Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

NATO to Take Over Command of Libya Operation?; Deal "In Principle" on NATO & Libya; Syria Nears the Brink

Aired March 24, 2011 - 14:59   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

JOE JOHNS, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Randi. We have got developing news on Libya, a potential diplomatic breakthrough. We're awaiting word of a possible deal to get Washington out of the leadership role of the strikes against forces loyal to Moammar Gadhafi.

Let's go quickly now to CNN's Elise Labott, standing by live at the State Department.

What do you have, Elise?

ELISE LABOTT, CNN SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT PRODUCER: Hi, John (sic).

Well, what we're hearing is there's a deal in principle between NATO allies for Washington to hand over command of this no-fly zone over Libya to NATO within the next few days. We just heard about a phone call between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the foreign ministers of France, Turkey, the U.K. All have been working to try and get Washington to hand over this command.

We know that President Obama has said that he really wants to hand over as soon as possible. So we're expecting some more details from NATO directly from the secretary-general, Fogh Rasmussen, but we're expecting that NATO will be taking over command maybe sometime over the weekend -- John (sic).

JOHNS: There had been some question as to whether handing over to NATO would be problematic in the view of Arab countries, countries in the Mideast. Do you know how that might be resolved?

LABOTT: Well, this is one of the things that's been the interesting back story, Joe, is that the French have said that the Arabs don't want NATO to take over this command because they feel as if it would be some kind of Western crusade.

But Arabs that we have talked to said they really don't have a problem with NATO command. And we have seen that a lot of NATO states are -- a lot of Arab states are taking part in Afghanistan, such as the Jordanians, for instance, have a very robust role.

And a lot of -- there's been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing about the French really wanting to be in the lead and that wouldn't be the case if they hand it over to NATO. So, we do hear from the French foreign minister that they have had agreement -- he was speaking on the record to some of the news agencies -- that NATO is going to be taking over.

And like I said, Arabs that we have talked to over the last few days are expecting that to happen as well. So we're expecting some more details within the hour. And we will be sure to let you know.

JOHNS: And one last question. There had been a lot of talk about the timetable. It seems like that's important to the White House. Do you know when this handover might occur?

LABOTT: Well, we have heard the president say days, not weeks. And we're coming across about a week of the no-fly zone. So we're expecting it to happen over the next few days, as I said, details very sketchy.

It seems like they're still working out the real technical arrangements for the handover of command. Obviously the United States wants to be really sure that whoever is going to take over this command has it well in hand. But we are expecting it in the next couple of days.

JOHNS: Great. Thanks so much, Elise Labott at the State Department.

Now, let's just go the few short blocks over to the White House and speak with our White House correspondent Dan Lothian.

Dan, what are you hearing about this thing?

DAN LOTHIAN, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, so far, we're not hearing anything from the White House here specifically to that agreement, John -- Joe, rather.

But I can tell you that this would certainly relieve some of the pressure from this administration from this administration, from the president himself. There have been a lot of questions about the U.S. mission there in Libya, about cost, about an exit strategy.

And the president and other senior administration officials have talked about this and narrowly defined this narrow focus of this mission and that the U.S., which has been taking a supporting -- a leading role, rather, would then move in this second phase to a supporting role. What would that look like?

Well, Jay Carney, the White House spokesman today, said that U.S. jets would not be used in enforcing any kind of no-fly zone, but it would be more of an assist role, perhaps providing jamming technology, even intelligence.

So that is how the White House sees this next phase of the mission in Libya, but, again, no official reaction yet to this agreement. One other point, Joe, I should make is that, you know, we're waiting to find out if perhaps the president will make any public comments about this to the American people.

There have been a lot of questions about the president perhaps not fully explaining all of the ins and outs of this mission to the American people. The White House has pushed back on that, saying that, from the beginning, whether it be in press conferences or statements, that the president has been very forthcoming in laying out what this mission is about, and that is protecting the innocent lives in Libya and to prevent that region from becoming destabilized.

And so they don't think that the president has not been doing a good job of talking to American people. But, today, Jay Carney leaving open the possibility that perhaps the president will be saying more on that issue, Joe.

JOHNS: Dan, there is a disconnect here though, and simply put it is that the U.N. resolution says no regime change; that's not what we're interested in. But the president has suggested that he thinks Moammar Gadhafi has got to go.

Have they talked at all about, you know, what's the message we're supposed to be getting hearing these two sides talk?

