US CONTRIBUTION:THE US wielded the most firepower in the opening stages of the attack on Libya, belying the claims of US leaders that it is merely playing a supporting or "enabling" role.
Until another military leader for the coalition is chosen, international forces are under the orders of Gen Carter Ham, the head of the US African command. Gen Ham briefed President Barack Obama and his national security team via conference call yesterday morning.
Mr Obama is visiting Brazil, and it fell to Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, to explain on the Sunday morning television talk shows why the US was attacking another Muslim country, eight years to the day after George W Bush started the Iraq war.
Speaking from Brasília on Saturday, Mr Obama stressed that he had authorised “a limited military action in Libya in support of an international effort to protect Libyan civilians”.
He said he acted with reluctance: “This is not an outcome that the US or any of our partners sought . . . I am deeply aware of the risks of any military action, no matter what limits we place on it . . . The use of force is not our first choice and it’s not a choice that I make lightly.”
The president said the US would “contribute our unique capabilities at the front end of the mission” but added that “the enforcement of a no-fly zone . . . will be led by our international partners . . . We will not – and I repeat, we will not – deploy any US troops on the ground.”
In the event, up to 25 vessels, including the USS Mount Witney command ship, participated in the attack on Libya’s command and control system, according to Vice-Admiral Bill Gortley, the director of the joint staff. “We are on the leading edge of a coalition military operation,” he said.
At least five US vessels – the destroyers Stout and Barry, and the submarines Scranton, Florida and Providence – fired Tomahawk cruise missiles at targets in Libya. The Pentagon did not confirm a CBS News report that B-2 stealth bombers attacked Libyan air fields and defence sites yesterday.
Admiral Mullen’s television appearances added to confusion surrounding US actions. On March 3rd, Mr Obama demanded that Col Gadafy leave office. But Admiral Mullen said yesterday it was possible that Col Gadafy could remain in power after the military operation ended. “We’re not going to put any boots on the ground. This isn’t about occupation in any shape or form,” he said.
America’s top military officer could not say how long the US will be involved or how long the no-fly zone will stay in place. He admitted that US forces were under “stress and strain” from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but said, “We are within our capability and capacity to be able to execute this mission.”
Parallels have been drawn with Iraq, where a no-fly zone was enforced for 12 years while Saddam Hussein remained in power. Under the protection of a no-fly zone, Benghazi and eastern Libya could become virtually autonomous, like Iraqi Kurdistan in the 1990s.
Democratic senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the armed services committee, said that although the US was leading the military operation at present, “We’re looking to hand off that leadership in the next few days.” Britain, France and Arab nations will take control of the mission, Mr Levin said.
Mr Obama received conflicting advice from his own top advisers, with three women – secretary of state Hillary Clinton, UN ambassador Susan Rice and Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council – advocating intervention on moral grounds.
Three men – defence secretary Robert Gates, national security council chief Tom Donilon and counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan – led the pragmatists and sceptics, who believe that Libya is not a vital US interest and that Washington can ill-afford plunging into this conflict without an exit strategy plan.
Too little is known about the opposition that the international coalition is supporting, the sceptics say. And the attack on Gadafy could ultimately favour the emergence of radical fundamentalists.
Mr Brennan has expressed concerns that Col Gadafy will retaliate against western powers by mounting terrorist attacks, as he did repeatedly in the past.
There are also fears he might seize western reporters in Libya. Four New York Timesjournalists have been held by Libyan authorities since March 15th, despite a promise by Seif al-Islam Gadafy on March 18th that they would be released.
And the regime keeps 10 tonnes of mustard gas at the Rughawa site, south of Gadafy's home town of Sirte, the Washington Postreported.