United States President Barack Obama told journalists in London Wednesday that dislodging Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi from power in Libya will be "a slow, steady process in which we're able to wear down the regime forces and change the political calculations of the... regime to the point where they finally realize that they're not going to control this country."
Obama said he and British Prime Minister David Cameron had ruled out sending troops into Libya. "Once you rule out ground forces," he added, "then there are going to be some inherent limitations to our air strike operations. It means that the opposition on the ground in Libya is going to have to carry out its responsibilities."
Obama was speaking during a visit to the United Kingdom at a joint news conference with Cameron. Excerpts from the White House transcript of the news conference:
Journalist: Thank you very much indeed. Prime Minister, can you confirm that you plan to escalate the war in Libya by sending ground attack helicopters? And, Mr. President, can you confirm that United States will sit that particular mission out?
....
PRIME MINISTER CAMERON: Well, thank you for that. Lots of questions in there. First of all, the President and I agree that we should be turning up the heat in Libya. I believe the pressure is on that regime. You see it in the fact that the rebels have successfully liberated much of Misurata. You see it in the success in other parts of the country. You see it in the strength of the coalition. You see it in the growth of the National Transitional Council. So I believe we should be turning up that pressure.
And on Britain's part, we will be looking at all of the options for turning up that pressure, obviously within the terms of U.N. Resolution 1973, because we believe we need to keep enforcing that resolution, protecting civilians, pressurizing that regime so that the Libyan people have a chance to decide their own future. And within that, those are the options we'll look at.
....
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, I do think that we've made enormous progress in Libya. We have saved lives as a consequence of our concerted actions. I think it is important to note that we did so under a U.N.
mandate and as part of a broad-based international coalition that includes Arab countries. And I absolutely agree that given the progress that has been made over the last several weeks, that Qaddafi and his regime need to understand that there will not be a letup in the pressure that we are applying. And the United Kingdom, the United States, and our other partners are putting a wide range of resources within -- consistent with the U.N. mandate -- in order to achieve that pressure.
And I think we will ultimately be successful.
The goal is to make sure that the Libyan people can make a determination about how they want to proceed, and that they'll be finally free of 40 years of tyranny and they can start creating the institutions required for self-determination.
So in terms of historical analogies, I just want to underscore this is not the United Kingdom and the United States alone. We have a broad range of partners under an international mandate designed to save lives and ensure that we did not have the sort of massacre that would lead us then to look back and say to ourselves, why did we stand by and do nothing.
....
Q Thank you, Mr. President. You've said that Muammar Qaddafi's exit from Libya is inevitable and that the U.S. will continue with the campaign until his attacks stop. Does that also mean that you will commit the U.S. to that campaign until Qaddafi is removed from power? And would you be willing to commit additional U.S. resources if that meant speeding up Qaddafi's exit?
And, Prime Minister Cameron, do you believe that the U.S. and other NATO allies should increase their role in the Libya campaign, as other British lawmakers have suggested? Thank you.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I have said from the outset that our goal, the reason that we intervened in Libya, was to protect the people on the ground and to give the Libyan people the space that they needed in order to bring about a change towards democracy. And I also was very clear in terms of how we were going to participate.
We moved very heavily on the front end, disabling their air defense systems, carrying the lion's share of the burden when it came to setting the stage for NATO operations; and then that -- once the transfer took place to NATO command and control, that at that point our primary role would be a whole range of support that utilized America's unique capabilities. That's what we're doing. I also ruled out us putting any ground forces in Libya.
We have proceeded consistent with that. There are times where, for example, with our Predator capabilities, we have a unique capacity that we've brought to bear, and we will continue to do that. And the Prime Minister and I consistently discuss on a regular basis what can we all do to make sure that that pressure continues to apply.
I do think that is it going to be difficult to meet the U.N. mandate of security for the Libyan people as long as Qaddafi and his regime are still attacking them. And so we are strongly committed to seeing the job through, making sure that, at minimum, Qaddafi doesn't have the capacity to send in a bunch of thugs to murder innocent civilians and to threaten them.
I believe that we have built enough momentum that as long as we sustain the course that we're on, that he is ultimately going to step down. And we will continue to work with our partners to achieve that.
So we have not put forward any artificial timeline in terms of how long this will take. My belief is, is that the more resolute that we are now, the more effective the coalition is in rallying all the resources that are available to it, that we're going to be able to achieve our mission in a timely fashion.
One last point, and this speaks to the issue of whether there are other additional U.S. capabilities that could be brought to bear. David and I both agree that we cannot put boots on the ground in Libya. Once you rule out ground forces, then there are going to be some inherent limitations to our air strike operations. It means that the opposition on the ground in Libya is going to have to carry out its responsibilities. And we're going to have to do effective coordination -- and we are doing that -- with the opposition on the ground.
But I think that there may be a false perception that there are a whole bunch of secret super-effective air assets that are in a warehouse somewhere that could just be pulled out and that would somehow immediately solve the situation in Libya. That's not the case.
The enormous sacrifices that are being made by the British, by the French, by ourselves, by the Danes and others -- we are bringing to bear an array of air power that has made a huge difference. But ultimately this is going to be a slow, steady process in which we're able to wear down the regime forces and change the political calculations of the Qaddafi regime to the point where they finally realize that they're not going to control this country; the Libyan people are going to control this country. And as long as we remain resolute, I think we're going to be able to achieve that mission.
But there's not a whole host of new and different assets that somehow could be applied -- partly because we've been extraordinarily successful in avoiding significant civilian casualties. And that's been part of our goal, that's been part of our mission, is making sure that we are targeting regime forces in a way that does not result in enormous collateral damage. And that means we may have to sometimes be more patient than people would like. But ultimately I think it promises greater success, and it sustains our coalition and support for it, not just here but in the Arab world as well.
PRIME MINISTER CAMERON: Thank you. I so agree that the two key things here are patience and persistence. That is what the alliance is demonstrating and needs to go on demonstrating.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Julie, I'd just make two points. First of all, I think the President and I completely agree on this point of, of course, the U.N. resolution is not about regime change; the U.N. resolution is about protecting civilians from attack and taking all necessary measures to do so. With that said, most political leaders, including the two here, have said it's hard to see how you implement U.N. Resolution 1973 with Qaddafi still in control of his country, which is why we've been so clear about Qaddafi needing to go and needing to leave Libya.
In terms of the U.S. role, I would make this point, which I'm not sure is widely understood in Britain or in Europe -- is already a huge number of the sorties and the support and the air assets that are actually bringing the pressure to bear are U.S. assets. There was this enormous effort at the beginning, as the President said, but also a sustained amount of assets that have been used.
And as the President said, there are also the unique assets and capabilities that the U.S. has that others don't have that are so vital.
And as he said, we all have to ask what is it that we can all do to make sure the pressure is really brought to bear. That is what the British are doing, the French are doing, the Americans are doing. And I know we'll discuss this in the margins of the G8.
But I'd just make this point, as well. As well as the military pressure, don't underestimate the pressure of building up the opposition, the contacts we have with the National Transitional Council, the fact that they are opening offices and building support and strength from the allies. Don't underestimate the extent to which we're now cutting off oil products to the regime because they're using them in their tanks and their other military equipment -- and also the other steps that I know Americans and others are taking to try and release Libyan assets back into the hands of the National Transitional Council and recognizing them as the right interlocutor for us to speak to.
So in all those ways, we can keep this pressure up over the coming period while showing patience and persistence at the same time.
....
