Political India: Engaging America

From The Hindu

The United States was drawn deeper into the conflict in Libya this week as top government officials confirmed that it would be supplying $25 million in “non-lethal” military aid to the rebel groups fighting the forces of Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi.

While foreign policy circles here have been buzzing with talk of arming rebel groups, the Obama administration informed Congress this week that the U.S. would provide the rebel Transitional National Council with existing Pentagon stocks of medical supplies, uniforms, boots, tents, personal protective gear, radios and Halal meals, officials said.

Initially, the administration had proposed supplying the rebels with vehicles and portable fuel storage tanks but those items were dropped from the list of potential aid on Wednesday after concerns were expressed that they could be converted into offensive military assets, the officials said.

Media reports said that while initially the administration intended to provide the rebels, primarily based out of Benghazi, with vehicles and portable fuel storage tanks, “those items were dropped from the list of potential aid... after concerns were expressed that they could be converted into offensive military assets.”

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was quoted as supporting the provision on “non-lethal” supplies to the rebel groups, arguing that the aid would support U.S. efforts “to protect civilians and the civilian populated areas that are under threat of attack from their own government in Libya.”

Aid would be “drawn down from items already in government stocks that correspond with the needs that we have heard from the Transitional National Council,” Ms. Clinton said, however adding, “This is not a blank check.”

Thus far the Pentagon was said to have spent $608 million on operations in Libya, according to Politco magazine, and Defence Secretary Robert Gates said at a Congressional hearing last month that if operations continued at planned levels, they would cost about $40 million per month.

From The Hindu

In a speech that was long on grand sentiment and short on strategic detail, United States President Barack Obama laid out the justification for the U.S.’ military intervention in Libya, at the National Defense University here.

Speaking to an audience of top military brass but addressing his remarks to the American people, Mr. Obama cast Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi as a murderous "tyrant" who targeted innocents, saying, "There is no question that Libya — and the world — would be better off with Qadhafi out of power..."

Mr. Obama also reiterated the message that he was abiding by his promise that in the Libyan engagement "America’s role would be limited; that we would not put ground troops into Libya; that we would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation and that we would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners."

However, he did not spell out how long the present phase of the operations would last, the date on which all U.S. troops not a part of NATO would withdraw, and how exactly he visualised balance of power between Qadhafi and the rebel groups in Libya evolving.

Striking a defensive note, the President said the U.S. had intervened in Libya because - "We had a unique ability to stop that violence: an international mandate for action, a broad coalition prepared to join us, the support of Arab countries, and a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves."

Yet in doing so, he made no mention of the fact that numerous nations including India, and the United Nations Security Council members China and Russia, had abstained from voting through the resolution mandating action by Western powers on Libyan soil.