Earlier today, Politico’s Glenn Thrush told us that President Obama would not be speaking about Libya. Period. That was apparently the word from press secretary Jay Carney this morning. That article has now been rewritten as an explanation for Obama’s slow response.
This evening, Carney announced that Obama would speak after all; and couple of hours ago, the President made what Al Jazeera termed “a strongly worded statement” (see video above) about the intense violence that has been unleashed on the Libyan people for the past few days and the resulting bloody carnage in the streets of Libyan cities.
I’m not sure why the President changed his mind about speaking. Perhaps it’s because they have managed to get American citizens out. Perhaps Obama finally realized he was be criticized all over the world for his lack of action.
So far the response to the statement hasn’t been that enthusiastic. The Washington Post wants to know why Obama was the last to speak about the situation in Libya.
By late Wednesday only one major Western leader had failed to speak up on Libya: Barack Obama. Before then, the president’s only comment during five days of mounting atrocities was a statement issued in his name by his press secretary late last Friday, which deplored violence that day in three countries: Yemen, Libya and Bahrain. For four subsequent days, the administration’s response to the rapidly escalating bloodshed in Libya was measured and relatively mild statements by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Administration officials explained this weak stance by saying they were worried about U.S. citizens, hundreds of whom were being extracted by ferry Wednesday afternoon. There were fears that the desperate Mr. Gaddafi might attack the Americans or seek to take them hostage. But the presence of thousands of European citizens in Libya did not prevent their government’s leaders from forcefully speaking out and agreeing on sanctions.
Late Wednesday afternoon, Mr. Obama finally appeared at a White House podium. He said “we strongly condemn the use of violence in Libya,” but he did not mention Mr. Gaddafi or call for his removal. He said the administration was preparing a “full range of options” to respond but didn’t say what those might be; he made no mention of the no-fly zone that Libya’s delegation at the United Nations has called for. He stressed that the United States would work through international forums – and said Ms. Clinton would travel to Geneva for a meeting of the notoriously ineffectual U.N. Human Rights Council, which counts Libya as a member.
[….]
Shouldn’t the president of the United States be first to oppose the depravities of a tyrant such as Mr. Gaddafi? Apparently this one doesn’t think so.
The New York Times also noted that Obama did not “castigate” Gaddafi, but they meekly explained that the President was worried about getting Americans out of Tripoli.
Mr. Obama made no mention of the Libyan strongman, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, reflecting the administration’s worry about the safety of American diplomats and their families in Tripoli, where a ferry meant to evacuate Americans was still stuck at the port, penned in by high winds in the Mediterranean. Mr. Obama has been coming under fire from critics who said he has not been tough enough against Colonel Qaddafi in the wake of the violent crackdown by pro-Qaddafi forces against demonstrators.
“This statement could have been put out by the first President Bush. It has the aspect of an Arabist statement. I shouldn’t be too strong here, but it doesn’t have any dignity. I mean – Ronald Reagan – to his credit, said ‘evil empire’ before the fall of the wall.”
Huh? Oh well, it doesn’t make sense, but he didn’t like the statement anyway.
At Foreign Policy, Peter Feaver is losing patience with the President. Based on Jay Carney’s lead-up to the statement, Feaver wrote:
I can think of only two plausible explanations for the weak White House response thus far:
Perhaps the Gaddafi regime is blocking the evacuation of U.S. citizens so as to intimidate the White House into making only muted statements — and this intimidation is working (note to President Obama, this is closer to what real hostage-taking feels like).
Or perhaps the administration is paralyzed with indecision because of debates between internal factions, some wanting a stronger Bush-like response and others wanting to stick with the Obama 2009 approach that guided the weak response to the Iranian post-election protests in June 2009.
What did you think of the “strongly worded statement?” Will we see any action in the near future?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
As everyone who isn’t living on a desert island knows at this point, Libya is in chaos, with hundreds of people killed and probably thousands injured by their own government.
Actually, pretty much the whole Middle East is in chaos, but right now the situation in Libya is the worst. Tin pot dictator Muammar Gaddafi turned his security forces and hired goons against the Libyan people, and they did so–firing machine guns and shooting from helicopters, and dropping bombs from fighter planes. It’s a full fledged massacre, according to all reports.
The world is watching the situation in Libya with alarm. We join the international community in strongly condemning the violence in Libya. Our thoughts and prayers are with those whose lives have been lost, and with their loved ones. The government of Libya has a responsibility to respect the universal rights of the people, including the right to free expression and assembly. Now is the time to stop this unacceptable bloodshed. We are working urgently with friends and partners around the world to convey this message to the Libyan government.
It’s not a very strong statement, but I assume Hillary just said what the President asked her to say. Meanwhile, our fearless leader hasn’t said boo. I do hear he’s *concerned* though.
