´óÏó´«Ã½

Commentators discuss US President Barack Obama's strategy over the Libyan uprising.

Mr Obama appears in no hurry to see Gaddafi go, perhaps because the president fears that a revolution in Libya could open the door to Islamist terrorism:

"Would Obama prefer a Gaddafi victory? If that sounds implausible, then just look at the record. On March 3, Obama announced that Gaddafi "must go". Two weeks have passed since then - and more than a month since the uprising began on February 15. In the interim, the tide of war has turned in Gaddafi's favour. Yet Obama has done nothing to make his own words reality. Every proposal - from the no-fly zone and aid to rebels, to recognition of a provisional government - has somehow become bogged down... The Obama administration may not care to admit it, but it did make a decision, and one of benefit to Gaddafi. Why? Perhaps President Obama reasoned something along these lines: "Yes, Gaddafi is a very bad guy... But things could be worse. Tribal leaders, fighting each other, inspired by Islamic ideology - all just 300 miles from the coast of Sicily?"

The director of the Foreign Policy Initiative, that the American president "continues to dither" over Libya:

"Although [Obama] insists that all options are on the table, his administration has failed to outline a plan that could conceivably help the Libyan rebels oust Qaddafi and end the bloodshed. The weak American response pales in comparison with countries such as France - which has recognized Libya's revolutionary council as the country's legitimate government and has contemplated airstrikes - and even the Arab League, which endorsed a no-fly zone over the weekend... It is not too late. Obama should listen to those inside his administration and in the international community who believe that the United States should act to prevent further bloodshed. If he does not, Libya will become the latest in a long list of cases in which the United States, once again, ends up on the wrong side of history."

In :

"Increasingly, US and European politicians and media hawks are insisting it's all because the west has shamefully failed to intervene militarily in support of the Libyan opposition. The Times on Wednesday blamed Barack Obama for snuffing out a "dawn of hope" by havering over whether to impose a no-fly zone in Libya... But Saudi Arabia's dangerous quasi-invasion of Bahrain is a reminder that Libya is very far from being the only place where hopes are being stifled. The west's closest Arab ally, which has declared protest un-Islamic, bans political parties and holds an estimated 8,000 political prisoners, has sent troops to bolster the Bahraini autocracy's bloody resistance to democratic reform."

But  Mr Obama to intervene:

"Of course, no one in Europe or the United States wants another quagmire in the Muslim world, and the latest polls drive that point home. According to the Pew Research Center a resounding 63 percent of Americans say the U.S. has no responsibility to act in Libya. A plurality opposes a no-fly zone, a huge majority is against airstrikes, almost half are against sanctions... So what's a leader like President Barack Obama to do? Well, one might say, "lead." Because, whether war-weary Americans want to believe it or not, the lack of direction in American policy right now - opposing Gaddafi but finding every excuse not to act against his forces - is going to be hugely damaging to their interests. As Jane Kinninmont of Chatham House in London put is, "The United States faces a crisis of credibility in the Arab world." And that translates into all sorts of dangers."

a conversation between Mr Obama and a White House foreign policy adviser:

Adviser: "The Brits are pressing for a no-fly zone over Libya."
Obama: "That's pretty easy to do when you've abolished the Royal Air Force What's he planning to police it with, a British Airways 737? Thank you for joining us on this routine patrol; we will be circling Benghazi for a few hours. Insurgents are invited to help themselves to snacks and drinks from our trolleys."
Adviser: "The French are also demanding actual intervention, Mr President."
Obama: "We're being out-hawked by the French?"
Adviser: "We think it's empty rhetoric, Sir."
Obama: "I'm being outgunned on rhetoric?"