Thursday, March 31, 2011
U.S. Spending: From Excessive to Obscene
Europe's basket case economies are in agony as they attempt to get their financial houses in order. In Greece, Ireland and Portugal, government spending is getting whacked, wages and pension costs are coming down and retirement ages are going up. Yet it's not working. National debt loads are still soaring and bailouts are still coming.There is a lesson here for countries with rising debt loads.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/31/us_spending_from_excessive_to_obscene_253013.html
Sarah Palin Saxby Chambliss Scott Brown Sheldon Whitehouse Sherrod Brown
The President's Credibility Gap
Addressing the nation Monday evening, President Obama suggested that the United States was in the process of reducing its military footprint in Libya, even as he explicitly rejected the idea of pursuing regime change in Tripoli by force of arms. Both statements seemed calculated to make our intervention seem tightly limited rather than open-ended. (“I want to be clear,” Obama said. “The United States of America has done what we said we would do.”) But two days later, both look dubious in the extreme.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/31/the_president039s_credibility_gap_252990.html
Condoleezza Rice Daniel Akaka Daniel Inouye David Vitter Debbie Stabenow
Europe Tackles Debt, U.S. Ignores It
Europe’s basket case economies are in agony as they attempt to get their financial houses in order. In Greece, Ireland and Portugal, government spending is getting whacked, wages and pension costs are coming down and retirement ages are going up. Yet it’s not working. National debt loads are still soaring and bailouts are still coming.There is a lesson here for countries with rising debt loads.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/31/europe_tackles_debt_us_ignores_it_253013.html
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Praying Obama Gets Lucky in Libya
There is an old saying in the Middle East that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee. That thought came to my mind as I listened to President Obama trying to explain the intervention of America and its allies in Libya — and I don’t say that as criticism. I say it with empathy. This is really hard stuff, and it’s just the beginning.When an entire region that has been living outside the biggest global trends of free politics and free markets for half a century suddenly, from the bottom up, decides to join history — and each one of these...
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/30/praying_obama_gets_lucky_in_libya_252926.html
Mike Crapo Mike Enzi Mike Huckabee Mike Johanns Mitch McConnell
Life 2.0: How Bill Gates & I Founded Microsoft
My high school in Seattle, Lakeside, seemed conservative on the surface, but it was educationally progressive. We had few rules and lots of opportunities, and all my schoolmates seemed passionate about something. But the school was also cliquish. There were golfers and tennis players, who carried their rackets wherever they went, and in the winter most everyone went skiing. I’d never done any of these things, and my friends were the boys who didn’t fit into the established groups. Then, in the fall of my 10th-grade year, my passion found me.My honors-geometry...
Remarks by the First Lady during Ballou High School Visit
1:57 P.M. EDT
MRS. OBAMA: Well, it was -- Principal Branch, it was important to tell that story, because another one of the reasons why I like to come out to schools is because I want the nation to see all that you all have to accomplish. And a lot of times when I show up, other people will follow. So I’ve heard a lot of good things about this school, about the students in this room, in this building, and I’m honored to be here.
One of the reasons why we do this is that when my husband was elected and we got into the White House, every First Lady can have a set of agendas. And I have a few, but one of the things that I wanted to do with this office is to open up the White House primarily to kids in this community to make sure that everyone in this country and everyone in this district understood that the White House was their house.
And sometimes you do that by inviting people in, but a lot of times you do that by stepping out and going into other people’s community. And mentoring is also an important part of my agenda, because it was an important part of my life. I wouldn’t be here today, and neither would my husband, if we didn’t have people in our lives who stepped off of their track to enter our lives and our worlds and help us figure out the path for getting where we needed to be.
And our view is that we have an obligation to give that back; you know, the further you go, the further you have to reach back and make sure you’re pulling other people along the way. So I’ve been spending a lot of time investing in mentoring and trying to get other famous and wonderful people to do the same thing.
So today, we’ve got a group of women, because it is the end of Women’s History Month, who’ve come from all over the country who are going out to schools just like yours. And I am fortunate enough to be here. But we’ve got people like Lisa Leslie and Dominique Dawes and Geena Davis and India Arie and Ledisi and, you know, the head of Lifetime and the head of the folks who make Sesame Street. We’ve got a general. We’ve got an astronaut. We’ve got, you know, people of all walks of life who’ve flown here to D.C. just to be a part of this day and to spend some time with you all, because they think, number one, you all are just that important, and they feel that same obligation that I do to try and be some point of connection for you all.
Another reason I like to do this is because when I listen to Principal Branch about the struggles and the journey you have to take just to get to school every day, it reminds me of me. I went to a public magnet high school on the South Side of Chicago that was an hour and a half away from my house, because the schools around my neighborhood weren’t preparing kids for college.
So I would get up, get on the bus at 6:30 in the morning every morning and ride the bus all the way to the other side of town just to get an education. So I know what it feels like to struggle to get the education that you need. In so many ways, I see myself in you all. And I want you to see yourselves in me, so that you’re not looking at me just as the First Lady of the United States.
But I grew up on the South Side of Chicago and my parents were working-class folks. I had two of them. I was fortunate enough to have two parents. But my parents didn’t have a lot of money, and I went to public schools my entire career. So there’s not too much of a difference between how I was raised and how many of you all are raised.
But I’m here, and the point is, is that you can be here, too. And I say this a lot, there is no magic to being here. You know, Barack and I were not born with silver spoons in our mouths and connections and money and resources. A lot of why we’re where we are today is because we worked hard. We felt a deep passion for getting our education. We were motivated not by making our friends proud of us, but by making our family proud of us.
And with a lot of preparation, when the opportunities presented themselves, we were ready. And you all can do the same.
So that’s why I’m here. But I’m also here so you all can ask some questions. It’s not every day you get to talk to the First Lady of the United States, right? I mean, I’m assuming. (Laughter.) You got good people that come, but I haven’t been here yet.
So now, I want to spend some time -- the press will stay for a short period of time, because I know that sometimes you like being in front of the press. Sometimes, it’s easier when they’re gone. But we’re going to take a couple of questions to start out with. Then, we’ll let them leave. And then, we’ll keep talking. So you can ask anything you want, as long as it’s PG. (Laughter.)
Q Hi, Mrs. Obama. My name is Ryan Hayes (ph). And I was wondering if it’s possible that we can have a national anti-bullying campaign to go along with your child nutrition program?
MRS. OBAMA: That’s a good question. We just hosted, the President and I, a national conversation at the White House about bullying. So there are a number of efforts that we’re supporting to bring to light this issue and the challenges that young people are facing in schools today.
So I think it’s important that we have a national conversation. But a lot of the work that needs to happen around the question of bullying needs to happen on the ground. It’s got to happen with parents and principals and communities and with kids, all of you all, taking some responsibility for either stepping up or staying out of that fray.
You know, there’s a lot of things that the President can do. But, you know, affecting behavior on the ground, a lot of times it has to come from the community. So I think the important thing is for people to raise awareness about the issue. We’re trying to do our part in encouraging all of you to have conversations in your schools, in your homes and communities to sort of figure out what’s going on. What’s going on with kids today? What are the things that are leading kids to bully? What keeps kids from being able to stand up for themselves? I mean, those are questions I have for all of you, because generationally, you know, you wonder if the question is, is it this generation? Is this something that’s not new? Has it changed?
And those are questions that I’m curious about. So that’s why these conversations are really important. Thanks for the question.
Q Hi, I’m Rebecca Bib (ph). I’m not a teenage mom, but what would you say to a teenage mom who still wants to go to college?
MRS. OBAMA: I would say, good for you. (Laughter.) I mean, not to be funny. But no, I would say, excellent. But I would probably tell a teenage mother the same thing I would tell any young person who’s thinking about college. And I would say, think about what you want to get out of college and think about it thoroughly. Think about the cost. Think about how you’re going to afford it. Think about, you know, what kind of loans you’ll have to take out to go. Think about the job market on the other end. Where are the jobs in this economy, and what kind of training and education do you need to get them?
So, you know, I want young people to end their educational career with success on the other side. And I would urge young people to think about how they define that success, right? And it’s unfortunate that young people have to think about that so early in their lives. I mean, when I was going to school it was a given that you’d go to college, whether you took out -- and I took out a lot of loan debt to go to college, because I went to a very expensive private school. My parents didn’t have money. So what you did was you took out loans.
But when I was going to school and you came out on the other end, there was probably a job waiting that could help defray the cost of those loans. When I went to law school, it was the same thing.
Now, I would urge people to know what that job is and to think about that in addition to thinking about getting an education.
So I think young people nowadays have to really think about the plan. You know, I’d urge you all to think about what are the jobs out there, what are you good at, where are your passions, and then work from there.
