More

U.S: Libya Role To Remain Limited Despite Setbacks

Libya Us

MATTHEW LEE and RAF CASERT   04/12/11 09:22 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — Despite rebel setbacks and an increasingly public rift with NATO allies, the U.S. will stick to its plan to remain in the back seat of the Libya air campaign, the Obama administration insisted Tuesday after three weeks of air missions that have failed to turn the tide against Moammar Gadhafi.

France's defense minister declared that without full American participation, the West probably would not be able to stop attacks by Gadhafi loyalists on besieged rebel cities.

U.S. officials said they were comfortable with their role and had no plans to step up involvement, even as British and French officials said Washington's military might was needed to ensure the mission's success. The Americans said NATO could carry out the operation without a resumption of the heavy U.S. efforts that kicked it off last month.

"The president and this administration believes that NATO, and the coalition of which we remain a partner, is capable of fulfilling that mission of enforcing the no-fly zone, enforcing the arms embargo and providing civilian protection," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters.

"The U.S. has not abandoned this operation by any means," State Department spokesman Mark Toner said. "We still are offering support where we can. I don't think it's correct to say that there's somehow discord in the alliance."

The public complaints of Britain and France, however, contradicted that position, and U.S. officials contended privately that some in Europe appeared to be backing down on pledges to take the lead in the operation once the opening phase was over. The administration had not wanted to keep a primary role after that point and had made its participation in the NATO mission contingent on having only a supporting function afterward.

With the disagreement out in the open, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is expected to hear loud calls for the U.S. to resume heavier fighting when she travels to Germany for meetings of NATO foreign ministers on Thursday and Friday. Those talks are expected to be dominated by the situation in Libya, where rebels fighting forces loyal to Gadhafi are facing increasing challenges and appealing for additional assistance.

At the State Department, spokesman Toner said President Barack Obama had been clear from the beginning that the U.S. "role would diminish as NATO stepped up and took command and control of the operation."

He added, "The U.S., of course, as needed, would help out if requested in other capacities, in other capabilities, but really our role has receded in this mission."

At the Pentagon, Marine Col. Dave Lapan said there was no move to increase American military involvement.

"I don't see any planning to re-assert U.S. strike aircraft and forces as we saw early in the campaign," the Pentagon spokesman said. "NATO has those capabilities to conduct strikes."

"Ultimately, what needs to happen is Gadhafi needs to stop attacking his own people," Lapan said. "The lack of U.S. strike missions doesn't change that."

At NATO headquarters in Brussels, alliance officials agreed and said the operation was succeeding.

NATO Brig. Gen. Mark Van Uhm rejected criticism of the operation. He said the North Atlantic military alliance was performing well in enforcing the arms embargo, patrolling the no-fly zone over Libya and protecting civilians.

"With the assets we have, we're doing a great job," Van Uhm told reporters.

France and Britain differed, calling for the rest of the group, in particular the United States, to step up the campaign.

At a European Union meeting in Luxembourg, Paris lamented the limited U.S. military role in Libya and chided Germany, too, for its lack of involvement. In a dire analysis, France's defense minister said that without full American participation in the combat operation, the West probably couldn't stop Gadhafi's attacks on rebel-held cities.

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe shredded NATO's united front, saying its actions to this point were "not enough" to ease the pressure on the city of Misrata, which has been subjected to weeks of bombardment by forces loyal to Gadhafi.

"NATO absolutely wanted to lead this operation. Well, voila, this is where we are," Juppe said. "It is unacceptable that Misrata can continue to be bombed by Gadhafi's troops."

Britain's Foreign Secretary William Hague agreed that the allies must "intensify" their efforts, but he used a more diplomatic tone.

"The U.K. has in the last week supplied additional aircraft capable of striking ground targets threatening the civilian population of Libya," Hague said before a meeting of EU foreign ministers. "Of course, it will be welcome if other countries also do the same. There is always more to do."

French Defense Minister Gerard Longuet complained that France and Britain were carrying "the brunt of the burden." He said the reduced U.S. effort – American forces are now in support, not combat, roles in the airstrike campaign – have made it impossible "to loosen the noose around Misrata," which has become a symbol of the resistance against Gadhafi.

Longuet also criticized Germany, which is not taking part in the military operation, saying that Berlin's commitment to primarily back a humanitarian effort only was "secondary" at best. Germany does not take part in NATO's military airstrikes in Libya because it sees the operation as too risky. Italy also has been reluctant to get involved in the airstrikes because it had been Libya's colonial ruler.

France's frustration with the stalemate on the ground, where Libyan rebels have struggled to capitalize on Western air attacks, has been echoed in several Western capitals, but rarely were the comments as barbed as Juppe's.

The reduced U.S. role since NATO took over command on March 31 has clearly affected the operation.

"Let's be realistic. The fact that the U.S. has left the sort of the kinetic part of the air operation has had a sizable impact. That is fairly obvious," said Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt.

Libyan opposition spokesman Ali al-Issawi said that Gadhafi's soldiers have killed about 10,000 people throughout the country and injured 30,000 others, with 7,000 of the injured facing life-threatening wounds. He said an additional 20,000 people were missing and suspected of being in Gadhafi's prisons. There was no way to independently verify his claims.

