======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/01/AR2011030104406.htm
U.S. defense leaders warn of no-fly-zone risks
By Karen DeYoung and Craig Whitlock
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, March 2, 2011; 12:18 AM
U.S. defense leaders expressed caution Tuesday about military
intervention in Libya, warning that enforcement of a no-fly zone
would require scarce air assets, domestic political approval and
international authorization.
Foreign leaders, and some U.S. officials, have said a no-fly zone
is under active consideration, and Defense Secretary Robert M.
Gates said the Pentagon was preparing "a lot of options and
contingencies" for President Obama.
But Gates said military measures could have indirect consequences
that "need to be considered very carefully." He suggested any
intervention in Libya could drain U.S. forces from the war in
Afghanistan and questioned the wisdom of the United States
engaging in military action in another Muslim country.
Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, told reporters that they had no confirmed reports that
Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi had used airstrikes against
civilians or opposition forces that occupy the eastern half of the
country. Gates also said there had been no request by the rebels
for military assistance.
But opposition leaders in the eastern city of Benghazi, frustrated
by their inability to dislodge Gaddafi from his stronghold in
Tripoli, said they were considering making such a request.
"We are well aware of the ongoing efforts by Col. Gaddafi to
defend the area of Tripoli and a few other places that he
continues to hold," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told
U.S. lawmakers Tuesday. The opposition, she said, has been
"working to create more of a military presence so they can not
only defend places already taken over but try to take territory
away" from Gaddafi.
Former Air Force generals said that while a no-fly zone could be
set in motion relatively quickly, enforcement would require
hundreds of fighter jets and support aircraft as well as a
coordinated bombing campaign.
The Libyan air defense system is significantly more advanced than
the Iraqi defenses that the U.S.-led force destroyed in 2003 in
the early stages of that invasion. "It consists of much more
modern surface-to-air missiles," said Lt. Gen. David Deptula, a
former fighter pilot who until recently oversaw Air Force
intelligence in the Pentagon.
The administration has sharply increased both its rhetoric and
actions against Gaddafi in recent days, hoping to persuade senior
Libyan military and regime leaders to decide that his cause is
lost and that they should turn against him. At the same time, it
is coordinating possible military actions with European allies in
case they become necessary.
As it seeks to calibrate its message, the administration is also
trying to determine who is in charge of the opposition. With few
direct contacts in Libya, U.S. officials have queried those with
business and other non-governmental ties for names, phone numbers
and assessments of those who appear to be in charge.
"It's a very fluid situation, but we are reaching out through
these different channels to a variety of people who are in the
opposition," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "We want to
hear from and learn from and talk to those who have a desire to
move towards a representative government."
Clinton, in testimony Tuesday on the administration's foreign
policy budget for fiscal 2012, referred to intense administration
activity on Libya as an example of the kind of capabilities that
would be undermined by budget cuts proposed by House Republicans.
Libya could face a "protracted civil war" without a strong U.S.
and international response to the turmoil there, Clinton told the
House Foreign Affairs Committee. "The stakes are high," and a
"strong and strategic American response will be essential" not
only in Libya but also throughout the Middle East if the United
States is to protect its own national security, she said.
The hearing was the first skirmish in the administration's efforts
to repel proposals to half the State Department's $56 billion
budget request.
The request includes $47 billion in "core" budget funds for
programs and partnerships around the world, and to keep the
department running. That figure, essentially the same as the 2010
level, does not include an additional $8.7 billion for "Overseas
Contingency Operations," part of $126 billion Obama has requested
to fund military and civilian operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and
Pakistan.
"It is a lean budget for lean times," Clinton said. The
administration is still trying to persuade Republicans not to
implement a proposed 16 percent cut in the pending 2011 budget.
But the majority Republicans gave little ground. Funding decisions
must be made "in light of the unfortunate fiscal realities facing
our government and every American family," Chairman Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) said. "Those who complain about diminished
levels of international affairs funding need to ask themselves:
How much less would an insolvent United States of America be able
to do?"
Meanwhile, the 192-member U.N. General Assembly voted by consensus
Tuesday to suspend Libya's membership in the U.N. Human Rights
Council, an extraordinary rebuke for an influential U.N. player
that only a year ago held the assembly presidency.
In a rare expression of criticism by one Arab government against
another at the United Nations, Lebanon's U.N. Ambassador Nawaf
Salam, said that "it is an honor for my country to be a co-sponsor
of this resolution" that condemns the "flagrant violation of human
rights" in Libya.
Staff writers Greg Jaffe in Washington and Colum Lynch at the
United Nations contributed to this report.
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com