And also, the truth is, is that it’s going to change. So you may not know. And you may decide it’s worth the investment for me to go to a four-year college or go to a community college, because I need that baseline education and I’m going to incur that debt because in the end it’s going to prepare me for something bigger and better. And if you know that and you’re going into it thoughtfully, go for it. College is no joke because it is so expensive. But it is necessary in so many ways to prepare yourselves for the jobs for the future.
But the first thing is to get this right, to be focused in high school, so that when you leave here, the choices are yours, right? I mean, you don’t want to be opted out of college because you fooled around as a freshman and as a sophomore, right, because you were a knucklehead as a junior and a senior, that you weren’t thinking about anything at all. You don’t want those doors to be closed to you, because you weren’t ready, right?
So what that means is that you all have to do is focus on how to prepare yourselves. You remember what I said? Barack and I didn’t -- there was no magic dust sprinkled on us. But we were ready, right? And ready meant we came to school every day, right? We were on time. We didn’t cause trouble. We didn’t get into trouble. We learned to read and write well. We were ready, you know?
We had good relationships with our teachers. We got involved in outside activities. So then when it was time to apply to college, those options were ours to either choose or not, right? But it wasn’t because we weren’t ready and didn’t take the courses and, then, senior year you come to find out you needed four years of English and two years of a language and now you can’t go because you weren’t thinking like that, right? You want to be prepared for the opportunities so that these choices are yours. And you want to think about who you want to be and how you want to structure that, so that you have a plan.
Look, our daughter who is 12 is thinking about this stuff now. And she is a little interesting, right? I mean, we weren’t thinking about this stuff at 12. But she is thinking about it at 12. And it’s important for you all to know that there are kids out there that are being trained to think about this stuff at 12, right? At 12 years old, they’re thinking, okay, what courses do I need to take, and how do you get into the best schools and what are they looking for, and what do I have to do now to get myself ready?
You don’t want to be in 12th grade thinking about that stuff. You want to think about it now, because the rest of the country and the world, the kids who are going to get these opportunities are preparing themselves every single day. So you don’t want to wake up one day and start trying to get it together. Get it together now. And that’s what I would tell a teen mom. And that’s what I would tell any young person thinking about college.
Does that make sense? Anything that doesn’t make sense, just let me know and I’ll try and clarify. Next? What else?
PRINCIPAL BRANCH: Okay, so we’re going to take just a quick break so that the media and such can excuse themselves. And then, it’s going to be your time specifically with the First Lady. So we’ll just pause for that.
MRS. OBAMA: Bye, press.
END
2:09 P.M. EDT
Joe Biden Joe Lieberman John Barrasso John Cornyn John Edwards
President Obama Signs Oregon Disaster Declaration
The President today declared a major disaster exists in the State of Oregon and ordered Federal aid to supplement State and local recovery efforts in the area struck by a tsunami wave surge on March 11, 2011.
Federal funding is available to State and eligible local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work and the repair or replacement of facilities damaged by the tsunami wave surge in Curry County.
Federal funding is also available on a cost-sharing basis for hazard mitigation measures statewide.
W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Homeland Security, named Dolph A. Diemont as the Federal Coordinating Officer for Federal recovery operations in the affected area.
FEMA said additional designations may be made at a later date if requested by the State and warranted by the results of further damage assessments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FEMA (202) 646-3272.
Statement by the President on the Passing of Geraldine Ferraro
Michelle and I were saddened to learn about the passing of Geraldine Ferraro. Geraldine will forever be remembered as a trailblazer who broke down barriers for women, and Americans of all backgrounds and walks of life. Whether it was as a public school teacher, assistant district attorney, Member of Congress, or candidate for Vice President, Geraldine fought to uphold America's founding ideals of equality, justice, and opportunity for all. And as our Ambassador to the UN Human Rights Commission, she stood up for those ideals around the world. Sasha and Malia will grow up in a more equal America because of the life Geraldine Ferraro chose to live. Our thoughts and prayers go out to her husband, John Zaccaro, her children and grandchildren, and their entire family.
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/03/26/statement-president-passing-geraldine-ferraro
Michelle Obama Mike Crapo Mike Enzi Mike Huckabee Mike Johanns
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
ObamaCare Is Central Front in Budget War
Even as they engage in heated battles over the budget and try to define a new agenda from their perch in the House of Representatives, conservatives clearly understand that the key to turning things around"‹—"‹to averting a debt crisis and defending the ideal of limited government"‹—"‹is winning the 2012 election. Only with a new president can they halt and reverse the leftward leaps of the past few years and address the increasingly dire consequences of six decades of welfare-state expansion.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/29/obamacare_is_central_front_in_budget_war_252904.html
Bill Richardson Bob Casey, Jr Bob Corker Byron Dorgan Carl Levin
In Libya, Inaction Was Not an Option
In 1938, President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed an international conference at Evian-les-Bains, France, to deal with the urgent problem of Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany. Representatives from 32 countries met for nine days, trying to come to grips with a humanitarian calamity. At the end, only the Dominican Republic agreed to admit additional Jewish refugees, and Hitler, observing matters from Berlin, concluded that the world would permit him to do with the Jews as he wished. He murdered 6 million of them.The Evian conference is not much mentioned anymore -- although it should...
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/03/29/the_high_toll_of_apathy_109370.html
Lamar Alexander Lindsey Graham Lisa Murkowski Maria Cantwell Mark Begich
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough
11:36 A.M. EDT
MR. CARNEY: Good morning, everyone. Thanks for coming to this morning’s gaggle. I just want to clarify that this is pen and pad only. It is not for broadcast of any kind. And with that, as you know, I have with me today Denis McDonough, the President’s deputy national security advisor.
Neither Denis nor I is here to preview the President’s speech. We are here to -- Denis can talk to you about the questions you have about -- substantive questions about Libya, what’s happening there or other issues, but we’re not going to get ahead of the President in terms of the -- what he will actually say in the speech.
So with that, why don't we get started?
Q Are you going to start?
MR. CARNEY: Ben.
Q Okay, well. (Laughter.)
MR. CARNEY: We can end it now if you like, or move on to other issues. (Laughter.)
Q We have a Denis McDonough sighting. It’s good to see you. I will make a run at something here. Can we -- even in a broad sense, can we expect the President to talk about the Libya conflict in the context of the broader Middle East and other aspects of what’s happening in this volatile region, or is this a Libya speech?
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, Ben, it’s nice to see you, and thanks for the opportunity to speak with all of you this morning.
I’m going to follow the guidance of my colleague Jay and not get into the contents of the speech today. Obviously, that will -- the President will lay that down tonight. And you’ve heard him talk about it generally. You heard Secretary Gates and Secretary Clinton talk about our case yesterday, and they surely put it in the context of the region and what’s happening in the region.
Q So going forward, once the U.S. has fully pulled back to this support role and the civilian protection and no-fly, how many ships, planes and service members will we have -- approximately will we have committed to this effort?
MR. McDONOUGH: I didn't understand the full -- I think like the fourth or fifth word you said when we pull back to this what?
Q Support.
MR. McDONOUGH: Oh, okay.
Q That's the word you guys have been using, right?
MR. McDONOUGH: I just didn't understand --
Q So when you guys pull back to the support effort, how many ships, planes and servicemembers will you have committed to this?
MR. McDONOUGH: I don't have a specific number for you, Jake, but --
Q Do you have a rough number, an idea?
MR. McDONOUGH: I’m sure the Joint Staff does, but I don't have that for you right now.
Q Tomorrow they’ll be convening a high-level conference in London to talk about the Libya situation going forward. And Secretary Clinton already mentioned that there will be -- as a post-Qaddafi era. Do you see this conference providing any kind of a way out for Qaddafi, a way, a sort of final “this is your last chance to leave quietly or else” kind of situation? Or is it not going to get quite that specific?
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, we’re obviously very gratified that the U.K. is going to be leading the conference. And Secretary Clinton will obviously be participating as our representative. We do think it’s very important to spell out an end-state, a vision of where this goes. And it’s also very important that we have the opportunity to work that jointly with our allies and with all the countries -- all of our partner countries. So you’ll see a big Arab League presence, as we understand it. And obviously, as the Secretary indicated over the weekend, that you’ll see a presence of Libyan opposition, as well.
So we -- I’m not going to get ahead of the conference because it is a U.K.-led effort. But we do expect that there will be some amplification of the political end-state. And what the Libyan people can expect, which, as the President has made clear throughout this effort, that the bottom line here is that they need to have a greater say in their own future -- something that they have not had for 41 years.
Q And on Syria, the situation continues to deteriorate there. The Syrian forces have been firing on protestors again today. Can you give us a sense of -- is there any sense within this administration that -- of taking acting against Syria, similar to what’s being taken by a coalition against Qaddafi of Libya? And where do you see the whole situation heading?
MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, I’m not sure what you mean by “similar” -- the similar sets of actions, Matt, but --
Q Military action.
