The Obama administration discounted speculation Thursday that U.S. forces had taken on a heightened role in the Libyan conflict, even as CIA officials were dispatched to aid rebel forces amid swirling debate about arming the opposition against President Moammar Gadhafi. Speaking on Capitol Hill, Defense Secretary Robert Gates vowed the United States would not send ground troops to Libya “as long as I am in this job,” a declaration made against the backdrop of handing the military operation over to NATO command Thursday.
Though White House officials refused to comment publicly on any CIA presence in Libya, administration sources argued that an intelligence presence should hardly be equated with deploying combat troops since CIA personnel are stationed in virtually every country worldwide.
However, Gates was openly hesitant about equipping the rebels with weapons, an approach that Obama has not ruled out.
“My view would be, if there is going to be that kind of assistance to the opposition, there are plenty of sources for it other than the United States,” Gates told the House Armed Services Committee.
Critics have assailed the administration for the lack of an endgame in Libya, which they insist could lead to a prolonged stalemate and trigger deeper military intervention to topple Gadhafi.
And others have questioned the potential fallout of arming rebels, considering many of those in the opposition camp are hardly allies of the United States, including members of al Qaeda.
Yet, the administration continues to cite Gadhafi’s demise as inevitable in light of the continued diplomatic and military pressure being placed on the dictator who has ruled the country with an iron fist for more than four decades.
Moussa Koussa, Gadhafi’s now ex-foreign minister, fled Libya for Great Britain, where intelligence officials are pushing him for sensitive information on the embattled Libyan leader.
“If there was ever a sign that the sort of inner circle surrounding Moammar Gadhafi was crumbling, it was the defection of Moussa Koussa yesterday to the United Kingdom,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said. “So we believe that the pressure is obviously having an effect, and we will keep it up with our partners.”
But Gates reminded lawmakers that Gadhafi is nowhere near ready to leave power. The defense secretary told the House committee that Gadhafi’s forces still outnumber rebels 10-to-1.
And the White House argues that simply overwhelming Gadhafi militarily would compromise the political objective in Libya.
“Does the United States have the capacity to unilaterally with military force produce regime change in Libya or another country?” Carney said. “We probably do. Is that a desirable action to take with — when you have your eye on the long game here in terms of Libya’s future, the future, the interests of the United States in the region? No.”
Still, others were concerned by a response they contend took far too long to materialize.
“[Obama’s] timing in Libya is like a [doctor] giving a pregnant woman an epidural, the day after she has the baby,” said Ari Fleischer, former press secretary for President George W. Bush, on his Twitter account. “He [should] have acted sooner.”
