Obama: Gadhafi should go

WASHINGTON – For the first time, President Barack Obama called publicly and personally Thursday for Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi to go, said he had authorized U.S. military aircraft to help evacuate refugees at the Libyan border and said the U.S. might need to intervene more there to get food to starving civilians.

The president’s remarks came during a news conference at the White House, where he stood with visiting Mexican President Felipe Calderon.

On Libya, when he was asked whether he has a broad doctrine for military intervention, Obama said his doctrine was “no violence against citizens” and “we stand for freedom and democracy.”

“I don’t want us hamstrung,” the president said.

But he stopped short of calling for a no-fly zone to prevent Gadhafi from using airstrikes against those who are seeking his overthrow, or calling for military assistance to them. He said that while he was “looking at every option that’s out there” he also was mindful that doing more could raise geopolitical problems.

Obama’s reluctance to use military force in Libya’s civil upheaval is putting him at odds with key players in Congress.

Obama first called for Gadhafi to leave power five days ago, but he did so indirectly, through a printed White House statement that described a private conversation he’d had with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. In making the demand Thursday in person before TV cameras that “Col. Gadhafi needs to step down from power and leave,” Obama turned up his volume, but still he didn’t say what he’s willing to do to make it happen.

The president said he recognized that without foreign intervention, “there is a danger of a stalemate that over time could be bloody.” Gadhafi is thought to have killed hundreds and perhaps thousands of civilians since the uprising against his repressive 42-year regime began two weeks ago.

Even so, Obama hinted that the United States, spread thin by two long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have inflamed Muslim resentment of America, may not be ready or willing to take sustained unilateral action. He repeated his desire to coordinate any action with other nations.

“What I want to make sure of is that the United States has full capacity to act potentially rapidly,” he said.

He signaled reluctance for any intervention that might stir more resentment against the United States.

Recalling how Egyptian protesters forced Hosni Mubarak from power last month, Obama said that one of the “extraordinary successes” then was “the full ownership that the Egyptian people felt for that transformation. That has served the Egyptian people well. It serves U.S. interests well. We did not see anti-American sentiment arising out of that movement in Egypt precisely because they felt that we hadn’t tried to engineer or impose a particular outcome, but rather they owned it.”

While the administration insists that “all options are on the table” to remove Gadhafi, senior officials have also signaled they have no taste for imposing a no-fly zone over Libya.

Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates has criticized “loose talk” about a no-fly zone, which he called a major effort that would be tantamount to an attack on an Arab state. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the administration is far from such a decision, warning of the need to avoid perceptions that the U.S. wants to “invade for oil.”

But in Congress, both liberals and conservatives have embraced the idea.

Democratic Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a customary Obama supporter, said that the U.S. and allies “should not be on the sidelines” as Gadhafi attacks the Libyan people. This week, the Senate adopted a nonbinding resolution calling for the United Nations Security Council to impose a no-fly zone.

A number of senior Republican lawmakers, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona; Florida’s Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; and Michigan’s Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House intelligence committee, have endorsed the idea.

Rogers said the no-fly zone also could deter Gadhafi from striking rebels with his chemical weapons and offers the U.S. a way to “project power without getting engaged on the ground.”

David Cortright, of the University of Notre Dame’s Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, said Obama strove for weeks during the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt to show the public that he was siding with the demonstrators against their rulers.

But now, the debate over the no-fly zone “has again put Obama in a difficult spot,” Cortright said. With public sentiment strongly against Gadhafi, “Obama could take a lot of heat for not helping the Libyans get rid of this guy,” Cortright said.

The idea of help from Western forces has been winning support from some Libyan rebels, who in recent days had emphasized their desire to avoid outside military intervention, fearing it could lead to a repeat of the occupation of Iraq.

But on Wednesday, as Gadhafi forces showed their staying power in battles with the insurgents, members of a newly formed “interim national government council” in rebel-held Benghazi, Libya, signaled they might need more firepower.

They said they wanted not only a no-fly zone but also strikes against the government’s strongholds and military equipment.