MR. MCDONOUGH: There has not been any discussion of that. What we have made clear through various channels is that we expect the Syrian government to respect the rights of Syrians to peacefully protest; that they -- as we’ve made clear across the region, that Syrians have every right to expect that their certain universal aspirations and values be respected, and we’ll continue to communicate that to the Syrian government and to others.
Q I noticed the French President and the British Prime Minister put out a joint statement on Libya, and why wasn’t President Obama part of that?
MR. CARNEY: I’d have to see the joint statement. I don’t know, Dan.
Helene.
Q Hi, Denis. Can you -- now that you’ve set the precedent in Libya, are you guys worried at all that now since we went into Libya that other countries and people -- other countries in the Arab region, including Syria or Bahrain or other places that blew up, are going to expect American intervention? I mean, are you worried at all about the Libya precedent?
MR. MCDONOUGH: Hi, Helene, it’s nice to see you, too.
Q What about the rest of us? What about us?
MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, you didn’t start your question by saying, “Hi, Denis.” (Laughter.) Just trying to keep it real here. (Laughter.)
Q Hi, Denis.
MR. MCDONOUGH: Hi, Dan. (Laughter.) You know, we don’t -- I think it’s very important that we see each of these instances, as the President has said since the beginning in the region, as unique; that obviously there are certain aspirations that are being voiced by each of these movements. But there’s no question that each of them is unique nationally, that each of them, frankly, is nationally motivated; it’s not an international thing by any means.
So we don’t get very hung up on this question of precedent. What we do -- because we don’t make decisions about questions like intervention based on consistency or precedent. We make them based on how we can best advance our interests in the region. And I think you heard Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates spell that out yesterday.
So do we worry about what’s happening in the region? We worry about it an awful lot. Do we worry about setting some false set of precedent? We don’t, because we’ve been very clearly communicating why we’re doing certain things in certain instances and not in others, and we’ll continue to do that.
Mostly, however, we’ll continue to respect the fact that each of these movements is a national and unique reaction to certain developments in their countries, and we’ll try to do our best to make sure that we recognize that, as we have kind of since the beginning of this effort.
Q But you’ve sort of -- with the Libya case, you’ve sort of made the argument that civilians were in danger and there was a responsibility to protect. I mean, if that becomes the case in Syria, is that --
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think we’ve made the case -- we’ve made the argument that each is very unique. And I think you’ve heard Ben and Tom and Secretary Gates and Secretary Clinton and others spell out exactly why we believe Libya was unique. And insofar as we believe it’s unique, we believe it doesn’t set a precedent that should create any expectations in that regard.
Mara.
Q Very nice to see you, Denis.
MR. McDONOUGH: Nice to see you, Mara. (Laughter.)
Q Two questions. One, you said it’s important to spell out the end-state. Could you describe the end-state that you want to see?
MR. McDONOUGH: I think you’ll hear more and more about that from Secretary Clinton in the course of the next couple days, so I’m not going to beat to that.
Q You don't -- do you know what the end-state is that you want to see?
MR. McDONOUGH: We do, yes. We’ve been working on --
Q You just don't want to talk about it?
MR. McDONOUGH: No, I want to make sure that my bosses have the opportunity to talk about it.
Q Okay. The second question about precedent, just to follow on Helene. In the Saturday radio address, the President said that if we didn't do this, other dictators would be emboldened to use force against their own people. Isn’t that by definition the idea of a precedent; that you’re doing this to prevent other dictators from doing the same thing? Doesn’t that suggest that if they do it, they’re going to get the same response?
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think that, again, to take it back to where -- what I was saying to Helene -- the fact is that each of these instances is unique, and I could spell out each of the Libya examples which makes it unique: the fact that we had very unsettling and insightful language -- inciting language from the government, to include that he would use no mercy, or that he would go door to door and find people in their closets; his history -- threatening the King of Saudi Arabia; being behind an attack on American citizens, as has been very well spelled out in Pan Am 103; the fact that we had indications of the planning around the use of such violence against individuals.
All of those speak to the unique developments in Libya, and the reason why the President thought it was so important to send a very clear signal that in the event that -- as we did, for example, in the run-up to the elections in Sudan, making clear that the Sudanese leadership understands, as it relates to Darfur and otherwise, that we continue to watch developments, that we continue to be on top of them, and that the international community will hold leaders to account if they don't live up to their expectations.
Does that mean that every time we have to lead an international coalition to intervene militarily? Absolutely not. But --
Q But he seemed to describe this as a kind of deterrent or even a precedent --
MR. McDONOUGH: There’s a lot of ways to --
Q -- where he says that if we didn't do this --
MR. McDONOUGH: I think there’s a lot -- I think what the President is referring to, Mara, is that there is a lot of ways to deter the kind of hateful actions that we’ve seen too often over the course of time.
That could mean, obviously, increasing the amount of time and attention we focus on these issues, making sure that people are understanding that we’re accumulating reporting as it relates to the mistreatment of individuals. And we’ve done that in Sudan. We did that in Libya. We continue to make that case as it relates, for example, in the Libya case, by having the ICC referral in the first resolution out of the Security Council.
So, again, the idea that since we intervened -- since we had led an international coalition to shape the environment for an intervention in Libya means that we have to intervene everywhere else just belies the fact that we don't intervene based on precedent or based on a certain set of consistency guidelines but rather so that we can advance our interests. And each of those interests is going to be unique in each instance.
Q Denis, you said you won’t address the substance of tonight’s speech. How about the procedure? Why is this not in the Oval Office? Why is it at NDU?
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think it’s very important to go down to NDU, which is a place where we have mid-career officers from each of the services who are currently serving or who have -- many of them just come back from tours overseas. But if you just line it up, Chip, about what our military is doing right now -- undertaking an enormous effort in Japan to support our Japanese allies in this moment of great trial; continuing the effort in Afghanistan to ensure that Afghanistan does not again become a safe haven for al Qaeda; winding down our effort in Iraq so as to ensure the hand-over at the end of this -- at the end of next year, so that we are in a position to shape the environment using our unique assets and capabilities in Libya so that we can hand off to our allies.
Q So he’ll be addressing all --
MR. McDONOUGH: So he wants to send a very clear signal to the folks there to that regard. But as it relates to whether it should be in the Oval or somewhere else, I think that that's probably better addressed to somebody else.
Q Will he be addressing all those issues tonight that you just went through?
MR. McDONOUGH: I’ll let the speech speak for itself later on.
Q Well, what about the argument that has been widely reported, or at least commentated that he’s doing it to downplay the importance of the Libya operation -- that's why he’s not in the Oval Office.
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, you know, we’ve had meetings every day with the President, and the President is meeting every day either telephonically, in person -- including over the weekend -- with the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Vice President, General Ham, Secretary of State and his National Security Advisor because of the importance he attaches to it. The fact is that he attaches great importance to it. And as I think each of you has heard him say, no issue weighs more heavily on him and he attaches no greater importance to any issue than the decision to send our men and women in uniform into conflict.
Wendell.
Q Denis, is our part of the heavy lifting basically done now in Libya?
MR. McDONOUGH: I think that we feel great -- I think the President feels great pride in the good work of our Marines, soldiers, airmen, sailors because of the remarkable and successful work that they’ve done in turning back, as he said in the speech -- or in the address on Saturday, in turning back the potential onslaught in Benghazi, Ajdabiya, and other places. So I think he feels very proud of their work.
I don't know if you want to characterize it as heavy lifting or whether the important support missions that the President referred to going forward, I think those are -- ultimately come at a big sacrifice with our troops deployed overseas and doing things away from their families. So I think that's all -- I always consider each of those deployments for our guys to be a heavy lift because they are taking time away from their family and doing things that are -- that the President is calling on them to do.
So I don't want to get into the business of characterizing which is heavy and which is light, but I do know that he’s very proud of the work that they’ve done.
Q Can this be called a “Mission Accomplished” moment?
MR. McDONOUGH: I think we’ll -- the President in his address on Saturday laid out what he thinks about what’s happened so far, and I think he’ll discuss that more tonight.
Chuck.
Q Denis, two things. One, I want to follow up on Helene’s question. The President on -- I believe it was on Tuesday in El Salvador said one of the justifications for doing this in Libya had to do with the fragile status of Tunisia and Egypt. So this is a case -- I mean you’ve been making this argument, each -- everything is unique, and yet this was a case where he felt one of the justifications has to do with what’s going on in the region. So can you square that with a Syria, with a Bahrain, with a Yemen?
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I’d have to go back and look at the specific comment in El Salvador, Chuck. But I think the reference there is to the fact that both Tunisia and Egypt, which I’ve -- Tunisia being the first, Egypt being kind of the center of gravity for the region and historically a real bellwether and leader for the region -- are going through important transitions. And I think that insofar as you saw a humanitarian crisis engulf Libya and lead to a mass exodus of people, either to Tunisia or to Egypt, I think that what he is referring to there is the fact that that would not be in our interests, particularly at this time of delicate transition.
