Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Pressure on Obama to Push Regime Change in Libya

Republican Party-aligned hawks and some administration allies have applied increasing pressure on the President Obama to push for regime change in Libya.

Inter Press Service

As Libyan strongman Muammar Al-Gaddafi vowed to hang on to power, a close Congressional ally of U.S. President Barack Obama early this week called for an end to his regime.

"The Gaddafi government's use of deadly force against its own people should mean the end of the regime itself," said Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, who frequently acts as a stalking horse for the Obama administration on foreign policy issues.

"It's beyond despicable, and I hope we are witnessing its last hours in power," he said in a statement issued by his office that also called for the administration to pursue a series of bilateral and multilateral measures to expedite Gaddafi's ouster.

Until President Barack Obama’s harsh criticism of the Libyan regime on Wednesday, the administration appeared to be unwilling to say much due to concern over the fate of several thousand U.S. citizens still in Libya and in deference to deliberations of an all-day U.N. Security Council session that took place behind closed doors.

"[W]e feel like when the international community speaks with one voice, it can be most effective, so we are obviously participating fully" in the Security Council meeting, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters while traveling with Obama to Cleveland, Ohio.

The administration's silence before Wednesday was strongly assailed by some lawmakers and commentators – mostly neo-conservatives and other hawks – who called on Obama to speak out publicly against the regime and consider taking more aggressive measures to support anti-government forces, which appear to have gained control of Libya's second-largest city, Benghazi, and most of the eastern part of the country.

"The United States should not remain silent in the face of Qaddafi's egregious violations of human rights," said two Republican senators, Minority Whip John Kyl and Mark Kirk in a statement issued early Tuesday. "We urge the President to speak out clearly in support of the Libyan people in their struggle against the Qaddafi dictatorship."

"We'd …tell the Libyan armed forces that the West will bomb their airfields if they continue to slaughter their people," advised the Wall Street Journal in its lead editorial Tuesday. "Arming the demonstrators also cannot be ruled out."

"Now that the Libyan people are rising against [Gaddafi], they deserve urgent and tangible American support," it added.

As the policy debate gathered steam in Washington, the situation inside Libya itself remained unclear due to cuts in communications links and the absence of independent reporters on the ground.

In a rambling televised address from one of residences, Gaddafi himself vowed to fight to his "last drop of blood" against the demonstrators whom he repeatedly called "rats" and "cockroaches" doing the bidding of foreign powers.

"I have not yet ordered the use of force, not yet ordered one bullet to be fired," he declared in one passage that contrasted strongly with the video and personal accounts that have emerged from Libya over the last five days. "When I do, everything will burn," he declared.

Instability in Libya "will give al Qaeda a base", he warned in a passage that appeared directed at the U.S. and other Western nations that have cooperated closely with Tripoli over the past decade in the so-called "global war on terrorism".

That cooperation helped rehabilitate Gaddafi, who had been treated as an arch-enemy for most of his 42-year reign.

Bilateral ties reached their nadir during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who in 1981 ordered U.S. warplanes to attack targets in Libya and again in 1986 in alleged retaliation for terrorist attacks. The latter incident killed 40 Libyans, including Gaddafi's baby daughter.

Reagan's successor, George H.W. Bush, also led a successful diplomatic campaign to impose far-reaching U.N. sanctions against Libya for the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, in which all 259 passengers were killed.

In 1999, however, Libya surrendered two Libyans for trial for the Lockerbie bombing in what would become a gradual – if at times erratic – process of rapprochement with the U.S. and Western Europe lubricated in major part by Western interests in exploiting Libya's ample oil and natural gas resources.

That process gathered pace in 2003 when Tripoli accepted responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing, agreed to pay compensation and began dismantling weapons of mass destruction programmes.

The administration of President George W. Bush authorised U.S. oil companies to re-open offices in Libya by early 2005, restored full diplomatic relations the following year, and sent then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to Tripoli to celebrate a "new phase" in bilateral ties in September 2008.

Washington has even offered to sell the regime "non-lethal" military equipment, including helicopters, and to help finance training for Libyan officers, according to a 2009 State Department cable disclosed by Wikileaks.

