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.

Print Friendly

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

The Foreign Policy Initiative, founded in 2009 by a host of neoconservative figures, was a leading advocate for a militaristic and Israel-centric U.S. foreign policies.


Billionaire investor Paul Singer is the founder and CEO of the Elliott Management Corporation and an important funder of neoconservative causes.


Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is known for his hawkish views on foreign policy and close ties to prominent neoconservatives.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and a close confidante of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.


Blackwater Worldwide founder Erik Prince is notorious for his efforts to expand the use of private military contractors in conflict zones.


U.S. Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis is a retired U.S Marine Corps general and combat veteran who served as commander of U.S. Central Command during 2010-2013 before being removed by the Obama administration reportedly because of differences over Iran policy.


Mark Dubowitz, an oft-quoted Iran hawk, is the executive director of the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

The time has come for a new set of partnerships to be contemplated between the United States and Middle East states – including Iran – and between regimes and their peoples, based on a bold and inclusive social contract.


Print Friendly

Erik Prince is back. He’s not only pitching colonial capitalism in DC. He’s huckstering ex-SF-led armies of sepoys to wrest Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya and perhaps, if he is ever able to influence likeminded hawks in the Trump administration, even Iran back from the infidels.


Print Friendly

Encouraged by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s statement late last month that Washington favors “peaceful” regime change in Iran, neoconservatives appear to be trying to influence the internal debate by arguing that this is Trump’s opportunity to be Ronald Reagan.


Print Friendly

When asked about “confidence in the U.S. president to do the right thing in world affairs,” 22 percent of those surveyed as part of a recent Pew Research Center global poll expressed confidence in Donald Trump and 74 percent expressed no confidence.


Print Friendly

A much-awaited new State Department volume covering the period 1951 to 1954 does not reveal much new about the actual overthrow of Mohammad Mossadeq but it does provide a vast amount of information on US involvement in Iran.


Print Friendly

As debate continues around the Trump administration’s arms sales and defense spending, am new book suggests several ways to improve security and reduce corruption, for instance by increasing transparency on defense strategies, including “how expenditures on systems and programs align with the threats to national security.”


Print Friendly

Lobelog We walked in a single file. Not because it was tactically sound. It wasn’t — at least according to standard infantry doctrine. Patrolling southern Afghanistan in column formation limited maneuverability, made it difficult to mass fire, and exposed us to enfilading machine-gun bursts. Still, in 2011, in the Pashmul District of Kandahar Province, single…


RightWeb
share