Q But looking to Syria, Syria is -- while Egypt culturally the center of the Arab world, Syria has been at the center of pretty much every Middle East conflict this country has ever dealt with.
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, again, Syria is an important country, and I think I’ve said -- I think I’ve made our case on that one, Chuck. I mean, we’re going to continue to make clear to the government that they ought to respect and -- respect the Syrian people’s ability to peacefully protest, peacefully speak their minds. And insofar as you want me to try to approach this as if what we’re going to do in one country works exactly the same way in another country, I’m just not going to go there because that's not how we operate.
Q And then do you have an estimate on cost? Do you feel as if you’re going to need --
MR. McDONOUGH: I don't have an estimate on that, but I think that's being worked.
Q And comfort level with the Libyan opposition -- has it grown over the last -- because you were very careful early on not to -- almost as if to say, it’s not necessarily that America is taking sides, but it’s trying to clear -- trying to create a fair fight, I guess.
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think what we’re trying to do, as I indicated earlier, that we’re -- rather than get into a characterization of the Libyan opposition, because I think that's quite a broad movement of people. You had the people -- shopkeepers and others -- and even in Tripoli, those first several days who were protesting and saying that the mistreatment that they’d been under for so long was -- needed to end. I think they’re part of the opposition. I think those people in Misurata right now who are pinned down by government forces are part of the opposition.
So I think it’s not just the forces that are carrying out this effort as they head back west from Benghazi. It’s not just those individuals, but I think it’s individuals that we saw in those first several days -- shopkeepers, students and others. And there’s no question that they have every right to be heard on this.
Q Denis, can I take another shot since you didn’t answer my --
MR. McDONOUGH: I don’t know what the rules are, Jake, in terms of --
MR. CARNEY: Let me get a few more because we’re going to -- I don’t want Denis to have to stay here too long. So why don’t we -- Laura.
Q Thanks.
MR. McDONOUGH: Hi, Laura.
Q Hi. What is your assessment of the situation on the ground in Libya right now? And could you speak -- including the weekend events. And could you speak to the timing of the speech today, why this is the right moment for the President to be addressing the nation on this?
MR. McDONOUGH: I think the -- I’ve been very impressed by the reporting from many of your colleagues, which I think has been intrepid and I think it’s -- they’ve given us as good an understanding of what’s going on the ground any given day. And I think if you look kind of across the region and the great risk that many of your colleagues are taking to report for the American people, I think it’s very admirable -- not only admirable, but I think very accurate. And so much of the reporting we see reflects a lot of what we’re seeing in other sources.
So I think my assessment is not going to be much different than yours, Laura, which is that the opposition is -- has regained some momentum; that that momentum is feeding some sense of opposition -- or some sense of momentum throughout the country, not just in the east.
And that as it relates to timing, I think that the President has been -- has talked to many of you about it, and each of you has talked with others about in the administration -- has been talking to the American people about this since that Friday afternoon, and talking to Congress about it, really, since a couple of weeks before that when we had a kind of regular series of interactions and briefings and hearings and otherwise on this important issue. But I think he just thinks that given that we are approaching the moment that he indicated would be days not weeks whereby we would begin to transition to our allied lead, he thinks that would make sense to do that now.
Q But why does it make it sense to address the people at the moment when we’re transitioning as opposed to at the moment when we’re getting into it? I mean, why is this the -- is it sort of a --
MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, I disagree a little bit with the premise of the question because he did address the issue when we were getting into it.
Q Well, not in the same length, certainly.
MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, I mean, he gave a very good -- very complete set of remarks on that Friday, which obviously was preceded by a very good meeting with the bipartisan, bicameral leadership down in the Sit Room, another one of those which he did last Friday. Intermittent -- or in between there, we obviously had a series of interactions on the staff and member level on that. So we’ve been engaged with the American people on this throughout and we think this is another good opportunity to do that.
MR. CARNEY: Why don’t we just do two more. Peter and then April.
Q Denis, the Egyptian news agency is quoting the Arab League, as you may know, as saying that it would like to see a stop to the military operations to clear the way for some sort of a political solution. Do you have -- what would your reaction be to that? And is this any indication of sort of a split from the portrayal that the President has been offering that the Arab Leagues is on board, too?
MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think the Arab League will be present, members and other -- members and Arab League functionaries will be present tomorrow in London, so they’ll have an opportunity to discuss it there.
Q If I could just jump in real quick on terms of a transition to -- Denis, if -- Denis McDonough -- if I could just make this transition. When you talk about the transition, going forward do you see the U.S. playing anything -- once the transition is complete, anything other than a supporting role? Or is it once we’ve crossed over into supporting role, are we in a supporting role for -- and just in Libya, keeping it Libya specific?
MR. MCDONOUGH: I mean, I think the -- I think as Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates talked about yesterday that we -- we’ve been working very closely with our allies and with our partners; been intense -- intense planning being done over at the North Atlantic Council to ensure that our -- the alliance can take over each of these functions. And so obviously we’ll continue to support that, but we don’t see anything beyond that.
MR. CARNEY: And April, you’re last for Denis. And I’ll stay and take questions on other issues or similar issues, but I want to let Denis get back to work.
April.
Q Good morning.
MR. MCDONOUGH: Hello, April.
Q How are you? All right, with this military action in Libya, how is the administration looking at reshaping or continuing, even, its message to the Muslim world? You had Iraq, you have Afghanistan, and now Libya. And then also, prior to the military action and Libya, how often did President Obama talk with his commander at AFRICOM, then Commander Kip Ward? Because we know he talks to Petraeus and other commanders, but how often did he keep in touch with AFRICOM, especially knowing the buildup -- potential buildup into Libya?
MR. MCDONOUGH: I’m forgetting first question, April.
Q The first question is the Muslim message.
MR. MCDONOUGH: Oh, right. Well, the message continues to be the same, which is that I think if -- as you look at this, the -- obviously the Arab League and the Gulf countries strongly endorse the idea of a no-fly zone expressly because I think they were worried about the potential threat to Muslims in Libya as a result of the actions of the government.
We, obviously, continue to express the same kind of messaging that we have kind of throughout this, basically since the Cairo speech, but also throughout this effort and this series of reform and changes in the region, which is that there are certain aspirations which are universal. And people, regardless of their religion or ethnicity, ought to have the opportunity to express them. And we’ll continue to underscore that as we have here and abroad going forward.
As it relates to AFRICOM, the President -- I guess I could probably try to find a calendar, April, of expressly when he met with him. But, for example, before we had these series of daily briefings that the President has been having with his team, he had had dinner earlier in the week with his combatant commanders, and General Ward and General Ham were both there, the outgoing and incoming from AFRICOM. And then of course around Sudan, the planning for the referendum contingency planning there for, the President was in touch with AFRICOM and its leadership.
Q When was this dinner?
MR. McDONOUGH: He has an annual dinner here at the White House with the combatant commanders.
Q Can I follow up on April just real quick --
Q Let me finish --
MR. McDONOUGH: So oftentimes -- so the President has regular interactions with his team, but then many of the interactions are then incident-specific or issue-specific. So, for example, he does have the monthly SVTCs with General Petraeus, General Mattis, and others, as it relates to Afghanistan.
Q On Libya -- just real quick on the message to the Muslim world and the universal aspirations, because the message has been very similar to Syria and Jordan and Bahrain and Yemen, and yet your Nowruz message to Iran was really quite different. It was very specific. You mentioned names. You were very condemnatory. And then when you went on to speak to the youth, you came sort of this close to saying that if they rose up, you would support them. That's quite different from what you’re saying to the rest of the world.
MR. McDONOUGH: I’m going to let the President’s Nowruz message speak for itself. It’s become an annual effort here where the President communicates with the Iranians and others who are celebrating Nowruz, and so I think I'll let the message speak for itself.
Thanks, Jay.
MR. CARNEY: Thanks, Denis. So I’m here for more questions. We don't want this to go on for too long. But, Jake, yes.
Q There was a report out of West Point in 2007 about the people going through Syria to get into Iraq to fight U.S. troops, and that report had about a fifth of those going in to fight U.S. troops from Libya. There was also a Libyan opposition group that was affiliated with al Qaeda. And my question is, how concerned is the administration about the possible presence within this broad group of Libyan opposition figures that there are those who fought jihad against the United States in Iraq, or are affiliated with al Qaeda or affiliated groups?
MR. CARNEY: Well, Jake, what I'll say is that we have obviously spent a lot of time looking at the opposition in Libya and speaking with opposition leaders. Denis spoke a little bit about that just moments ago. I don't have anything for you on a specific concern. But what we have seen in Libya is something that's national and organic, where, as we’ve seen in other countries, the people of Libya have expressed their desire for greater participation, greater voice in their government, more representation.
