a million?

Please America intervene now. You will not like the outcome if you don't.
01:40 AM on 03/11/2011
We won't like the outcome if we do. Us in Iraq and Afghanistan hasn't worked well. No more unilateral BS. Either the world, including arab nations asks us and chips in or we keep our distance and let them decide for themselves except in the case of genocide.

It's heartbreaking, yes, but it's also right to not pretend like we're a knight in shining armor. It's not our fight.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrBlueBoyBlitz
11:55 AM on 03/11/2011
Its not our fight but its our responsibility, it's just the responsibility that comes with power, unfortunately we are that knight, as is the responsibility of any individual or nation who has the means to help and intervene against atrocity, that is human nature to help those weaker than us.
Invasions born of fear is a completely different ball game compared to aid and military aid against a tyrant.
Arab nations did ask and so did the rebellion.
05:12 PM on 03/11/2011
They say President Obama is Timid and a Coward for not sending another's son or daughter to die just to prove a point....OK, I like that ...stay to that course Mr. President. No one remembers when President Reagan sent Marines to Lebanon and we lost two hundred or more to suicide bombers and immediately departed....I don't think we need to look that tough and for those who disagree send your sons and daughters.
photo
Michaela1976
Ironically speaking
03:23 PM on 03/10/2011
For all those who support U.S. intervention in Lybia, are you willing to have your taxes raised to pay for it ? Raise your hands..........
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrBlueBoyBlitz
04:34 PM on 03/10/2011
yep
01:41 AM on 03/11/2011
No I don't want US intervention.

No I'm not a coward when it comes to taxes. I want the nation to be taxed for the wars. Directly. No more borrowing.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:10 PM on 03/10/2011
If I were to bet, I would place my money on that Obama is secretly sending arms -- including shoulder-fired AA missiles, to the opposition, but that he sees more downside than upside to advertise the support. While T. R. said, "speak softly but carry a big stick," the current policy could possibly be: Don't speak at all, but distribute lots of little sticks.
01:42 AM on 03/11/2011
I hope this is the case. I truly do. It's probably the best course of action, alongside pressure to step down.
photo
Michaela1976
Ironically speaking
03:10 PM on 03/10/2011
I think 2 trillion is enough money dedicated to the democratization of the middle east.
photo
Michaela1976
Ironically speaking
03:07 PM on 03/10/2011
Before we spend another DIME on any other country's defense, I want to see them vote on the FUNDING FOR IT. There are lots of bad people in the world. This country is firing teachers. If we can't afford teachers we cannot afford to help anyone else.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
SanTang
Your micro-bio is empty is my micro-bio
02:41 PM on 03/10/2011
There is a lot of discussion going on right now regarding the no-fly zone. Public ones are for local politics only. They are more like bla-bla from any thinktank.

The quieter ones and the secret ones are certainly considering
a- the fact that the US is already up to its ears in two unpopular wars,
b- the financing of any type of military operation,
c- the UN position on the subject given that Russia and/or China will certainly use their veto against such a resolution,
d- who is the actual leader of the rebels and thus should receive help (humanitarian, financial and military).

In the highly probable case the UN votes against it, would the US taxpayers be ready to support the whole cost considering that positive results might not be achieved before many months or even years and that chaos will definitely dawn on Libya.

Yes, some people are calling for help but can the US afford to give it?
photo
Michaela1976
Ironically speaking
02:56 PM on 03/10/2011
No we can't afford to help. I am sick of wars when our own country can't afford to even educate our children.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
02:31 PM on 03/10/2011
"Speak loudly and carry a limp stick?" Is this the Obama Doctrine?

If you ask me, Teddy Rooseveldt's Doctrine of "Speak quietly and carry a big stick" works substantially better than whatever it is that Obama seems to think he is doing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jorge999
A Gem of a Gemini
01:28 PM on 03/10/2011
Most of the recent news, including today has been about Gadhafi's forces pushing back the rebels, re-taking towns etc.
If after all his tough words, Obama does nothing and the cretin Gadhafi prevails, it will further underscore Obama's growing image as dithering, weak and indecisive.
After Obama's shameful veto of the U.N. resolution concerning West Bank 'settlements' (aka colonization) BO will have zero respect in the Arab world, and, frankly, close to zero from me.
12:51 PM on 03/10/2011
no bombs on libya.

Thank you Mr. Obama for letting nature run its due course.

There have been at least 43 wars since 2003. are we supposed to intervene in them all?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_2003%E2%80%93current
We are NOT the world police
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
02:35 PM on 03/10/2011
we have made tremendous sacrifices for the ideal of forcing Democracy on the Iraqi's even though they seem not to want it.

