By PETER BAKER and TRIP GABRIEL
Published: October 12, 2012
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration’s handling of the Libya attack has opened up a new front in the presidential campaign just weeks before Election Day, as Republicans seize on it to question the president’s performance as commander in chief.
Jim Wilson/The New York Times Mitt Romney continued his criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the Libya attack during a speech at a campaign event on Friday in Richmond, Va.
The dispute over the episode escalated after Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said during the debate on Thursday night that “we weren’t told” that Americans on the ground wanted security bolstered, despite testimony that requests were made to and turned down by the administration. Mitt Romney’s campaign on Friday accused the vice president of trying “to mislead the American public.”
The conflicting statements over security come after the administration’s shifting assessments of the attack on the diplomatic post in Benghazi that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. For President Obama, who had counted on foreign policy as a political strength, the issue has put him on the defensive, while Republicans who had focused on the economy now see a chance to undercut his credibility with the public on national security.
“There were more questions that came out last night because the vice president directly contradicted the sworn testimony of State Department officials,” Mr. Romney said at a rally in Richmond, Va., on Friday morning. “He’s doubling down on denial. And we need to understand exactly what happened, as opposed to just having people brush this aside. When the vice president of the United States directly contradicts the testimony, sworn testimony, of State Department officials, American citizens have a right to know just what’s going on, and we’re going to find out.”
A State Department regional security officer and a Utah National Guard officer in charge of security in Libya both testified before a House committee this week that they sought more security officers but were rebuffed by the State Department.
Asked about that on Thursday night during his debate with Representative Paul D. Ryan, Mr. Romney’s running mate, Mr. Biden said: “We weren’t told they wanted more security again.
We did not know they wanted more security again.” The White House on Friday tried to explain Mr. Biden’s comments by saying that diplomatic security requests were handled by the State Department, not the White House. “The vice president was speaking about himself, the president and the White House,” said Jay Carney, the White House press secretary. “He was not referring to the administration.”
Mr. Carney was pressed repeatedly by reporters to explain what the president and vice president knew and when they knew it, but he declined to answer in detail. Beyond saying that the White House typically did not make security decisions at diplomatic posts, Mr. Carney would not say whether Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden were specifically informed about the concerns about Libya.
Echoing the president’s campaign advisers, Mr. Carney accused Republicans of pursuing the issue for political gain and engaging in hypocrisy because they voted against some money proposed for diplomatic security, singling out Mr. Ryan. “I find it rich that charges are made about concern over diplomatic security by those who routinely slash funding for diplomatic security to pay for tax cuts,” he said.
Mr. Biden was expecting tough questions about how the White House handled the aftermath of the Benghazi attack, as well as on the level of security at the American mission there, according to people familiar with his debate preparation. But he still seemed caught off guard when the moderator, Martha Raddatz of ABC News, pressed him on whether American diplomats had requested additional security in Libya.
Senior administration officials said Mr. Biden’s answer was accurate because while the embassy in Tripoli requested an extension of duty for 13 American military or diplomatic security personnel — which the State Department denied — it did not request additional security guards for the mission in Benghazi. Moreover, they said, the request did not filter its way up the reporting chain to the White House or the vice president’s office.
The Libya attack has risen to the forefront of the campaign dialogue even as other foreign policy issues, like the war in Afghanistan and the confrontation with Iran, have remained secondary topics. The administration at first attributed the deaths of Mr. Stevens and the others to an opportunistic attack taking advantage of protests against an anti-Islam film. Over time, officials eventually termed the assault a terrorist attack tied to Qaeda elements and discounted the role of the film.
The White House has explained the shifting descriptions as the natural result of evolving intelligence, but even some Democrats have said the public statements have provided fodder to critics. Republicans see the issue not only as a way of attacking the incumbent’s handling of this specific episode but also as furthering their broader indictment of Mr. Obama as overly passive in the defense of American interests abroad.
How much the issue has influenced voters remains uncertain. Approval of Mr. Obama’s handling of foreign policy fell from 54 percent in August to 49 percent last month after the Benghazi attack, while disapproval rose from 40 percent to 46 percent, according to a survey by NBC News and The Wall Street Journal at the end of September.
At the same time, Republicans are focusing attention on national security even as they worry that the economy may not offer as much traction as they once thought. Polls have shown some increasing optimism about the economy as unemployment has fallen to 7.8 percent, the lowest it has been during Mr. Obama’s presidency.
Mr. Romney has been ratcheting up his criticism of the president over Benghazi all week, but he has intentionally stayed one or two steps behind fiercer Republican critics in Congress, according to his advisers.
He has not joined Congressional Republicans in accusing the administration of playing down a terrorist link to the attack to save the president from embarrassment so close to the election.
With surrogates to press that incendiary charge, aides said that Mr. Romney would continue to strike a more judicious tone, speaking of the “troubling questions” raised as more information comes out.
The campaign wants to avoid a repetition of its first hasty response to the attack, when Mr. Romney accused the administration of apologizing to protesters, a statement widely criticized as irresponsible. Mr. Romney began the week with a speech on foreign policy at Virginia Military Institute that was intended to offer a reset on his credibility as a commander in chief. The effort will continue at the second presidential debate on Tuesday, the first time foreign policy will be a topic between him and Mr. Obama.
The political back-and-forth over Libya comes as the administration tries to get a more definitive picture on the Benghazi attack and figure out a potential response. An investigation is looking into what was known in advance and how the government acted.
In a July 9 cable signed by Mr. Stevens, the embassy requested that the State Department extend the tours for a minimum of three security officers in Benghazi. The department had earlier approved a request for five guards for the mission, which was still in effect at the time of the July 9 cable.
Still, Mr. Biden’s statement was in answer to a question about heightened security in Libya, not just in Benghazi, and the State Department did not dispute that there was a request for bolstered security in the country, only that it was supposed to be for Tripoli, not Benghazi.
Charlene Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, said at the Congressional hearing on Wednesday that a request from Eric A. Nordstrom, the chief of security at the embassy in Tripoli until recently, to extend the military team was only a recommendation and that the State Department had been right not to heed it. The broader strategy, she said, was to phase out the American military team and depend more on the Libyan militiamen who were protecting the compound along with a small number of American security officers.
Five American security agents were at the compound at the time of the assault, Ms. Lamb said, although it was later noted that only three were based at the compound and that two had accompanied Mr. Stevens from Tripoli. She said there were also three members of a Libyan militia that had been retained to help protect the compound. In addition, a well-trained American quick reaction security team was stationed at a nearby annex.
At the hearing, the leader of a 16-member American military unit based in Tripoli said he and other embassy officials warned their superiors in Washington that the security situation throughout Libya was deteriorating and warranted the additional security.
“The security was a struggle and remained a struggle throughout my time there,” said the officer, Lt. Col. Andrew Wood of the Utah National Guard. “The situation remained uncertain, and reports from some Libyans indicated it was getting worse.”
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Friday urged patience for investigators to do their work. “To this day, we do not have a complete picture,” she told reporters. “We do not have all the answers. No one in this administration has ever claimed otherwise.”
Peter Baker reported from Washington, and Trip Gabriel from Richmond, Va. Eric Schmitt and Mark Landler contributed reporting from Washington.
Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog".
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .
conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
13102012
___________
Cộng sản Việt Nam là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment