March 26, 2011 | Log In | Sign Up

Obama Libya Speech: President To Deliver Nationally Televised Address On Libya

Obama Libya Speech

By ROBERT BURNS and BEN FELLER   03/25/11 09:31 PM   AP

WASHINGTON -- To a nation and a Congress seeking answers, President Barack Obama on Monday will offer his most expansive explanation of the U.S. role in the Libyan war, delivering a speech that is expected to cover the path ahead and his rationale about the appropriate use of force.

Obama's 7:30 p.m. EDT speech, to be given from the National Defense University in Washington, comes as leading Republican lawmakers and some from his own party have pressed him for clarity about the goals and exit strategy of the United States. Obama and top U.S. security officials spent about an hour talking to lawmakers on Friday, with the president answering direct questions from critics.

For a president who was on a Latin American outreach trip when the U.N.-sanctioned military assault on the Libyan regime began, the speech offers him his best chance to explain the purpose and scope of the mission to a nation already weary of war. Obama has spoken about the matter since authorizing the use of force, but not in a setting as prominent as an evening speech, as he seeks to take command of the story.

Obama is expected to explain how the U.S.-led campaign is shifting to NATO control, and how the multinational approach with Arab support puts the United States in the strongest position to achieve the goals of protecting Libyan civilians, a White House official said.

The president will also put the Libyan campaign into a broader context of his decisions about the use of force, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the president's thinking. U.S.-led forces began launching missile strikes last Saturday against embattled Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi's defenses to establish a no-fly zone and prevent him from attacking his own people.

With the Obama administration eager to take a back seat, it remained unclear when NATO would assume command of the no-fly patrols. Also unclear was when – and even if – the U.S. military's Africa Command would hand off to NATO the lead role in attacking Libyan ground targets.

The U.S. commander in charge of the overall international mission, Army Gen. Carter Ham, told The Associated Press, "We could easily destroy all the regime forces that are in Ajdabiya," but the city itself would be destroyed in the process. "We'd be killing the very people that we're charged with protecting."

Instead, the focus is on disrupting the communications and supply lines that allow Gadhafi's forces to keep fighting in Ajdabiya and other urban areas like Misrata, Ham said in a telephone interview from his U.S. Africa Command headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany.

The White House announcement of Monday's speech came after Obama's teleconference Friday with a bipartisan group of key members of Congress. The call came amid complaints on Capitol Hill that Obama was not adequately consulting about the intervention in Libya with Capitol Hill.

Story continues below
Advertisement

During the call, Obama and other U.S. officials emphasized to lawmakers that the United States' military role would be decreasing going forward, according to an official who listened to the conversation and spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the closed meeting.

Obama reiterated the U.S. position that Gadhafi should leave power. But he said, as he has publicly, that the United States planned to follow the mission of the UN Security Council resolution – which centers on the protection of Libyan civilians. The campaign is not aimed at killing Gadhafi, the official said.

House Speaker John Boehner asked a series of questions and got direct answers from both the president and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, the official said. The president also took questions from the Senate's top Republican, Mitch McConnell, and from other lawmakers.

After the call, a spokesman for Boehner said the speaker wants the Obama administration to do more to explain how the mission in Libya "is consistent with U.S. policy goals."

And Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who also participated in the call, remained concerned that the current military action might not be enough force Gadhafi out of power, spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan said.

Buchanan said McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, supports the military intervention in Libya but fears it could lead to a stalemate that leaves Gadhafi's regime in place.

Obama also faced political pressure from his own party, with one prominent Democrat expressing reservations about the wisdom of continuing the military mission.

"I know the president carefully weighed all the options before taking this emergency action but now that our military has prevented an immediate disaster, I have very serious concerns about what this intervention means for our country in the coming weeks," Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., gave Obama a strong endorsement after speaking with the president and his advisers.

"The president gave a very clear, very strong presentation," Levin said. "I continue to believe there will be strong bipartisan support in Congress. He clearly answered the questions about the mission and planned schedule for the handoff of the principal responsibility for population protection to NATO and Arab countries."

Meanwhile, a Pentagon official said Friday that even as other nations begin taking a larger role in the international air assault mission in Libya, the Pentagon was considering adding Air Force gunships and other attack aircraft that are better suited for tangling with Libyan ground forces in contested urban areas like Misrata.

Navy Vice Adm. William Gortney told a Pentagon news conference that for the second consecutive day, all air missions to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya were flown by non-U.S. aircraft, and U.S. planes conducted about half the missions attacking Libyan air defenses, missile sites and ground forces. Qatar became the first Arab nation to join the effort, flying F-16s in support of the no-fly zone.

"The division of labor between the U.S. and our partners has largely evened out," Gortney said.

In his interview with the Associated Press, Ham said the U.S. expects NATO will take command of the no-fly zone mission on Sunday, with a Canadian three-star general, Charles Bouchard, in charge. Bouchard would report to an American admiral, Samuel Locklear, in Locklear's role as commander of NATO's Allied Joint Force Command Naples, Ham said.

