Changes

{{Cquote|The US$30 billion frozen by Mr Obama belong to the Libyan Central Bank and had been earmarked as the Libyan contribution to three key projects which would add the finishing touches to the African federation – the African Investment Bank in Syrte, Libya, the establishment in 2011 of the African Monetary Fund to be based in Yaounde with a US$42 billion capital fund and the Abuja-based African Central Bank in Nigeria which when it starts printing African money will ring the death knell for the CFA franc through which Paris has been able to maintain its hold on some African countries for the last fifty years. It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi.}}

{{Cquote|The US$30 billion frozen by Mr Obama belong to the Libyan Central Bank and had been earmarked as the Libyan contribution to three key projects which would add the finishing touches to the African federation – the African Investment Bank in Syrte, Libya, the establishment in 2011 of the African Monetary Fund to be based in Yaounde with a US$42 billion capital fund and the Abuja-based African Central Bank in Nigeria which when it starts printing African money will ring the death knell for the CFA franc through which Paris has been able to maintain its hold on some African countries for the last fifty years. It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi.}}

===War Powers Act===

===War Powers Act===

Under the [[War Powers Act]] of 1973 the U.S President has limited authority to use military force without Congressional authorization when there is an imminent [[national security]] threat, however President Obama made clear that he ordered the use of force for other reasons.  Members of Congress of both parties have expressed concern the President may have violated the law in doing so.<ref>http://rooney.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3190:rooney-resolution-president-should-obtain-congressional-authorization-or-end-military-campaign-in-libya-&catid=48:2011-press-releases</ref>  The War Powers Act specifically states that the President’s power to introduce forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities can only be exercised pursuant to (1) a declaration of war; (2) specific statutory authorization; or (3) a national emergency created by an attack on the United States or its forces. The War Powers Act requires the President in every possible instance to consult with Congress before introducing American Armed Forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities unless there has been a declaration of war or other specific Congressional authorization. None of these prerequisites have been met.

Under the [[War Powers Act]] of 1973 the U.S President has limited authority to use military force without Congressional authorization when there is an imminent [[national security]] threat.

 

None of these prerequisites have been met, however, and President Obama made clear that he ordered the use of force for other reasons.  Members of Congress of both parties have expressed concern the President may have violated the law in doing so.<ref>http://rooney.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3190:rooney-resolution-president-should-obtain-congressional-authorization-or-end-military-campaign-in-libya-&catid=48:2011-press-releases</ref>   

On March 21, 2011, President Obama publicly announced U.S. military forces commenced no fly-zone operations in Libya two days earlier, on March 19, "to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe" and cited UN Resolutions as giving him the authority to do so. Secretary of Defense [[Robert Gates]] warned establishment of a no-fly zone meant attacking Libaya.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20038391-503544.html</ref> Officials as National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough also opposed to attacking Libya; but [[Hillary Clinton]], tossing her "[[smart power]]" doctrine to the wind,  "won the bureaucratic battle to use Department of Defense resources to achieve what's essentially the State Department's objective... and Obama let it happen".<ref>[http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/18/how_obama_turned_on_a_dime_toward_war How Obama turned on a dime toward war.]</ref> The Charter of the [[United Nations]], in Article 2(4), prohibits the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence” of a member state, and many observers have wondered whether the establishment of a no-fly zone would constitute a violation of this prohibition. The Congressional Research Services advised that a no-fly zone imposed against a state that has not carried out an attack on its neighbors may consider the imposition of a no-fly zone an “armed attack.” CRS warned that even if no-fly zone operations in a given state do not constitute an “armed attack",

On March 21, 2011, President Obama publicly announced U.S. military forces commenced no fly-zone operations in Libya two days earlier, on March 19, "to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe" and cited UN Resolutions as giving him the authority to do so. Secretary of Defense [[Robert Gates]] warned establishment of a no-fly zone meant attacking Libaya.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20038391-503544.html</ref> Officials as National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough also opposed to attacking Libya; but [[Hillary Clinton]], tossing her "[[smart power]]" doctrine to the wind,  "won the bureaucratic battle to use Department of Defense resources to achieve what's essentially the State Department's objective... and Obama let it happen".<ref>[http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/18/how_obama_turned_on_a_dime_toward_war How Obama turned on a dime toward war.]</ref> The Charter of the [[United Nations]], in Article 2(4), prohibits the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence” of a member state, and many observers have wondered whether the establishment of a no-fly zone would constitute a violation of this prohibition. The Congressional Research Services advised that a no-fly zone imposed against a state that has not carried out an attack on its neighbors may consider the imposition of a no-fly zone an “armed attack.” CRS warned that even if no-fly zone operations in a given state do not constitute an “armed attack",