By Elisabeth Bumiller and Thom Shanker
WASHINGTON Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates told Congress on Thursday that he opposed having the United States arm the Libyan rebels fighting Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi and that it was up to other countries to provide them with weapons and much-needed military training.
Mr. Gatess comments made during a marathon day of testimony to members of Congress angered by President Obamas incursion into Libya were the first time that a key member of the presidents national security team had publicly expressed an opinion on the issue. The administration has been engaged in a tense debate over the merits of giving arms to the rebels and so far Mr. Obama has only said that he is weighing what to do.
What the opposition needs as much as anything right now is some training some command and control and some organization" Mr. Gates said. Its pretty much a pick-up ballgame at this point." But he said providing training and weapons is not a unique capability for the United States and as far as Im concerned somebody else can do that."
Mr. Gates also said he strongly opposed putting any United States forces on the ground in Libya. Asked if there would be American boots on the ground" uniformed members of the military Mr. Gates swiftly replied Not as long as Im in this job." He declined to comment on reports that the CIA is already working there.
Mr. Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff spoke in a highly politicized atmosphere on Capitol Hill where members of both parties charged them with mission creep" in Libya or not doing enough. Mr. Gates stony faced throughout the day found himself in the awkward position of having to defend a military action that he had been reluctant to get into in the first place.
Members of Congress who are angry about the administrations push into Libya expressed deep skepticism about President Obamas plans to limit the American involvement and end the conflict.
History has demonstrated that an entrenched enemy like the Libyan regime can be resilient to airpower" Representative Howard P. McKeon Republican of California and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said at the start of the daylong hearings in both houses of Congress concerning the allied assault on forces loyal to Colonel Qaddafi. If Qaddafi does not face an imminent military defeat or refuses to abdicate it seems that NATO could be expected to support decade-long no-fly zone enforcement like the one over Iraq in the 1990s."
Democrats too were circumspect. Many have asked Why Libya? " said Representative Adam Smith of Washington the top Democrat on the House panel.
In response Mr. Gates said in his opening statement to the House committee that American involvement would be limited and that in his view the conflict would probably end with Colonel Qaddafis removal from power either by economic and political pressures or by his own people.
But under questioning from Mr. McKeon Mr. Gates said he did not have a time frame for Colonel Qaddafis ouster. The bottom line is no one can predict for you how long it will take for that to happen" he said.
Mr. McKeon told the defense secretary that he was concerned about what he described as the disconnect between the American militarys stated mission of protecting Libyan civilians and Mr. Obamas political mission of removing Colonel Qaddafi from power. Im concerned that such a mismatch is a strategy for stalemate" Mr. McKeon said.
Mr. Gates replied that he felt strongly that the military mission must be a limited one and then obliquely referred to the war in Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein. We tried regime change before and sometimes its worked and sometimes its taken 10 years" he said.
Mr. Smith asked why the administration did not notify Congress before launching some 200 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Libya and striking at Colonel Qaddafis ground forces. Mr. Gates replied that the president did not decide to take action against Libya until a Thursday night less than 48 hours before the first Tomahawks were fired.
To that Mr. Smith said that before the White House knows exactly what it is going to do there is some benefit to bringing leadership in the Congress into the discussion in terms of building support here."
Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen were summoned before Congress as Colonel Qaddafi s forces pushed the rebels into a panicked retreat and recaptured towns they had lost just days ago because of allied airstrikes. Both men suggested that the rebels should look beyond the United States for direct military aid.
What the opposition needs as much as anything right now is some training some command and control and some organization" Mr. Gates said. Its pretty much a pick-up ballgame at this point." Yet he said thats not a unique capability for the United States and as far as Im concerned somebody else can do that."
A short time later Representative Jeff Miller Republican of Florida asked whether the administration had plans to arm the rebels and observed They seem to be getting their butts whipped."
Admiral Mullen replied in an echo of Mr. Obama that we certainly are looking at options from not doing it to doing it" and then added there are plenty of countries that have the abilities the arms the skill set to be able to do this."
There is considerable debate within NATO over whether the U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing the air campaign also permits individual countries to arm the Libyan rebels. The secretary-general of the alliance Anders Fogh Rasmussen told reporters in Stockholm on Thursday that he believes it does not and that the alliance would enforce an embargo on shipping arms to either side in the Libyan conflict.