But beyond that, I don't have anything specific on elements of the opposition that would be of concern.
Q How confident is the President that whatever comes next after regime change happens, assuming it does, which is the stated policy of this White House, that it will be better for the United States and in our interests -- that government?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I'll share Denis’ opinion that I don't want to get ahead of the Secretary of State, who, as I think you noted, will be addressing this issue to some degree in London tomorrow.
But I will say that in general, this is obviously a situation in the region where there is a lot of unpredictability. But the President believes strongly that it is -- serves the U.S. national interest and national security interests to be on the right side of history and to, as he did with regard to Egypt and as he has with regard to situations across the region, to support the democratic aspirations of the people, to support political dialogue between governments and their people, and that an outcome that results in greater pluralistic, democratic representative governments in the region will increase prosperity, stability and therefore -- and also be good for the United States of America.
Ben.
Q Jay, it sounds like the speech is an attempt to -- the President to explain and recap for the American people why the U.S. got involved, what its goals are, and what's happened, and where we go from here, as opposed to a new policy speech; a chance for people who haven’t been paying attention to every news conference and radio address to kind of hear it all in one place. Is that the right way to think about this speech?
MR. CARNEY: Ben, I’m not going to deviate off of our promise not to characterize or describe or use language from the speech. Obviously, he’s going to speak about Libya, but I don't want to -- while others -- (laughter) --
Q Can we get that -- that has to be off camera? (Laughter.)
MR. CARNEY: Can you -- you all can tweet that, all right? But Chip was asking about whether we’re going to talk about some other countries. But I don't want to -- I’m not going to steer you away from what you just said, but I don't think that I want to go into any detail about his speech because I think it’s important that it comes from him.
Q Well, what does the President want to accomplish?
MR. CARNEY: He will be speaking to the American people tonight to communicate about this very important issue, as he has on a number of occasions leading up to and through the decision to use military force in a coalition with our international partners in Libya. He thinks it’s an essential part of his job as Commander-in-Chief and as President to communicate with the people, just as with the people of this country about an issue this important, and just as he does -- just as he thinks it’s an essential part of his job to communicate with members of Congress, which I think we discussed a lot in earlier briefings.
Q Jay, just to follow up on that, a number of times you and Denis have said you’re going to hear more about -- we’ll hear more about this from Secretary Clinton tomorrow. Will the President leave things unexplained that Hillary Clinton will explain, or tonight will he answer the basic questions --
MR. CARNEY: Laura --
Q I’m not saying what he’s going to say, I’m just asking --
MR. CARNEY: -- just say what he’s not going to say.
Q Well, I’m trying another way. Will the questions that members of Congress have been asking be answered tonight, in terms of what he sees as the end-game -- you don't have to tell me what he’s going to say -- just, do you think that he’ll satisfy those questions, which have been coming from both sides of the aisle, or will he also leave that for the Secretary of State?
MR. CARNEY: No. Look, I was echoing what Denis said, specifically on the issue of what an end-state looks like in Libya and the fact that the Secretary of State will be discussing that question in London. But beyond that -- and the President will obviously use this opportunity to answer the questions that the American people have, as well as members of Congress have, about his decisions with regard to Libya. But I’m not going to -- you can keep trying, but I’m not going to characterize it more than that.
Q The problem that we have is that once the speech is delivered, it’s not like we can come back and then have this moment to say what his goals were.
MR. CARNEY: We’ll talk tomorrow.
Q But we’re going to all have to write about it tonight, so if you could just give us a sense of what the --
MR. CARNEY: But, Laura, he will speak at some length tonight about it, and he’ll do it well, and I think that you ought to --
Q I’m not suggesting he won’t.
MR. CARNEY: He’ll do it, I’m sure, better than I could from here. So I’d just point you to the speech.
Margaret.
Q Thanks. Without talking about the speech, will we -- will Americans have a better sense about what to expect in the rest of the region? In other words, I know each country is case by case and we’re trying to balance what are the U.S. interests against everybody’s desire for more freedoms and democratization and stuff, but is the new formula that if there’s a multilateral willingness to act and a multilateral agreement that a group-Western action would behoove everybody’s interests? Is that kind of the new parameter? There are all these other countries where all this other stuff is happening, and I think there’s two questions on Americans’ minds, right? One is what’s going to happen in Libya; and one is, when Libya is over, what’s going to happen everywhere else. Is the President going to talk about that? And what guidelines can you set forth for how that works?
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, without getting into the contents of the speech, I will say that every country is different. And -- as Denis said -- and we don't -- but there are overarching principles, which I’ve discussed and others; the President himself has discussed, which we -- he looks at this -- which he carries with him as he looks at the situation in the region and the specific countries where unrest is occurring and that is: nonviolent response; political dialogue; the universal rights of citizens. And that guides him.
These are the principles that he enunciated in Cairo in 2009, and those principles guide the way he views what’s happening in the region now. But again, our response -- our policy response to each country will be different because the countries are so different -- not both in their -- what their governments are like; what the cultural makeup is like; the size; the response that the government is using when there have been protests; the international community’s response.
Again, on Libya, do not forget that we had a United States -- I mean United Nations Security Council resolution -- two of them, and in terms of the use of the kinetic force, we had 1973. And beyond the UNSC, we also had support from the Arab League. We had support in a request from the Libyan opposition for precisely what the Security Council resolution allowed for, which was -- to go back to some questions we’ve had before -- that the Libyan opposition did not ask for the use of international force to create regime change, it asked for the help that we have given them in terms of a no-fly zone and the other assistance that's been provided. So these are unique set of circumstances.
Ann.
Q Why is the President not delivering this from the Oval Office? Why in an auditorium? Is it not -- and not primetime but at 7:30 p.m.? Is he trying to not make this speech comparable to other Presidents who have announced war efforts?
MR. CARNEY: I think giving an address that's going to be covered by the -- we hope by all the major networks and cable channels is -- signifies how important we think this is. As Denis mentioned, the National Defense University is a very appropriate place to give a speech like this, given the tremendous engagement and sacrifice that our armed forces have been making around -- Libya being the case specific right now, but around the world in different areas; and one area that Denis mentioned that people tend to forget because it’s not a traditional military operation, and that's the assistance provided to our allies in Japan.
And I think there are different venues to do this. It’s still -- it is the President speaking to the American people and -- at a time when we expect a lot of Americans will be home and able to watch.
Q Will he speak at all directly to any of the opposition voices in Libya, Yemen --
MR. CARNEY: Again, I don't want to preview the contents of the speech.
Laura.
Q Thanks. In the joint declaration made by Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron on Libya, which was just released, they are saying that they are insisting on a new beginning for Libya, and they're saying at the end, we must unite to help them make again a new beginning. Can we expect the President tonight to have something different than that?
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I’m not going to get into the contents of the President’s speech, Laura, but I will say that, broadly speaking, the President has made it clear that he thinks Libya deserves a new beginning and that Colonel Qaddafi is no longer a legitimate leader of Libya, both in the eyes of his people or in the eyes of the world.
Stephen.
Q The advances of the rebels over the weekend appear to be possible because the coalition airplanes got there first and bombed the Libyan positions. Is that the policy now, moving from the defensive mission, which it was in Benghazi, to prepare the ground for the rebels’ advance? And is the coalition prepared to do that all the way to Tripoli?
MR. CARNEY: In terms of tactical military operations, I think the Defense Department is better suited to answer that question.
Q But that's a strategic question --
Q But that’s not -- yes, that’s not tactical.
Q But are you confident that what was taking place was compatible with the resolution protecting civilians? Is that -- is attacking military positions, the Libyan --
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I think that the Defense Department is better suited to answer some of these questions. But I think that the civilian protection aspect of the revolution -- not a revolution -- of the resolution allows for taking action in order -- if the military forces were in question here, Qaddafi’s forces are -- are and have been attacking Libyan civilians, that goes right at the heart of the resolution and the mission it authorizes.
David Corn.
Q Thank you. What is the President going to say tonight? (Laughter.) Critics on the left or right and voices in the media have talked about there being some confusion in the public over the President’s aims and the goals and intentions of this mission. Do you believe that from the very start the White House has communicated effectively with the public about what the President is thinking regards to the Libyan action?
MR. CARNEY: Absolutely, yes. No, David, seriously, I think -- I want to get at this question, because somebody over the weekend on one of these shows suggested that -- or claimed outright that the White House had suggested that some of the questions raised by members of Congress were illegitimate. No one in the White House ever said that. I certainly never said that from this podium.
Questions are legitimate. They deserve to be answered. We have endeavored to answer them from the President, to the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, National Security Advisor, Deputy National Security Advisor, and the Press Secretary and others.
So they’re all -- they are legitimate questions. And it is understandable that there is complexity here that needs to be explained and we have tried to explain, which is that there is the military mission, the goals of which are quite clearly laid out in the resolution authorizing the use of force in all necessary measures.