If NATO also decides to take on a wider mission broadly defined by the United Nations Security Council as protecting Libyan civilians from their own government – a mission that is currently carried out under U.S. command – then Bouchard might command that effort, too, Ham said.

In announcing on Thursday that NATO had agreed to take on the no-fly zone mission, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the campaign was evolving in line with Obama's plan to limit U.S. involvement.

"We're already seeing a significant reduction in the number of U.S. planes involved in operations as the number of planes from other countries increases in numbers," she said.

Gortney, however, said there has been no reduction in the number of American planes participating. In fact, he said the Pentagon was considering bringing in side-firing AC-130 gunships, helicopters and armed drone aircraft that could challenge Libyan ground forces that threaten civilians in cities like Misrata. The U.S. has avoided attacking in cities thus far out of fear that civilians could be killed or injured. AC-130 gunships, which operate at night at low altitude, can attack with unusual precision.

Gortney is staff director for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

NATO's governing body, the North Atlantic Council, is expected to meet again on Sunday to revisit whether the alliance will take command of the rest of the Libya operation, including the protection of civilians.

___

Associated Press writers Jim Kuhnhenn, Pauline Jelinek, Matthew Lee, Donna Cassata, Richard Lardner and Erica Werner contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

President Obama will give a nationally televised address on the conflict in Libya on Monday night. The White House press office released the following statement: WASHINGTON—On Monday, March 28...
President Obama will give a nationally televised address on the conflict in Libya on Monday night. The White House press office released the following statement: WASHINGTON—On Monday, March 28...
Gingrich criticizes Obama's handling of Libya
Libya mission gaining, as US looks to cede control: Obama: 'When this transition takes place, it is not going to...
MUST READ: Fouad Ajami WSJ op ed: Obama's Holbrooke Moment -- on.wsj.com/fhC0Du
Kucinich: War is a swamp, Obama Libya action unconstitutional
3 days ago from web
25 mins 2 air: We'll hv 's interview w/Pres re the allied mission in
3 days ago from web
Miss this? Video- President Obama offers more on Libya role from El Salvador
RT : Garrett Epps makes convincing case: Obama should ask Congress authoriz for Libya attacks even now
Meantime WH officials spent enrgy pst weekend calling ppl to protest narrative ClintonRicePower pushed Libya action, Obama/Donilon wanted.
3 days ago from web
Garrett Epps makes convincing case: Obama should ask Congress authoriz for Libya attacks even now
Sarkozy, Obama agree on NATO use to back coalition
McDermott praises Obama handling of Libya | Strange Bedfellows ...
President Obama says US 'should be proud' of Libya involvement
Supermajorities in poll want compromise, approve no-fly zone. Nukes lose ground, solid
3 days ago from web
Obama Defends US Involvement In Libya: President Barack Obama on Tuesday continued to defend US involvement in L...
Obama defends U.S. military mission in Libya
Top Story: Obama Defends US Involvement In Libya: President Barack Obama on Tuesday continued to defend US invol...
Obama Defends US Involvement In Libya
Obama Defends US Involvement In Libya: President Barack Obama on Tuesday continued to defend US involvement in L...
As Cap Obvious might say, it's notable that Obama's US natl interest rationale for intervention could apply to many leaders/countries
3 days ago from web
Filed by Whitney Snyder  | 
 
Comments
3,036
Pending Comments
16
View FAQ
Login or connect with: 
More Login Options
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »   (43 total)
photo
Jennifer Zeares   0 minute ago (1:55 AM)
I'm about as left leaning as anyone can get but even I realize that the president is simply a figurehead­. I mean, come on. He said what he was told to say to get elected (let's just pretend that votes count in this country) and now he's towing the line and doing what the power people tell him to do. Obama has nothing to do with actual decisions, but hey, his family is attractive­. Oooh, shiny.
photo
WorldEdition   0 minute ago (1:54 AM)
Nations and People who publicly congratula­te oil dictators for joining a war

give the legitimacy to dictatorsh­ips and undermine democracy.
photo
EconPadawan   1 minute ago (1:53 AM)
I was anti war before you tr0//s were and I'm still anti war so F 0 k you....

Cee-Lo Green F 0 c k You
http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=L4-2QoPkz­j0
7voiceofreason7   1 minute ago (1:53 AM)
A plurality of Americans support this campaign:

http://www­.gallup.co­m/poll/146­738/americ­ans-approv­e-military­-action-ag­ainst-liby­a.aspx

47% in favor, 37% opposed, is not strong numbers. Certainly that would crash if he were to commit ground troops. Which Obama is not going to do.

This is quite the roll of the dice, but if Qaddafi flees to Zimbabwe or whatever within the next week, Obama has a good chance of coming out of this smelling like a rose.

Months just ain't gonna cut it. Obama is a lucky guy. He will need to dip into that well here.
photo
misspellings   2 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
I'm proud of my president, he finally acted. He didn't want a third front but he could not just watch it happen. And I salute those coalition pilots and sailors who are risking their lives for a truly noble cause. No one wanted to help save these poor souls from that madman. As that old lady in Benghazi said, "their mothers should be proud of them."