___

Casert reported from Luxembourg. Associated Press writers Pauline Jelinek and Sagar Meghani contributed from Washington, Angela Charlton from Paris, Selcan Hacaoglu from Turkey, Adam Schreck from Doha, Qatar, and Paisley Dodds and Raphael G. Satter from London.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

WASHINGTON — Despite rebel setbacks and an increasingly public rift with NATO allies, the U.S. will stick to its plan to remain in the back seat of the Libya air campaign, the Obama administrati...
WASHINGTON — Despite rebel setbacks and an increasingly public rift with NATO allies, the U.S. will stick to its plan to remain in the back seat of the Libya air campaign, the Obama administrati...
Filed by Cara Parks  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 176
  • 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
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheTightwireGuy
Attempting to balance reason and passion
02:09 AM on 04/14/2011
From these comments, I would surmise that the British and French were hoping that (a) a quick strike led by the US would topple Gaddafi, or (b) barring that, draw the US in to take the lead by default if NATO couldn't quickly topple Gaddafi. The US should hold firm that NATO take responsibility under the original agreement. If this leads to a stalemate and Libya ends up being partitioned along the two main tribal regions, so be it.

The US has to stop using its military to keep old colonial boundaries intact when there is tribal strife within these nations. These boundaries were originally set up by the European colonial powers to keep the more populous tribes weak so that it would be easier to rule over them using the minority tribes. That's why the conflict in Afghanistan is so effed up and intractable. See the Wikipedia article about the Durand Line to learn this is so:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Line
photo
wowme
Fail to prepare, prepare to fail
09:10 PM on 04/13/2011
Libya is another Iraq
12:27 PM on 04/13/2011
"Libyan opposition spokesman Ali al-Issawi said that Gadhafi's soldiers have killed about 10,000 people throughout the country and injured 30,000 others, with 7,000 of the injured facing life-threatening wounds. He said an additional 20,000 people were missing and suspected of being in Gadhafi's prisons. There was no way to independently verify his claims." Why is this being published??? This is only propaganda. Next we will hear how Gadhafi is killing babies in incubators.
photo
wom122
Primum non nocere
08:56 PM on 04/13/2011
F & F!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
devildoc68
12:05 PM on 04/13/2011
NATO is a joke...just like the U.N.....just like the GOP
photo
wom122
Primum non nocere
08:58 PM on 04/13/2011
NATO original purpose was to "keep the Americans in, the Russians out, and the Germans down". With the collapse of the Soviet Empire it lost its "raison d'etre".
11:16 AM on 04/13/2011
How can we even be talking about raising taxes, cutting social security and the like yet still be fighting these stupid wars. Compare what we have gained to what we have lost.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mmkay
Holy Sith! 'mkay?
08:54 AM on 04/13/2011
Well, there goes the US and NATO's humanitarian argument down the flusher. Anyway, I'm all for the Libyans sorting their stuff out. Whoever prevails, they have no choice but to sell the oil because oil is all they go and Libyans cannot live by oil alone, sayeth the common sense.
photo
GravitonX
10^300 bosons could care less.
08:54 AM on 04/13/2011
Not to play the numbers game, but 10,000 is absolutely nowhere near the 800,000 kil led in Rwanda.

The "boogieman" of mass slaughter and geno cide was a "mushroom cloud" in the desert.
11:31 AM on 04/13/2011
I disagree, Benghazi has about 700,000 people in it. Gadhafi's forces were already in the outskirts of the city, after he had promised: "No more fear, no more hesitation, the moment of truth has come ... There will be no mercy. Our troops will be coming to Benghazi tonight."
As someone who lived in Libya, and Benghazi specifically, no one doubts when Gadhafi says you are dead. Did you notice the 20,000 missing? Gadhafi's forces had started rounding up dissidents as soon as the other Middle East uprisings started. There were mass hangings in public universities when I lived there. I have no doubts about the mass slaughter and genocide that was prevented by intervening at the 11th hour to save Benghazi.
11:49 AM on 04/13/2011
He said nothing of the kind. He identified the rebel leadership as those for whom there "should" be no mercy and no one else. Meanwhile, the Benghazi leaders keep calling for Qaddafi and his people to be killed and said that Qaddafi supporters should "run for their lives".
08:22 AM on 04/13/2011
Let me understand, we went in to gain air superority and did so.
Now it is a civil war being fought on the ground.
That is really between the Libyan govt and the Libyan rebels. (And we still don't know who they are, who they support or who supports them)
If we are to go in and help the rebels win, that is a different discussion and needs to be brought up in the UN and Arab league.
speaking of which, how many Arab League troop[s are suppoorting the rebels, on the ground?
Also, wasn't there an agreement that the rebels turned down? Isn't the rebels stance that the only solution is for Ghadafi to step down? Wouldn't that mean that the rebels are stating the only acceptable outcome is their victory?

Another question, if 5 million people demanded that our administration step down and took up arms to push that, would that be OK? Would we expect the administration to just say, "OK, My bad....We'll leave"
Would we expect the UN to come in and assist that situation?