And then there are the over -- and there are the other baskets, the other tools. I think Secretary Gates said it well that we have more than just hammers in our toolbox here, and the things that we are doing unilaterally as the United States, but also in concert with our international allies, to put pressure on Qaddafi and isolate Qaddafi, that is also very much an important aspect of our policy.
And I think that where you see the question of confusion come up is this idea that because we have stated, the President has stated, that we do not believe Qaddafi is a legitimate leader and that he should leave power, and yet we are not authorizing our military -- or the U.N. Security Council resolution is not authorized to take out or remove or effect regime change in Libya, that there is somehow confusion in that.
There is a military mission designed to protect civilians, to enforce a no-fly zone. And there is a policy of this administration that we are pursuing through other measures that seeks to isolate and pressure Qaddafi to the point where he leaves power.
Q To follow up on that, Mitt Romney has attacked the President for being nuanced and timid on other things. Do you think that having a policy that has these different levels is just hard to explain in a hyper-media --
MR. CARNEY: I would just say, David, we’ve tried to explain it and I think -- when it’s explained well and clearly, that it is understandable. And the President has done that on a number of occasions, and again the American people will hear him speak to it tonight.
Yes.
Q NRC Chairman Jaczko is in Japan right now. Do you have any information? Was he instructed by the White House to go there in any capacity?
MR. CARNEY: I know that he is in Japan, but I don't have his -- I mean, it’s an independent agency, so I don't believe he was instructed by the White House. But obviously I think the fact that he’s there reflects the intense engagement between the NRC and its Japanese counterparts, the number of experts the NRC has had in Japan, trying to assist our allies there. And the fact that the chairman is there, I think, reflects that commitment.
Q May I follow up on that?
MR. CARNEY: Yes.
Q Thank you, Jay. So on the situation in Japan, what's the latest assessment by the administration on the situation on the ground? About a week ago the situation seemed to be -- stopped getting worse, but now Japanese officials are now saying that there may be a leaking from a core of a reactor. Is the situation deteriorating again, or what's your sense of that?
And secondly, on the ripple effect of the Japan earthquake on the U.S. economy or the world economy, a week ago General Motors announced that they laid off 59 people because of the disruption of the parts from Japan. What's your sense of the impact of the earthquake on the U.S. economy and the world economy?
MR. CARNEY: Let me take the economic question first. We continue to believe that while this is a very serious situation and has immediate impacts economically, that the -- we have great confidence in the resiliency of the Japanese people and the strength of its economy and believe that Japan will recover, and that is good for -- obviously for Japan but also for all of its trading partners and for the United States.
On the issue specifically with the reactors, I think the NRC is better suited -- or the Department of Energy -- to get into the specifics. What I can tell you is we obviously monitor it a lot very closely from here. The President gets constant updates. Our national security team is focused on this, continues to be focused on it. And we are aware of the fact that while the world’s attention has shifted to other areas, that the situation in Japan remains serious. And that's why we have committed so many resources to helping the Japanese in any way that we can with that problem.
Yes.
MR. EARNEST: Jay, we should just do last one --
MR. CARNEY: This is the last one, yes.
Q Thank you, Jay. And following up on the diplomatic talks to achieve U.S. stated goal of getting Qaddafi to leave, can you elaborate a little bit on -- beyond financial sanctions? What are they?
MR. CARNEY: Well, there were a lot of things that were laid out in the initial United Nations Security Council resolution, but they are -- the financial sanctions are important; the travel restrictions are important; the referral to the International Criminal Court is very important.
I mean, part of this is aimed directly at Colonel Qaddafi, but obviously a lot of it is aimed at those around him who have to make a judgment about what their lives will look like if they continue to stand by Colonel Qaddafi and -- with the full understanding that they will be held accountable by the international community. And we obviously encourage the people around Colonel Qaddafi and the Libyan regime to consider that very carefully, consider the future of their country, the future of their people and their own personal futures in making decisions in these next days and weeks.
Thanks, guys.
END
12:23 P.M. EDT
Daniel Akaka Daniel Inouye David Vitter Debbie Stabenow Dennis Hastert
Readout of Vice President Biden's Visit with Volunteers for the 25th Annual National Disabled Veterans Winter Sports Clinic
Earlier today, Vice President Biden greeted volunteers during registration for the 25th annual National Disabled Veterans Winter Sports Clinic in Snowmass Village, Colorado. Over 600 volunteers will participate in the week-long program that brings together nearly 400 veterans with disabilities through adaptive winter sports. The clinic is organized by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Disabled American Veterans.
Click here for a photo: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/vp_dav.jpg.
Mike Enzi Mike Huckabee Mike Johanns Mitch McConnell Nancy Pelosi
Monday, March 28, 2011
Libya & the Timeliness Paradox
Here is one lesson we can draw from the mostly negative media commentary about the Obama administration’s actions in Libya: Presidents get more credit for stopping atrocities after they begin than for preventing them before they get out of hand.The U.S.-led NATO intervention that stopped mass killing in Bosnia in 1995, for example, came only after 200,000 people had already been killed.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/28/libya_amp_the_timeliness_paradox_252825.html
Evan Bayh Frank Lautenberg George H. W. Bush George LeMieux George Voinovich
Readout of President Obama's calls with Brazilian President Rousseff, Chilean President Pi�era, and El Salvadoran President Funes
President Obama called Brazilian President Rousseff, Chilean President Piñera, and El Salvadoran President Funes today to express his appreciation for their hosting of the First Family during a successful trip to Latin America this past week. President Obama highlighted the productive conversations carried out with the three leaders and followed up on several initiatives launched during the trip. With President Rousseff, he underscored the importance of the new bilateral Economic and Financial Dialogue and the Strategic Energy Dialogue; with President Piñera, he thanked Chile for its leadership in co-sponsoring UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Resolution on Iran that was approved on March 24; and with President Funes, he agreed with the Salvadoran leader on the importance of our partnership on Citizen Security in Central America and reaffirmed El Salvador’s participation in the Partnership for Growth initiative.
Bill Clinton Bill Nelson Bill Richardson Bob Casey, Jr Bob Corker
The Routinization of Humanitarian War
“Humanitarian imperialism.” I think that label will stick. And in a true empire–in this case, the empire of UN approved human rights enforcement–war never really ends. Always someone to protect somewhere. Imagine living in imperial Britain in the mid-19th century. There would almost always be a war or police action–actual shooting and killing–going on.** For a true empire to work– even, or perhaps especially, a humanitarian empire–war has to be routinized.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/28/the_routinization_of_humanitarian_war_252826.html
Violence Returns to Jerusalem
The counterman at the snack-food shack called A Blast of a Kiosk spotted the ownerless valise next to the busy bus stop and called the police to report a suspicious object. While he was talking on the phone and simultaneously trying to shoo people away from the bag, the bomb went off, spraying the metal pellets that had been packed with the explosives.The kiosk got its name after it was destroyed in an-early 1990s suicide bombing at the same spot, in front of the Jerusalem Convention Center, and then was rebuilt and defiantly reopened.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/28/violence_returns_to_jerusalem_252804.html
Michael Bennet Michelle Obama Mike Crapo Mike Enzi Mike Huckabee
China's Repression Undoes Its Charm Offensive
I was asked to lecture at Beijing University on soft power, the ability to use attraction and persuasion to get what you want without force or payment. This was before the series of revolutions roiling the Middle East, in whose aftermath China is clamping down on the Internet and jailing human rights lawyers, once again torpedoing its soft-power campaign. The auditorium that day was packed, and I had been told that more than a thousand articles have been published in China on this topic.
Roland Burris Ron Paul Ron Wyden Rudolph Giuliani Russ Feingold
Sunday, March 27, 2011
U.S.'s Lose-Lose War Objective in Libya
My late father, a WWll veteran, never had much love for the military. Respect and a sense of duty, yes, but no love. He made this clear when I was a kid and we were watching the Army-Navy football game. "Who are you rooting for?" I asked, knowing how he felt. "I'm rooting for a tie," he answered. As I look at what's going on in Libya, with full consideration of who the players are, I'm rooting for the same thing.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/27/us039s_lose-lose_war_objective_in_libya_252771.html
Robert Foster Bennett Robert Menendez Roger Wicker Roland Burris Ron Paul
A Nuanced Call to Arms
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/27/a_nuanced_call_to_arms_252762.html
Mike Huckabee Mike Johanns Mitch McConnell Nancy Pelosi Newt Gingrich
Toast Remarks by President Obama at Official Dinner in San Salvador, El Salvador
8:25 P.M. CDT
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Buenas noches. President Funes, First Lady, former Presidents Christiani and Saca, distinguished guests -- on behalf of Michelle and our daughters, thank you for the wonderful hospitality that’s been shown to us here in San Salvador.