At least someone is trying to help now.
photo
FalseConsciousness   2 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
The only sincere and principled people on this thread are the ones fed up with both parties.
photo
djcarlos1   0 minute ago (1:54 AM)
no kidding
photo
Blue neck   0 minute ago (1:55 AM)
narcissist­...

If we're not just like you then we're not sincere or principled­.... Unfortunat­ely for you personalit­y disorders like narcissism can't be treated.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
james rimes   2 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
Goldman Sachs Bought a Brown Man....
photo
Black Dragon Glass   3 minutes ago (1:51 AM)
this is just the start.
photo
gotalifepost   4 minutes ago (1:50 AM)
When cons say.......­...

They are lying.

The boy who cried wolf.
DA A Man   4 minutes ago (1:50 AM)
Obama's speech
lie lies yeah lies lies yeah they gonna get you.

http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=PA43ETEU1­Vg

Lies - Thompson Twins (HQ Audio
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
blueeyedbull   2 minutes ago (1:53 AM)
Go back to Faux news they probably have more nonsense talking points for you to post.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Isenki   5 minutes ago (1:49 AM)
There's a reason the Arab league, all of NATO, and most of the UN agreed to do this. Gaddafi has got to be stopped. Some people apparently haven't considered that their freedom to pay low, low taxes is less important than a Libyan's right to not be shelled by tanks for attending a demonstrat­ion.
kittenmittens4   4 minutes ago (1:50 AM)
well put
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
code blue   4 minutes ago (1:50 AM)
Most of the people posting here weren't alive for Lockerbie, or the Night Club.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mratcheson   2 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
Probably correct.
photo
PerfectSense   1 minute ago (1:53 AM)
The world condemned Reagan for attacking Qaddafi.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chuck prebys   1 minute ago (1:53 AM)
But thanks to modern mass media they all know about Saint Ronnie the Benevolent and how he saved the planet like superman
photo
libertyreturns   1 minute ago (1:54 AM)
so this is retaliatio­n for something that happened 3 decades ago?
photo
PerfectSense   2 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
...and what do progressiv­es propose to do the same situation in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Iran, etc?
BandAgain   2 minutes ago (1:53 AM)
Quadaffi's more dangerous now than he was in 2008.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robgrut   5 minutes ago (1:49 AM)
Obama Jr. received the endorsemen­t of Jimmy Carter, because Jimmy knew he was the only person capable of displacing him in the books as "worst President" in history.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
code blue   4 minutes ago (1:51 AM)
The black Jimmy Carter! Drink!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EbonBear   3 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
I don't drink. Am I allowed to smoke instead?
photo
Daniel Farady   2 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
Had to quit. Too hammered already.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chuck prebys   4 minutes ago (1:51 AM)
Bye bye oh ye little man of limited cranial capacity.
kittenmittens4   3 minutes ago (1:51 AM)
So how does it make you the worse president in history to creep us out of a horrible recession and actually start adding jobs? Just saying.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robgrut   0 minute ago (1:54 AM)
Kittens, Obama Jr.'s regulatory has made it impossible for companies to hire. Unemployme­nt(U6) is almost 20% including those who have given up. Don't tell me he has done a good job... He has failed.
Kinniver   0 minute ago (1:54 AM)
I guess adding jobs to make more bombs is a job created with a lives lost?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
imoverit   3 minutes ago (1:52 AM)
Your comment is so last year.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mratcheson   2 minutes ago (1:53 AM)
Where do you people come from?
BandAgain   5 minutes ago (1:49 AM)
President TheBuckSto­psThere will try to blame it all on Hillary.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EbonBear   5 minutes ago (1:49 AM)
I'm not sure what I'm more disappoint­ed in. The fact that the US forces seem to be exceeding the UN mandate, turning a police action into an illegal war. The fact that Obama has proven to be disappoint­ing on so many levels (although still miles better than whoever the Repubs put up in 2012). Or the fact that the criticism from the right is so utterly disingenuo­us, complainin­g about internatio­nal law and Constituti­onal authority when their history makes it clear that they don't care about either. They just regard Obama as illegitima­te for having a -D after his name and have been he//bent on lockstep opposition to everything­, relentless attack for anything they can think of and impeachmen­t on the very first pretext they can make up.
I think I'm starting to see why so many politician­s end up drinking.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
code blue   2 minutes ago (1:53 AM)
War: IOKIYAR

That said, the US is not exceeding the UN mandate, which is quite broad.
OpposingViewpoint   2 minutes ago (1:53 AM)
Oh my...does this mean I am a politician­? ;)
kittenmittens4   5 minutes ago (1:49 AM)
Ok I get it. I want us to stop spending on defense and fund our own country, however, when you see a dictator killing his own people who obviously want him gone but are you supposed to do? We did not even go in first, France did. Obama did the right thing in waiting for the UN to act (the waiting which mad a lot of people upset). This just seems like a lose lose and an excuse for anyone upset with him to lash out.

Twitter Edition