Obama faces growing criticism for Libya campaign

Reporting from Washington—
President Obama is facing growing criticism at home and abroad over whether the military campaign in Libya is the wrong policy — or the right policy at the wrong time.

Obama, on a five-day tour of Latin America, defended his administration's muscular approach in Libya, saying it was "very easy to square our military actions and our stated policies."

Speaking in Chile, Obama said U.S. military forces would focus on the goal approved by the U.N. Security Council last week, preventing longtime leader Moammar Kadafi's army from attacking Libyan civilians. But he also reiterated that Kadafi should be removed.

He said the United States also would use nonmilitary means, including economic sanctions and an arms embargo, to try to end Kadafi's four-decade rule.

Obama sent a letter to congressional leaders Monday attempting to assure them that the administration was seeking a "rapid but responsible transition" of military command to other members of the United Nations-backed coalition. The letter followed complaints that he had failed to consult Congress before launching military action.

Political analysts say Obama could benefit if Kadafi is quickly ousted, or if there is another quick and relatively bloodless resolution. But if the conflict becomes a stalemate, criticism is likely to mount.

Complaints have already started to escalate. Some early advocates of military intervention, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), said Obama may have waited too long to help the opposition in Libya.

A contingent of liberal Democrats, normally allied with the president, condemned the use of military force. Some conservatives, as well as foreign policy experts, said Libya is not a vital U.S. interest.

An antiwar group announced plans for protests in Los Angeles, Chicago and nine other cities this week.

"The president seems to have angered almost every major group: He's either done too much or too little or he's done it too slowly," said James Lindsay, a former official in the Clinton White House who is now with the Council on Foreign Relations. "There's a very real political risk for Barack Obama in all of this."

Among the critics Monday was Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), ranking minority member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a widely respected voice on foreign policy who has often sided with the administration.

"There needs to be a plan about what happens after Kadafi," Lugar said. "Who will be in charge then, and who pays for this all? President Obama, so far, has only expressed vague hopes."

Read More

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-us-libya-20110322,0,7678106.story

House Republicans aim to repeal Obama healthcare law

President Barack Obama signs the health insurance reform bill in the East Room at the White House in Washington, March 23, 2010.

Republicans in the House of Representatives plan to pass a bill next week to repeal President Barack Obama's overhaul of the U.S. healthcare system, a senior party aide said on Monday, but the effort is widely expected to fail in the Senate.

The new Congress will convene on Wednesday with Republicans in control of the House after November's midterm elections. They are set to move ahead with their campaign promise to try to rescind the new healthcare law, one of Obama's signature legislative victories.

Brad Dayspring, a spokesman for incoming House Republican leader Eric Cantor, said the House plans to vote on legislation to repeal the healthcare law on January 12.

"It will pass the House," Dayspring said.

Although Republicans will control the House, 242-193, Obama's Democrats retain control of the Senate by 53-47 and are likely to block any repeal of the healthcare law.

"Obamacare is a job killer for businesses small and large, and the top priority for House Republicans is going to be to cut spending and grow the economy and jobs," Dayspring said.

Republicans, particularly from the fiscally conservative wing, were emboldened to attack the healthcare reform after a good showing in November's elections.

Senate Democratic leaders warned against repealing a healthcare provision that closes a coverage gap in the Medicare prescription drug program for seniors.

"If House Republicans move forward with a repeal of the healthcare law that threatens consumer benefits like the 'donut hole' fix, we will block it in the Senate," the Democrats wrote in a letter to incoming House Speaker John Boehner.

"Taking this benefit away from seniors would be irresponsible and reckless at a time when it is becoming harder and harder for seniors to afford a healthy retirement," the Senate Democratic leaders wrote.

Among other provisions, the healthcare reform extends healthcare insurance to millions of Americans without coverage, but opinion polls show voters are split over it. The reform has become a favorite target for Republicans who say it is an excessive reach by the federal government.

Even if repeal fails, Republicans will yield considerable sway over the government purse strings and try to use that power to deny the Obama administration's requests on financing to implement the new healthcare law.

Dayspring said the House will hold a procedural vote on Friday in preparation for the January 12 vote.

Read More

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70113W20110104

Senate vote on nuclear treaty may be defining moment for Obama

The upcoming Senate vote on a U.S.- Russia nuclear arms treaty may turn out to be a defining moment for the Obama administration's foreign policy.

If he wins the support of at least two-thirds of the Senate for the New START agreement in a vote that may come as early as Tuesday, President Obama could build on the victory as he turns to a long list of foreign policy challenges — including Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea and his broader plans to limit nuclear weapons.

Failure would be regarded in some world capitals as confirmation that the administration is too weak and preoccupied with domestic problems to put its stamp on world affairs.

With the Republican Senate leadership lined up against approving the treaty in the last days of a lame-duck session, the issue will be decided by a handful of GOP senators. Supporters are expected to vote to cut off debate on Tuesday, a step that would open the way for a final vote later in the day or on Wednesday.

The administration has made controlling nuclear weapons a major foreign policy goal and held out its "reset" of relations with Russia over the last two years as its most tangible international accomplishment. It views the New START treaty, which would reduce the ceiling on long-distance nuclear warheads by up to 30%, as the centerpiece of that relationship.

Russia has enormous influence in many key areas. It has close economic ties to Iran, including in civil nuclear power, and as a member of the U.N. Security Council, its cooperation is essential to pressure the Islamic Republic to accept limits on its nuclear program. Twenty years after Moscow ended its own war in Afghanistan, it has recently expressed a willingness to cooperate with the U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries there. And Russia is one of five countries engaged in sporadic talks with North Korea about its nuclear program.

Other countries will also be watching. The vote will probably help them decide whether it's in their interest to cooperate with Obama.

"At this point, he needs a foreign-policy win," said Paul Saunders, a former State Department official at the Nixon Center in Washington.

The vote comes at a time when world powers have been reassessing the administration's power in light of its midterm election setbacks, the unraveling this month of its strategy for Arab-Israeli peacemaking, and other reversals.

In Israel, some conservative political leaders have said they see Obama's poll numbers and political strength ebbing, and have urged their government to push back harder against administration pressure.

One Senate Republican aide said many world powers attach great importance to a government's ability to work out a major treaty with another world power.

"This matters a lot to them, and they've yet to see it," said the aide, who declined to be identified because he was not authorized to speak to reporters.

On Monday the Senate considered several possible amendments to the treaty, including one to increase the number of annual inspections of each country's nuclear sites, and a second to increase the number of allowable nuclear weapon launchers.

The last START treaty took three years to ratify in the 1990s, but most U.S.-Russia arms treaties have won overwhelming bipartisan support. As recently as this summer, supporters believed New START would coast easily to ratification.

The treaty has wide support among former leaders of the U.S. foreign policy establishment from both parties, and is generally viewed as an incremental step in scaling back the vast nuclear arsenals of the two Cold War rivals.

But the treaty aroused conservatives' fears of Russia, and became entangled in the broader political struggle over Obama's record.

In recent days, as the administration pushed hard for votes on contentious issues such as immigration and the treatment of gays in the military, the debate has become more embittered.

Saunders said he feared the final hours of deliberations had polarized the two parties on Russia issues in a way that "will be extremely unconstructive going forward." Even if Obama ekes out a victory, it will be a narrow one that may not inspire much confidence in Moscow or other foreign capitals, he said.

A rejection may make cooperation more difficult with the Russians on future nuclear arms reduction issues, but also on related issues such as the coordinated missile defense system the two countries have been discussing, Saunders said.


Read More

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-fg-new-start-20101221,0,756518.story?page=2