Just kind of wondering what the gaol is and why we need to be involved.
The world, including our NATO allies, has previously stated that they neither want nor appreciate the US being the world's police. So let's stop.
Close all foreign bases and bring the troops home, to protect and serve the US citizens and boarders.
Let others provide defence and aid to their citizens.....
photo
GravitonX
10^300 bosons could care less.
08:59 AM on 04/13/2011
Yes.

At the point, the only thing the US and NATO is doing is "enforcing" an even more bloody stalemate.

The solution has always been for the rebels to surrender, which would happen if NATO withdraws, and negotiate a safe passage or retreat for the rebels, which typically is part of a surrender negotiation anyways
08:20 AM on 04/13/2011
Samantha Powers resigned once,
the second time around would be an idea whose time has come.
The lady from Prada was a beginner compared to her, talk about self serving!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
08:09 AM on 04/13/2011
people should read this
08:55 AM on 04/13/2011
ditto . . thank you for the link Observer77
11:16 AM on 04/13/2011
I would argue this.  When push comes to shove, the true measure of a person's character is revealed.  It was easy during the good times for Saiif to appear to be a reformer.  Maybe in the perfect world he could slowly pursue reforms, but reality got in the way and old habits are very hard to break.  He turned to what he knows best and feels the most comfortable supporting.  It is naive to think people really change in the heart when under pressure they fail to let us see that change.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kelly Hayes
This is what plutocracy looks like.
01:52 PM on 04/13/2011
"It is naive to think people really change in the heart when under pressure they fail to let us see that change."

On that point, I tend to agree with you. Virtue isn't virtue unless it's been tested. You are quite correct that it is easy to be virtuous during good times. Bad times are far more telling. That said, I don't think we can assume that this is "what he knows best and feels most comfortable supporting." There is no way to know whether he truly believes in this tyrannical regime, or whether he is just a son defending his father (even if he knows his father is wrong). Also, he could truly believe that his insurrection would not lead to democracy, but would instead throw Libya into total chaos. It's impossible to know. But the current situation is a spiraling disaster, and ultimately, he could be useful. Some unhappy compromises will probably have to be made here, because the original plan isn't working out so well.
08:02 AM on 04/13/2011
According to Gordon Duff, Gaddafi was using unbelievable weapons on the rebels that took out the area of 3 football fields and vaporized tanks and heavy military equipment. In support of this allegation is the fact that Rumsfeld blurted out that Gaddafi would not dare use (those tactical nuclear weapons) on the United States because they would be afraid of the response. Supposedly, there are new nuclear weapons that vaporize metal and do not leave so much radiation. Some people believe that is why the twin towers became atomized and took over a 100 days to cool down.
08:14 AM on 04/13/2011
HA!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peter Boehringer
Dona nobis pacem
08:16 AM on 04/13/2011
One of the major problems we have as a nation is that people believe things without having a single fact to back them up, ie. birthers, creationists, conspiracy theorists...
08:28 AM on 04/13/2011
good point, question? is it worse now with the internet, or before?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mmkay
Holy Sith! 'mkay?
08:59 AM on 04/13/2011
Yep. Did you know that 90% of all Planned Parenthood's function are abortions. I swear it's true. A congressman pulled this belief out of where he had it for safe-keeping. All those unborn Americans. Wow.
07:56 AM on 04/13/2011
http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/display/playlistref/120411/clipid/120411_misrata_12

ITN News (UK) seems to be doing a better job than NATO
07:52 AM on 04/13/2011
Wonderful sweet Mrs. Power,
During an off-the-record conversation with a reporter, she referred to Hillary Clinton as a “monster” and then had to resign as senior foreign policy to adviser to Barack Obama.
07:50 AM on 04/13/2011
Power is considered to be perhaps the key figure within the Obama administration in persuading the president to intervene militarily in Libya.
She should resign, immediately
11:13 AM on 04/13/2011
I believe Rice and Clinton joined Powers to form girl power and influence the president.  So if Powers needs to go, so do the others.
11:17 AM on 04/13/2011
I can deal with that...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Eileenla
Author, "Sacred Economics"
07:45 AM on 04/13/2011
I look forward to the day when all despots fall because no one will follow their orders any longer. Humanity apparently isn't there yet, because too many of us remain too self-serving (ie: blinded) to grasp the bigger picture that is the larger reality in which we're all embedded. While we continue to fight each other for temporary supremacy and destroy our environment for short term monetary profits, reality itself isn't waiting around much longer for us to get the message.

Sooner or later we're going to be fully confronted by our need to shift into full alignment with life itself. We can only accomplish that by choosing to live sustainably and regeneratively, and by treating this planet and each other with the reverence and respect both are due. Until then, we're no better than mindless kids in a sandbox, bashing each other over the head with our shovels and screaming, "mine, mine!"
07:57 AM on 04/13/2011
A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.
The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.
...Ambrose Bierce
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Eileenla
Author, "Sacred Economics"
09:09 AM on 04/13/2011
Nice! f&f!