On Friday, Obama’s new press secretary, Jay Carney, said the President was “deeply concerned.”
“I am deeply concerned by reports of violence in Bahrain, Libya and Yemen. The United States condemns the use of violence by governments against peaceful protesters in those countries, and wherever else it may occur,” the president said in a statement read to reporters by White House press secretary Jay Carney.
“The United States urges the governments of Bahrain, Libya and Yemen to show restraint in responding to peaceful protests and to respect the rights of their people,” Obama said.
In the administration’s strongest statement on the escalating violence in Libya, the State Department said that it was “gravely concerned” about the reports and that the number of deaths was unknown because of a lack of access to many parts of the country by news organizations and human rights groups.
Philip J. Crowley, the State Department spokesman, said that the United States has raised “strong objections about the use of lethal force” with several senior Libyan officials, including Musa Kusa, the foreign minister.
“Libyan officials have stated their commitment to protecting and safeguarding the right of peaceful protest,” Mr. Crowley said in a statement. “We call upon the Libyan government to uphold that commitment and hold accountable any security officer who does not act in accordance with that commitment.”
Okay, that’s nice, but they’re not doing it. Now what?
Obama also had UN Ambassador Susan Rice appear on “Meet the Press” to tell us that he’s “very concerned” about Libya.
The administration is “very concerned” about reports of Libyan forces gunning down civilians, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said Sunday.
Okay, we get that Obama concerned–very concerned, deeply concerned, even gravely concerned. When are we going to hear something directly from him? When is he going to call for a meeting of the UN Security Council to decide on some kind of action? Can’t UN forces be sent in to restore peace?
When are we going to get some leadership from this man? Does he ever get angry? Does anything outrage him? Does he ever get beyond being *concerned*?
Anger is an energy, Mr. President.
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Good Morning! It’s “Presidents’ Day.” Talk about a generic holiday. We used to mark two presidents’ birthdays in February–Washington’s birthday on the 22nd and Lincoln’s birthday on the 12th–but now we just have a Monday in February when everything goes on sale, and pictures of Washington and Lincoln are used to sell cars and mattresses. At least some of us get the day off work.
There’s an awful lot of news happening, and I’m guessing there could be a even more happening Libya by the time you start reading this. The latest is that protesters are in Tripoli, and the family of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi is vowing to fight the protesters “to the last man standing,” according to Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam in a really monotonous, rambling speech yesterday.
Anti-government protesters rallied in Tripoli’s streets, tribal leaders spoke out against Gaddafi, and army units defected to the opposition as oil exporter Libya endured one of the bloodiest revolts to convulse the Arab world.
Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam Gaddafi appeared on national television in an attempt to both threaten and calm people, saying the army would enforce security at any price.
“Our spirits are high and the leader Muammar Gaddafi is leading the battle in Tripoli, and we are behind him as is the Libyan army,” he said.
“We will keep fighting until the last man standing, even to the last woman standing…We will not leave Libya to the Italians or the Turks.”
In fast-moving developments after midnight, demonstrators were reported to be in Tripoli’s Green Square and preparing to march on Gaddafi’s compound as rumours spread that the leader had fled to Venezuela. Other reports described protesters in the streets of Tripoli throwing stones at billboards of Muammar Gaddafi while police used teargas to try to disperse them.
“People are in the street chanting ‘Allahu Akbar’ (God is great) and throwing stones at photos of Gaddafi,”an expatriate worker told Reuters by telephone from Tripoli. “The police are firing teargas everywhere, it’s even getting into the houses.”
There was also plenty of protesting going on in other Middle Eastern countries:
Libya’s extraordinary day overshadowed drama elsewhere in the region. Tensions eased in Bahrain after troops withdrew from a square in Manama occupied by Shia protesters. Thousands of security personnel were also deployed in the Iranian capital, Tehran, to forestall an opposition rally. Elsewhere in the region unrest hit Yemen, Morocco, Oman, Kuwait and Algeria.
At Asia Times Online, Pepe Escobar wrote a couple of days ago that the protests in Bahrain could soon spread to Saudi Arabia. That is one fascinating article.
“We’ll be here Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday — as long as it takes,” Gary Lonzo, a union organizer and former Wisconsin corrections officer, said Sunday as he watched protesters banging drums and waving signs here for a sixth day in a row. “We’re not going anywhere.”
As the protests went on through falling sleet and snow, some lawmakers suggested that a compromise might yet be possible over the cuts that Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, has proposed. A spokesman for Dale Schultz, a moderate Republican senator, said that Mr. Schultz supported Mr. Walker, particularly in his assessment that the state budget situation was dire, but that Mr. Schultz also hoped to work to preserve collective bargaining rights.