As many of you know, this has been my first trip through Latin America as President, and this is our final night. We are closer to home. I mean this in more than just a geographical sense. El Salvador is one of those places where the bonds between the United States and Latin America are strongest.
Just about every Salvadoran has a loved one or a friend in the United States -- husbands and sons, mothers and daughters -- working hard, sacrificing every day. They strengthen my country, and they mean so much to El Salvador. And they’re very much in our thoughts tonight.
In my speech in Santiago yesterday, I said that Latin America is not the stereotype of a region in perpetual conflict or trapped in an endless cycle of poverty. I repeat that tonight because many look at a country like El Salvador and only see the struggles. I’m proud to work with President Funes, a courageous leader, to meet those challenges together, as partners.
But I also want take this opportunity to pay tribute to the side of this nation that is too often overlooked, which is just as real and just as important. It’s the El Salvador that endures -- even when the earth shakes and the floodwaters rise -- because Salvadorans are a people who persevere.
It’s the El Salvador that has struggled for justice and human rights -- and, along with President Funes, I was honored to visit the cathedral this evening and pay my respects to Archbishop Romero, who remains an inspiration to people all around the world. And I see the current archbishop here. We’re very grateful for the wonderful tour that you offered.
It’s the El Salvador that not only forged historic accords, but has sustained them for nearly two decades --proving, in the words of your national anthem, that “happiness is found in peace.”
And it’s the El Salvador that gets up every day and goes to work -- students, merchants, farmers, young entrepreneurs, business people -- who remind us that building a just and prosperous future cannot be the work of government alone; it must be the responsibility of all who love their countries.
Of peace enjoyed in perfect happiness
El Salvador always nobly dreamed,
To achieve this has been Her eternal struggle,
To keep it, Her greatest glory.
With these words, I’d like to propose a toast -- if I can get a glass. (Laughter.) To President Funes and the First Lady, for their outstanding hospitality and friendship, and to the peace and happiness that we seek, for our peoples, for the region and for the world. May we not only achieve our dreams, may we keep them, for this and for generations yet to come. Salud. (Applause.)
END
8:30 P.M. CDT
Sheldon Whitehouse Sherrod Brown Susan Collins Ted Kaufman Ted Kennedy
Readout of the President's Meeting with Members of Congress on Libya
On March 25, President Obama briefed a bipartisan, bicameral group of Members of Congress on the situation in Libya. The President and his team provided an update on accomplishments to date, including the full transfer of enforcement of the no-fly zone to NATO, and yesterday’s unanimous agreement among NATO allies to direct planning for NATO to assume command and control of the civilian protection component in accordance with UNSCR 1973. Following the briefing, the President answered multiple questions from the Members of Congress. The discussion lasted approximately one hour and took place in the White House Situation Room.
Joining from the Administration
Chief of Staff Bill Daley
National Security Advisor Tom Donilon
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (via phone)
CJCS Mike Mullen
GEN Carter Ham (via via video conference)
Bipartisan bicameral group of members of Congress that participated (in person or by phone)
Speaker John Boehner
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi
House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell
Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl
Representative Adam Smith
Senator Carl Levin
Senator John McCain
Senator John Kerry
Senator Richard Lugar
Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Representative Howard Berman
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Senator Saxby Chambliss
Representative Mike Rogers
Representative C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger
Senator Daniel Inouye
Senator Thad Cochran
Representative Hal Rogers
Representative Norm Dicks
Richard Shelby Robert Foster Bennett Robert Menendez Roger Wicker Roland Burris
Chaos in Syria & Jordan Alarms U.S.
WASHINGTON — Even as the Obama administration defends the NATO-led air war in Libya, the latest violent clashes in Syria and Jordan are raising new alarm among senior officials who view those countries, in the heartland of the Arab world, as far more vital to American interests. Medics treated a wounded man, who later died, after security forces fired on protesters on Wednesday in Dara'a, Syria. Deepening chaos in Syria, in particular, could dash any remaining hopes for a Middle East peace agreement, several analysts said. It could also alter...
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/03/27/chaos_in_syria_amp_jordan_alarms_us_252752.html
Chuck Schumer Claire McCaskill Colin Powell Condoleezza Rice Daniel Akaka
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs Dan Restrepo and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes
4:06 P.M. EDT
MR. CARNEY: Okay, good afternoon, everyone. We have no opening statements, but I have with me again today Ben Rhodes, the Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications, and Dan Restrepo, who is the Senior Director at the National Security Council for the Western Hemisphere. And so we’re all here to take your questions.
How do you want to start?
Q Jay, I’m interested in any kind of readout you can give us of the President’s meeting today on Libya?
MR. CARNEY: I’ll let Ben take that.
MR. RHODES: Well, the President this morning had a call with his senior national security team on Libya. That included Secretary Gates, Secretary Clinton -- or actually, no, I’m sorry, I think Secretary Gates was meeting with the Prime Minister of Egypt. So it was Secretary Clinton, Admiral Mullen, General Ham, Tom Donilon, Bill Daley, and Denis McDonough and Tony Blinken.
The President started by getting an update from General Ham on military operations in Libya, including the progress that’s been made around Benghazi and also the efforts to protect the people of Libya in Misurata, as well as, again, the enforcement of a no-fly zone, which is increasingly being done by allied and partner planes.
They also reviewed the ongoing discussions at NATO about the transition that will take place regarding command and control efforts and the enforcement of a no-fly zone. And they reviewed diplomatic progress on a range of other issues associated with our efforts in Libya.
Q So what is the update on progress? Is there any more clarity as of this meeting in terms of Qaddafi’s ability to take on his own people or the timeline of transition to other forces for the U.S.?
MR. RHODES: Well, I think, first of all, it’s very important to point out that, in the first instance, this intervention was taking place to prevent an imminent humanitarian catastrophe, a potential massacre of thousands if not tens of thousands of people in major population centers like Benghazi, Misurata, and other places where Qaddafi’s forces were advancing.
And I think it’s important to underscore that Qaddafi’s forces have pulled back from Benghazi. And right now we’re similarly focused on trying to protect the people of Misurata as well.
So in the first instance there’s this immediate humanitarian objective I think that is the focus, frankly, of this phase one, along with the shaping of the conditions for a no-fly zone.
In terms of the timeline on transition, I think that is still being discussed at NATO. Those discussions will continue. I think as I said yesterday, there is an agreement that NATO is going to play a very important role in the command and control. Again, the exact structure and relative participation of different countries is what they’re continuing to discuss, and they will do so, again, tomorrow. But again, I think this is going to be a matter of days in which you see a movement towards a transition with regard to command and control.
Similarly, you already see an increase in the extent to which the no-fly zone, the enforcement of the no-fly zone piece of the effort in Libya right now is being undertaken by allies and partners. You see, again, a number of allies stepping up with different contributions as well.
So at the same time that we’re working through the command and control issue, we’re working to get contributions, clarity on contributions from a broader and growing range of coalition partners.
Q Ben, on the subject of coalition participation, Germans are stepping back from their involvement in the coalition. Do you have any reaction to --
MR. RHODES: Stepping back from --
Q I believe the Germans are stepping back, reducing their involvement in the coalition.
Q They’ve pulled their ships.
MR. RHODES: Well, look, Germany -- I mean, I think there’s no secret that Germany has had reservations about participating in military enforcement. They abstained from the resolution, so I don’t think that -- so, again, I think their hesitancy to be a robust participant in this has always been something that we were aware of.
Again, I think if you look at a broad range of countries, to include of course the United Kingdom and France, but also Italy, Spain, the Dutch, several other European partners, the Turks are talking about what their contribution might be, as well as Qatar. And then we continue to talk to other Arab states like Jordan and the UAE. Different countries are going to have different contributions to make here. I think we’re pleased that you see an expanding -- most of those countries that are coming forward with contributions, and at the same time that we are getting those efforts onboard, we are working through the final issues related to command and control, which, again, is an important thing to get right on the front end so that you have the best structure in place. And, of course, what you want, as I think I said yesterday, is a situation in which you have the full capacity to make use of the -- NATO’s unique ability to bring command and control assets to bear to a situation like this while also recognizing that you have a coalition that extends broader than NATO itself as well.
So, again, those are the discussions that are taking place in Brussels; they’re ongoing. We’ve made progress each day. And we expect to have this transition in place in a matter of days.
Q Ben, in the congressional briefings, Congress was reportedly told that this is not a war. Can you confirm that? Can you elaborate on that? And if it’s not a war, what’s the right way to characterize this operation?
MR. RHODES: Well, I mean, I wasn’t in those particular briefings. But again, I think what we’ve said is that this is a military operation that will be limited in both duration and scope. Our contribution to this military operation that is enforcing a U.N. Security Council resolution is going to be limited -- time limited to the front end, and then we’ll shift to a support role.