In his statement, Kerry, who has carried out a number of diplomatic missions for the administration, called on all U.S. and foreign oil companies to suspend operations in Libya and for the Obama administration to consider re- imposing bilateral sanctions; for the U.N. Security Council to impose its own sanctions, including an arms embargo, and provide authorisation for emergency humanitarian supplies and the protection of Libyan civilian centres (presumably through a no-fly zone); and on the Arab League and African Union to take action against the regime.

Meeting in Cairo Tuesday, the Arab League reportedly suspended Libya's membership.

At the same time, George W. Bush's first-term deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, urged the administration in a post on the American Enterprise Institute's (AEI) website to seek U.N. approval for, among other things, "recognition of a provisional authority in liberated areas, …imposition of a NATO-supported 'no fly zone over Libya to halt further bombing by Qaddafi's forces; [and] …provision of arms to the provisions authorities."

"When there are so many things that could be done to help the unbelievably brave Libyan people – without any risk to American lives – it is shameful to be sitting on our hands," he wrote.

"If that is not reason enough to act, then we should be thinking about the terrible reputation the United States is acquiring, by its inaction, among the Libyan people and throughout the region," Wolfowitz, a major architect of the Iraq War and now a visiting AEI scholar, concluded.

Sen. John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, and Independent Democrat Sen. Joseph Lieberman also issued a joint appeal for the U.S. and the European Union, among others, to immediately impose a no-fly zone "to stop the Qaddafi regime's use of airpower to attack Libyan civilians."

Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service and a contributor to Right Web (http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/). He blogs at http://www.lobelog.com/.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Haim Saban is a media mogul and major donor to the Democratic Party known for his hardline stance on Israel and opposition to the Iran nuclear deal.


Nikki Haley, Donald Trump’s first U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and is widely considered to be a future presidential candidate.


Brian Hook is the director of policy planning and senior policy advisor to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and is the head of the Iran Action Group.


Josh Rogin is a journalist known for his support for neoconservative policies and views.


Laurence Silberman, a senior justice on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, was a mentor to controversial Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and has been a vocal supporter of right-wing foreign and domestic agendas, including the campaign to support the invasion of Iraq.


The People’s Mujahedin of Iran, or MEK, advocates regime change in Iran and has strong connections with a wide range of top political figures in the U.S.


Eli Lake is a columnist for Bloomberg View who has a lengthy record of advocating for aggressive U.S. foreign policies towards the Middle East.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Jobs should not be an excuse to arm a murderous regime that not only appears to be behind the assassination of a U.S. resident and respected commentator but is also responsible for thousands of civilian casualties in Yemen—the majority killed with U.S-supplied bombs, combat aircraft, and tactical assistance.


The contradictions in Donald Trump’s foreign policy create opportunities for both rivals and long-standing (if irritated) US allies to challenge American influence. But Trump’s immediate priority is political survival, and his actions in the international arena are of little concern to his domestic supporters.


While the notion that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is decades old, it has been bolstered in recent years, by the campaign to add to the definition of anti-Semitism any criticism that singles Israel out and doesn’t apply the same standard to other countries. The bottom line is that this entire effort is designed not to combat anti-Semitism but to silence criticism. 


Short-term thinking, expedience, and a lack of strategic caution has led Washington to train, fund, and support group after group that have turned their guns on American soldiers and civilians.


Trump is not the problem. Think of him instead as a summons to address the real problem, which in a nation ostensibly of, by, and for the people is the collective responsibility of the people themselves. For Americans to shirk that responsibility further will almost surely pave the way for more Trumps — or someone worse — to come.


The United Nations has once again turn into a battleground between the United States and Iran, which are experiencing one of the darkest moments in their bilateral relations.


In many ways, Donald Trump’s bellicosity, his militarism, his hectoring cant about American exceptionalism and national greatness, his bullying of allies—all of it makes him not an opponent of neoconservatism but its apotheosis. Trump is a logical culmination of the Bush era as consolidated by Obama.


RightWeb
share