Meanwhile, Wisconsin’s Democratic State Senators are staying in Illinois until further notice.
“This is not a stunt, it’s not a prank,” said Senator Jon Erpenbach, one of the Democrats who drove away from Madison early Thursday, hours before a planned vote, and would say only that he was in Chicago. “This is not an option I can ever see us doing again, but in this case, it’s absolutely the right thing to do. What they want to do is not the will of the people.”
Either I missed this story completely, or the US corporate media ignored it. An exiled religious leader, Muslim cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has returned to Egypt after 50 years and may be trying to “stealing the revolution,” according to a retweet from Mona Eltahawy (h/t, Wonk the Vote). Quaradawi made a speech to more than a million people in Cairo’s Tahrir Square on Friday. During the rally,
Google executive Wael Ghonim, who emerged as a leading voice in Egypt’s uprising, was barred from the stage in Tahrir Square on Friday by security guards, an AFP photographer said. Ghonim tried to take the stage in Tahrir, the epicentre of anti-regime protests that toppled President Hosni Mubarak, but men who appeared to be guarding influential Muslim cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi barred him from doing so.
Ghonim, who was angered by the episode, then left the square with his face hidden by an Egyptian flag.
Uh oh….
Remember Raymond Davis, who was arrested in Pakistan for shooting two Pakistani men on the street? He was more or less outed as a CIA agent during his trial. The U.S. has been trying to save him from murder charges by claiming he had diplomatic immunity. But the trial has gone on anyway, and now it’s definite that he’s CIA.
Raymond Davis has been the subject of widespread speculation since he opened fire with a semi-automatic Glock pistol on the two men who had pulled up in front of his car at a red light on 25 January.
Pakistani authorities charged him with murder, but the Obama administration has insisted he is an “administrative and technical official” attached to its Lahore consulate and has diplomatic immunity.
Based on interviews in the US and Pakistan, the Guardian can confirm that the 36-year-old former special forces soldier is employed by the CIA. “It’s beyond a shadow of a doubt,” said a senior Pakistani intelligence official. The revelation may complicate American efforts to free Davis, who insists he was acting in self-defence against a pair of suspected robbers, who were both carrying guns.
[….]
The Pakistani government is aware of Davis’s CIA status yet has kept quiet in the face of immense American pressure to free him under the Vienna convention. Last week President Barack Obama described Davis as “our diplomat” and dispatched his chief diplomatic troubleshooter, Senator John Kerry, to Islamabad. Kerry returned home empty-handed.
Many Pakistanis are outraged at the idea of an armed American rampaging through their second-largest city. Analysts have warned of Egyptian-style protests if Davis is released.
Oh dear, another diplomatic nightmare for our indecisive President to deal with. BTW, has he said anything about the bloody massacres in Libya yet?
The New York Post has a nasty takedown of Mitt Romney by Josh Kosman, author of a book on how private equity firms could cause the next economic crisis.
…the former private equity firm chief’s fortune — which has funded his political ambitions from the Massachusetts statehouse to his unsuccessful run for the White House in 2008 — was made on the backs of companies that ultimately collapsed, putting thousands of ordinary Americans out on the street. That truth if it becomes widely known could become costly to Romney, who, while making the media rounds recently, told CNN’s Piers Morgan that “People in America want to know who can get 15 million people back to work,” implying he was that person.
Romney’s private equity firm, Bain Capital, bought companies and often increased short-term earnings so those businesses could then borrow enormous amounts of money. That borrowed money was used to pay Bain dividends. Then those businesses needed to maintain that high level of earnings to pay their debts.
Romney in 2007 told the New York Times he had nothing to do with taking dividends from two companies that later went bankrupt, and that one should not take a distribution from a business that put the company at risk.
Yet Geoffrey Rehnert, who helped start Bain Capital and is now co-CEO of the private equity firm The Audax Group, told me for my Penguin book, “The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Is Destroying Jobs and Killing the American Economy,” that Romney owned a controlling stake in Bain Capital between approximately 1992 and 2001. The firm under his watch took such risks, time and time again.
I’m going to leave you with this video from The Ed Show live in Madison, Wisconsin.
What are you reading and blogging about today?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
The Sky Dancing banner headline uses a snippet from a work by artist Tashi Mannox called 'Rainbow Study'. The work is described as a" study of typical Tibetan rainbow clouds, that feature in Thanka painting, temple decoration and silk brocades". dakinikat was immediately drawn to the image when trying to find stylized Tibetan Clouds to represent Sky Dancing. It is probably because Tashi's practice is similar to her own. His updated take on the clouds that fill the collection of traditional thankas is quite special.
You can find his work at his website by clicking on his logo below. He is also a calligraphy artist that uses important vajrayana syllables. We encourage you to visit his on line studio.
Recent Comments