Political India: Engaging America

From The Hindu

Hillary Clinton, United States Secretary of State, has refused to rule out an Abbottabad-like covert-operations strike against Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi.

At a news conference in Rome, Italy, where the Secretary is attending a meeting of the Libya Contact Group, she was asked whether it was imaginable that an operation such as the one conducted in Pakistan could take place in Tripoli, given that the National Transition Council rebel formation considered Qadhafi a legitimate target.

In response Ms. Clinton did not categorically rule out a military strike similar to the attack that led to the killing of al Qaeda leader and alleged terror mastermind Osama Bin Laden last Sunday in Pakistan.

Instead she said, “We are implementing United Nations security resolution with respect to protecting civilians. We have made it abundantly clear that the best way to protect civilians is for Qadhafi to cease his ruthless, brutal attacks on civilians from the West to the East, to withdraw from the cities that he is sieging and attacking, and to leave power.”

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.

From The Hindu

After days of prevarication through the peak of the Libyan crisis, the United States government finally moved on Friday evening to impose unilateral sanctions against the regime of Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi.

The Obama administration’s latest move came even as the United Nations Security Council planned to reconvene on the subject of violence in Libya and the consequent prospect of UN sanctions.

In a statement on Friday U.S. President Barack Obama said, “The Libyan government’s continued violation of human rights, brutalisation of its people, and outrageous threats have rightly drawn the strong and broad condemnation of the international community.”

Indicating the U.S. intention to coordinate its punitive actions with the international community Mr. Obama said that his administration would work closely with the UN and other allies in this regard.

Meanwhile the UNSC, including India, contemplated further sanctions against the Qadhafi government for its violent repression of protestors in Tripoli and elsewhere.

Maria Luiza Ribetro Viotti, who holds the rotating UNSC presidency for February, said in a statement that the Council was poised to consider a draft resolution on Libya on Saturday and action was “possible” against Tripoli given that “there is a sense of urgency,” regarding developments in that country.

In comments to media Ms. Viotti warned that the situation in Libya was deteriorating with reported violations of human rights, adding, “The [UNSC] draft resolution includes targeted measures aimed at putting an end to violence and [achieving] a peaceful solution to the current crisis, and ensuring accountability of the Libyan people.

In imposing a freeze on all assets and property of certain individuals and institutions linked to the Qadhafi regime Mr. Obama said in an executive order that his administration had found that “Colonel Muammar Qadhafi, his government, and close associates have taken extreme measures against the people of Libya, including by using weapons of war, mercenaries, and wanton violence against unarmed civilians.”

In the order Mr. Obama said the he further found that “there is a serious risk that Libyan state assets will be misappropriated by Qadhafi, members of his government, members of his family, or his close associates if those assets are not protected.”

Given these circumstances, and the fact that growing numbers of Libyans were seeking refuge in other countries from the attacks, the deterioration in the security of Libya posed a serious risk to its stability and to the national security and foreign policy of the U.S., Mr. Obama concluded, and this justified the imposition of sanctions. Meanwhile the State Department confirmed that it had completed the withdrawal of its embassy personnel from Tripoli and suspended all embassy operations effective February 25th.

From The Hindu

The United States persisted with its muted response to the unfolding crisis in Libya on Wednesday, with President Barack Obama reiterating his condemnation of violence by Libyan forces against protestors, but stopping short of declaring sanctions or supporting any stronger measures.

In a statement to the press Mr. Obama said that his “highest priority” was to protect American citizens in Libya, adding however that the U.S. also strongly supported the universal rights of the Libyan people and “strongly condemn the use of violence in Libya.”

Yet unlike other leaders, notably French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who was said to have publicly called for sanctions against Libya, Mr. Obama only hinted at a “full range” of measures that his administration might take against Libya for potential human rights violations.

He said, “I have also asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis. This includes those actions we may take and those we will coordinate with our allies and partners, or those that we will carry out through multilateral institutions.”

In a similar vein State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said to media here that while there were lots of actions that the U.S. could prospectively take, many of these actions required legal and executive orders to be undertaken, which implied a “standard of due diligence.”

Mr. Crowley said, “We are in the process of fully understanding and documenting what is occurring in Libya. We are prepared, as we are saying, to take appropriate actions internationally as well as... nationally, but many of these steps require some preparation.”

In his comments Mr. Obama however noted that he had asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to travel to Geneva on Monday to join with the foreign ministers of other nations in a discussion on developments in Libya and other parts of the Middle East by the Human Rights Council.

Additionally, William Burns, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, was slated to make several stops in Europe and the region to intensify the U.S.’ consultations with allies and partners about the situation in Libya, Mr. Obama added.