Why on earth are we not helping the people of Libya when they are choosing to put their lives on the line to bring about the sorts of democratic reforms that we claim we want for Iraq.

It makes no sense. Libya also has oil. By holding back we make them our enemy and support the reign of tyranny there and elsewhere. Khaddafi is a damn terrorist who bombed a civilian airliner which is worse than anything Saddam ever did to us; doesn't that matter?
photo
Michaela1976
Ironically speaking
02:58 PM on 03/10/2011
Because it is not our country. We need to take care of this country instead of inserting ourselves into wars we can't afford. If we are helping, how will we PAY FOR IT ?????
photo
RichardinDelmar
Seek first to understand
12:08 PM on 03/10/2011
Obama doctrine? Where was that published? Oh yea, under Chaney and Bush.

George Will toady listed a long list of questions to answer before any action in Libya.
# The world would be better without Gaddafi. But is that a vital U.S. national interest? If it is, when did it become so? A month ago, no one thought it was.

# How much of Gaddafi's violence is coming from the air? Even if his aircraft are swept from his skies, would that be decisive?

# What lesson should be learned from the fact that Europe's worst atrocity since the Second World War — the massacre by Serbs of Bosnian Muslims at Srebrenica — occurred beneath a no-fly zone?

# U.S. forces might ground Gaddafi's fixed-wing aircraft by destroying runways at his 13 air bases; but to keep helicopter gunships grounded would require continuing air patrols, which would require the destruction of Libya's radar and anti-aircraft installations. If collateral damage from such destruction included civilian deaths are we prepared for the televised pictures?

# Presumably we would coordinate aid with the leaders of the anti-Gaddafi forces. Who are they?

# Could intervention avoid "mission creep"? If grounding Gaddafi's aircraft is a humanitarian imperative, why isn't protecting his enemies from ground attacks?

# Would it be wise for U.S. military force to be engaged simultaneously in three Muslim nations?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:18 AM on 03/10/2011
Obama doctrine on military intervention?

How is that any different from the Bush doctrine?
photo
RichardinDelmar
Seek first to understand
12:27 PM on 03/10/2011
Less bluster and more sneakiness.
09:13 AM on 03/10/2011
I was an avid Obama supporter, but this unwillingness to intervene in what appears to be a large scale massacre of civialians standing up for freedom from a brutal dictator is hard to accept. He has lost credibility with me. These people are calling out for help and we are supposedly the leaders of the free world. If we back away, who will take the lead and go to their aid? I believe it is the US's reluctance that is causing other nations to hold off. I am shocked that my country is standing by and letting this slaughter continue.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:20 AM on 03/10/2011
You need to read some history of what the effects of our interventionism is--not only that, the Libyans DO NOT WANT the US to intervene, primarily because of our history in the Middle East.
09:28 AM on 03/10/2011
The Libyans are crying out for help. I did not say we should do it alone. I believe that our reluctance is holding NATO back. We cannot compare the unjustified invasion of Iraq with this situation. The Iraqis did not want us there and we did not improve conditions there at all. This is a different situation. We really will win the hearts and minds of the Libyan people if we intervene on their behalf. They are very clear that they desperately want us to help them. I don't understand how anyone can sit back and watch this slaughter of unarmed civilians. It is going to be too late by the time everyone stops dragging their feet.
12:46 PM on 03/10/2011
you do not know anything except what the media tells you
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mike dougles
07:43 AM on 03/10/2011
Obama Doctrine on world affairs, I see nothing, I hear nothing, I will do nothing.
08:15 AM on 03/10/2011
I'm not sure . . I seems like more of the same old same old . . .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nelson rivera
All Together Now.
12:50 AM on 03/11/2011
You have to Remember Obama is a Master Debater. He has many Meeting's to go too, before he Make's a Decision. He is looking for support from other Nation's. If no Support is found than he might just talk about it.Obama is a Smart Man, He want's to make the right Decision that's all. One Problem with that is Thousand's of Good People and Children are Dying right Now! Who will step up to the Plate and Help the Freedom Fighter's?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mike dougles
06:36 AM on 03/11/2011
He kind of reminds me of Neville Chamberlain.
07:13 AM on 03/10/2011
what setting up a no-fly zone entails . . . .

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/03/20113216120417207.html#
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mike dougles
07:44 AM on 03/10/2011
Plus Obama is to busy closing GITMO.
08:16 AM on 03/10/2011
what a joke . . . .