AFRICAN Union (AU) has alleged plan by North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and leading western nations to marginalise Africa in the resolution of the Libyan crisis.
Meanwhile, the White House has told the Congress that President Barack Obama has the legal authority to press on with the United States (U.S.) military involvement in Libya. It also urged sceptical lawmakers not to send "mixed messages" about their commitment to the NATO-led air war.
Speaking at the Security Council of the United Nations on Wednesday in New York, a spokesperson for the AU, Hamady Ould Hamady, said "we cannot simply be spectators to calamities that befall us," adding that Africa would suffer the most from the impact of the conflict.
According to Hamady, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mauritania who spoke on behalf of the African Union's High-Level Ad-Hoc Committee on Libya, the extra-ordinary summit of the African Union has expressed "surprise and disappointment" at attempts to marginalise the continent in management of the conflict, particularly since the High-Level Committee was formally recognised by the Council in resolution 1973 which authorises a no-fly-zone action against Libya.
In fact, in the last few weeks, NATO and the U.S. have come under intense questioning by observers on the issue of the role and continued support of Africans in managing and resolving the crisis. The U.S. in particular has been responding that all the three current African non-permanent members of the Security Council — Nigeria, South Africa and Gabon — support the no-fly zone resolution.
Since the implementation of the resolution, however, there have been several reports, including one from the UN, which claimed that African leaders are no longer united on the way forward.
While some continue to support the continued use of force against Libya, others seem to be advancing the dialogue option.
While reiterating the commitment of the Union to resolution 1970 (2011) and 1973 (2011), which authorise member-states to take actions to protect civilians in Libya, the AU spokesman said African leaders "expressed deep concern at the dangerous precedence being set by one-sided interpretations of these resolutions of the United Nations and consequences that may result for international legality."
According to Hamady, only political solution could end the conflict in the interest of the Libyan people, noting that the AU's Peace and Security Council has firmly condemned the use of violence against demonstrators and had launched an appeal to the Libyan authorities to ensure protection of their populations.
Speaking at the Council, the AU spokesperson on the Libya conflict said Africans would never hide from their responsibilities in helping to resolve the conflict in Libya and the "time was overdue to articulate a solution together." Such a solution, he added, has to protect civilians, ensure a democratic transformation and promote lasting peace.
Delivering a detailed report to the Congress to justify Obama's Libya policy, the administration argued he had the constitutional power to continue the U.S. role against Muammar Gaddafi's forces even though lawmakers had not authorised it.
According to a News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) report, tensions in Washington DC over the Libya conflict reflected growing unease over U.S. entanglement in a third conflict in the Moslem world in addition to costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and pressure for Obama to clarify the U.S. mission in the North African country.
The 32-page response to lawmakers' complaints followed a warning on Tuesday from House Speaker John Boehner that Obama was on thin legal ice by keeping U.S. forces involved in Libya for nearly three months without congressional approval.
But the White House insisted that Obama had not overstepped his authority because U.S. military participation in Libya had already been scaled back to a support role that did not require congressional consent.
Boehner accused Obama of failing to respect the role of Congress in military operations and asked him to explain the legal grounds for the Libya mission, saying that by Sunday, the president would be in violation of a 1973 law called the "War Powers Resolution" if nothing changed.
The U.S. Constitution says that only the Congress can declare war, while the president is commander in chief of the armed forces.
The White House cautioned lawmakers against signalling a wavering U.S. commitment as they pressed their concerns about Libya.
"We believe that it's important for the Congress not to send mixed messages about a goal that we think most members of the Congress share,'' Obama spokesman Jay Carney said, referring to hopes for the success of the NATO-led mission.
Ten members of the Congress filed a suit against Obama in a federal court on Wednesday over Libya.
The group, led by Democrat Dennis Kucinich and Republican Walter Jones, challenged Obama's decision to commit U.S. forces to Libya without congressional authorisation.
"With regard to the war in Libya, we believe that the law was violated,'' Kucinich said in a statement.
But senior administration officials briefing reporters argued that Obama was not in violation of the War Powers Resolution because U.S. forces, which initially spearheaded the assault on Gaddafi's air defenses in March, had pulled back to a support role in the NATO-led air campaign in early April.
"We're not engaged in any of the activities that typically over the years in war powers analysis is considered to constitute hostilities," one official said, adding: "We're not engaged in sustained fighting."
The law prohibits U.S. armed forces from being involved in military actions for more than 60 days without congressional authorisation, and includes a further 30-day withdrawal period, which would expire on Sunday.
The White House's arguments seemed unlikely to defuse tensions within the Congress over Libya, where rebels have made only halting progress against government troops and strains have emerged in the Western alliance.
Brendan Buck, Boehner's spokesman, said the White House had presented "creative arguments" that would have to be examined, but he made clear that Republicans remained skeptical.
"The commander-in-chief has a responsibility to articulate how U.S. military action is vital to our national security and consistent with American policy goals,'' he said, adding "With Libya, the President has fallen short on this obligation."
The White House report reiterated the U.S. rationale for joining the UN-approved air war against Gaddafi to keep the Libyan leader from creating a "humanitarian catastrophe" and prevent further instability in the region.
Source: The Guardian.