So I think what we’re doing is we’re enforcing a U.N. Security Council resolution. We’re taking -- we’re undertaking a military operation to protect the people of Libya. But that military operation is going to be, again, limited in both time and scope, and that’s the position we took to Congress, although I wasn’t in the precise briefings, so I couldn’t --
Q But it’s not going to war, then?
MR. RHODES: Well, again, I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone. Obviously that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end. But again, the nature of our commitment is that we are not getting into an open-ended war, a land invasion in Libya. What we are doing is offering a unique set of capabilities over a period of days that can shape the environment for a no-fly zone.
Q What have you been doing during the flight, the President been doing during the flight, and what sort of communications have there been?
MR. RHODES: He’s spoken a number of times to Tom Donilon to get updated on the situation. Beyond that, he hasn’t made additional calls.
Q Are there any plans today, once he gets back, to call any world leaders?
MR. RHODES: None that I’m aware of. I expect that there will be a number of calls to foreign leaders over the next coming days.
Q Ben, how do you respond to the critics who have said that the administration viewed it as essential to get international coalition support for this operation, including Arab League support, but has not viewed it as similarly essential to get congressional support for this operation?
MR. RHODES: Well, look, I’d say two points about that. First of all, we would like congressional support. We’ve consulted with Congress throughout this process, again, consulted before we took military action, and continue to brief Congress and, again, welcome congressional support and believe it’s very important to have a very close and ongoing dialogue with Congress about what we’re doing in Libya.
In terms of the importance of multilateral support, I think that it’s fundamental to America’s interest that the President of the United States would ensure that we are not undertaking this action alone. Were we to do so, the costs would be far greater for the American military, the American taxpayer. Again, the questions around timeline and the enduring nature of our responsibility to enforce a no-fly zone would be far more ambiguous. So, again, by taking the time to get international support for this effort, not only did we increase the legitimacy of the effort, and not only did we expand the number of partners both in the region and around the world who are supportive of this effort, but we’ve reduced the cost significantly to the United States in this undertaking.
And frankly, it also is a uniquely international challenge when you have -- and regional challenge -- when you have somebody undertaking these kinds of atrocities. It’s important that it not just be the United States’ responsibility to deal with that but that you have regional powers and international partners participating as well.
Q What’s your latest information on Muammar Qaddafi’s status -- his physical status, his political status?
MR. RHODES: Well, again, I think what you’ve seen in recent days is Qaddafi’s own forces that had been advancing at a very rapid pace across Libya are no longer making those advances; that you had masses of Qaddafi’s forces advancing imminently on Benghazi, for instance, which is what caused us to take the urgent action that we did. And they are no longer doing that, and they are pulling back from Benghazi.
So -- and you have similar instances around the different parts of the country where, again, his forces are facing a challenge that they didn’t before, and it’s affecting their ability to harm the Libyan people.
Again, as to his own political standing, that’s something that we’ll watch closely. We certainly saw the comments that came out from him yesterday. But what is clear is that he is no longer advancing in a way that poses the same threat to the Libyan people as it did a week ago.
Q I thought he was still being pretty aggressive in Misurata, his forces there. Are you concerned about what’s happening in that situation?
MR. RHODES: We’re concerned about it, but I think you’re actually seeing some indications that the effort of the coalition is, again, is focused on Misurata and is having an effect there. So that is certainly an area that we’ve been concerned about, continue to be concerned about.
When the President spoke at some length about the situation in Libya on Friday, he singled out a number of population centers, and the first two were Benghazi and Misurata. And so, again, those are -- that is something we’re concerned about, and I think you’ve seen over the course of the last day or two Misurata be a focus of the coalition.
Q What does the intelligence tell you about who it is that the allied forces are fighting exactly? Qaddafi’s forces? How many are actually Libyans? How many are mercenaries? Where are the mercenaries from?
MR. RHODES: Sorry, say that one more time.
Q Who are the people we’re fighting? How many of them are Libyans? How many are mercenaries? Where are the mercenaries coming from?
MR. RHODES: Well, there have certainly been -- there are certainly forces that are Libyan that are loyal to Qaddafi who have been -- played an important role in these advances. There are a set of military units that are particularly close to Qaddafi, again, that have been playing an important role, even as you had some military, particularly in the east, essentially defect from under Qaddafi’s rule.
There’s also been clearly the use of mercenaries as well. And that’s, for instance, why the U.N. Security Council resolution also authorizes actions to try to prevent -- try to work with the neighboring governments to try to prevent the flow of mercenaries into Libya so that he cannot draw upon that as a source going forward.
And when you look at, again, some of the additional efforts -- I know there’s so much focus on the efforts in the air -- but the enforcement of the arms embargo, which NATO agreed to carry out going forward, and the enforcement, again, of the -- stopping the flow of mercenaries is a further part of the tools that we have to bring to bear in terms of diminishing Qaddafi’s own resources and his ability to brutalize his own people.
Q Is there any thought being given to a presidential address to explain to the American people a little -- in more clarity what this mission is and those issues about how long it will last, et cetera?
MR. RHODES: Look, I think -- I’d say two things. First of all, the President thinks it’s very important to communicate clearly and consistently with the American people about something as important as the type of military action that we’re taking in Libya. I would argue that we have communicated on a very regular basis over the last several days. You had the President make a statement on Libya on Friday at the White House in which he laid out precisely the case for why he felt this was important, why he felt it was in our interest, what we were doing, who the coalition we were doing it with was, and what the type of timeline would be for our engagement. He had that statement on Saturday where he spoke to the initial authorization of the use of force. And of course, over the course of the last two or three days at press conferences, he’s had the ability to speak to Libya, as well as in interviews. And in a letter up to Congress, he again detailed his case for the intervention.
That said, we’re certainly going to be looking for additional opportunities for him to continue to speak to the American people about the situation in Libya, again, keeping in mind that part of that is speaking to a dynamic and fluid situation in which we will have a responsibility to both explain, again, very clearly what we’re doing, but also updating people on the evolution of our engagement and the evolution of our involvement and what is transpiring in Libya.
So, again, without specifically speaking to one speaking appearance, it’s certainly going to be the case that the President will continue to address the situation in Libya in the coming days.
Q Jay, do you have any details about the President’s schedule tomorrow and Friday?
MR. CARNEY: As of now there are no public events tomorrow. He has meetings in the White House, a full day of meetings. And then on Friday, also no public events, with the exception of the Greek Independence Day reception Friday evening. That obviously could change, but as of now that’s the schedule.
I just wanted to add one other thing on one of the questions that Ben answered, and that is we obviously take very seriously, as Tom Donilon, Ben and others have said, the need for congressional consultations. And we have done them and will continue to do them.
I would also say that it’s important to remember that in the run-up to this action, we were criticized somewhat -- in fact, fairly frequently -- by those who felt like we weren’t moving quickly enough, and now some are criticizing us for not going -- for going too quickly, and what the President did was make an action based on -- make a decision based on an imminent threat of a humanitarian nature to a great number of Libyans, and he has done that with a great number of consultations with Congress that will continue. But I think it’s important to remember where we were a week ago and where we are now.
Q Jay, can you or Ben on the schedule just tell us precisely why the President is leaving early or left early from El Salvador, and whether concerns about him being seen sightseeing at the time of this military action played into that decision?
MR. RHODES: Look, insofar as we left early, it was by an hour. I think all it was was we felt that there was a good opportunity for him to see the cathedral and the tomb of Oscar Romero yesterday, and this morning he was able to have a call that he’s had every single day on this trip, basically the same secure conference call with the same people, while his family, again, was able to engage in a cultural stop.
So, I mean, it really was just a matter of scheduling, nothing beyond that.
Q Question for Dan? Just very quickly, do you think that this trip achieved its objectives, particularly with the distractions?
MR. RESTREPO: It certainly did. One of the primary objectives of this trip was to underscore the importance of the Americas for the United States and for President Obama. I think we saw that throughout. It was also about setting a course on a relationship of working in partnership with countries throughout the Americas as we have an increasing number of capable partners in the region.
I think we made significant progress on moving the economic and commercial relationship with Brazil forward that will benefit the United States in the medium to long term; in Chile as well made important progress on cooperation on disaster response, on trade, both in terms of enforcement of the existing trade agreement between the United States and Chile and particularly intellectual property rights enforcement improvements by the Chileans, as well as moving forward on the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
And then in El Salvador, underscoring the importance of setting in motion and working with the Salvadorans to set in motion sustainable economic development that also has medium- to long-term benefits for the United States, as the President discussed yesterday with regard to immigration. And on citizen security, evolving our relationship in the region on citizen security as we’ve brought more partners to the table, more capable partners in the region -- Colombia, Chile, Canada, Mexico -- to work together with the United States and the countries of Central America to address something that very much has a bearing on the well-being of the United States.
So, all in all, I think the trip was very successful in underscoring the importance of the Americas to this President and to the United States.
Q Thank you.
END 4:25 P.M. EDT