LOTHIAN: Well, listen, you know, yesterday, there was a senior administration official who was asked that very same question, if -- if the administration is saying no regime change, then why has the president been consistent about saying that Moammar Gadhafi needs to go?

How they explain it is this way. It's very narrowly focused. The mission that the U.N. resolution gave essentially permission to was to create this safe zone to establish a no-fly zone, to knock out the ground threats in order to have -- put in place a no-fly zone. That mission was very specific.

It wasn't about regime change. It was specifically about clearing the area to establish this no-fly zone. But this administration, the president still believes that Moammar Gadhafi needs to go. So, they're -- they're looking at this as really two different things. Does the administration think that someone else needs to be in place there? Yes, they do.

Was this is specific mission about creating regime change? They say no.

JOHNS: And a last question is, and just tell me if you don't know, Dan, the question of an exit strategy for Moammar Gadhafi, short of, you know, fighting to the death. Is there any talk there at the White House about how they could get this guy out of that country without going down in flames?

LOTHIAN: You know, not only do I not know the answer to that question. I'm not sure they certainly know what the answer to that question is at all.

It's very unpredictable. Clearly, Moammar Gadhafi has said that he doesn't plan on going anywhere. He has been resistant throughout this entire process, and while initially said that he was -- you know, would abide by the U.N. resolution, that clearly that was not the case. And so I think it's unclear that anyone here in this administration really knows what the next step will be for Gadhafi himself. He has been very defiant, and it doesn't appear that that's going to change anytime soon.

JOHNS: Dan Lothian at the White House, thanks so much. We will be getting back to you.

Now let's go to Paula Newton live at NATO headquarters in Brussels.

Paula, what are you hearing?

PAULA NEWTON, CNN INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Joe, the NATO ambassadors are just wrapping up their meeting here. We do expect a statement from Anders Fogh Rasmussen shortly, but we know that the agreement has been hammered out.

And the sticking point here, Joe, was whether or not there was going to be a plan in place not just for the naval blockade or the no- fly zone, but, crucially, military airstrikes, when and how they would be employed. It seems that any concerns that the Turkish alliance here had, the officials have been basically soothed, that that phone call that Ms. Clinton had with her counterparts in the U.K. and France and Turkey went a long way in assuring many that command structure would still come from NATO.

It's been a very long day here at NATO headquarters. And you're starting to see a lot of that confusion that we see on the ground in Libya really play out here politically, a lot of countries now in this 28-member alliance uncomfortable with the way it's playing out in Libya and want there to be clear parameters.

The only way they believe that can happen is if full control is given to NATO. We expect more details, but command-and-control will be out of Naples, Italy. It will still under the umbrella of NATO. But that does mean an American commander will be at the helm.

But as we have already discussed, Joe, the United States, the White House being able to pull back from this mission and really give some support when and if it is needed, but the lead here being taken by NATO -- Joe.

JOHNS: Paula, the other question, of course, here in the United States is, what's the timetable? Do we have any sense as to when NATO will assume control, even though there will be presumably an American in charge?

NEWTON: OK. I will tell you what the plan here is on the table.

They had done the military plans for the naval blockade earlier in the week. They started to execute on that. They have the plans all done for the no-fly zone. What they don't have, Joe, is that crucial last point, which is, what is the operational plan, the rules of engagement for airstrikes? And that is key. The military planners are working on that right now in this building. They expect it's going to take at least 48 hours. Today is Thursday. They might get a look at it -- and I'm talking about all the NATO nations -- by Saturday or Sunday. They're saying the earliest that they would be able to possibly bring over control to NATO is some time on Sunday at the absolute earliest.

In their words, they're saying to me they want this control going from the United States to NATO, they want it to be seamless. And so they really want to have a look at the rules of engagement, and again a lot of controversy over those rules of engagement going forward for many nations, not just Turkey -- Joe.

JOHNS: Well, let's talk a little bit more about the controversy over those rules of engagement.

Have some of these concerns come from the Arab countries; have they come from the allies? What are they concerned about specifically?

NEWTON: Definitely from the Arab countries, but there's been a lot of reticence in nations and ambassadors I spoke to here today, Joe, saying, look, we're very uncomfortable with the issue of civilian casualties, and we do not want any, and these are quotes given to me, any countries -- quote, unquote -- "going freelance" on some of these airstrikes, and then NATO having to take the blame.

I mean, many countries telling me, look, we're not thrilled about this operation in Libya, but we will not stand in the way of the alliance of NATO taking over, as long as we're sure that cool heads will prevail and that people understand the endgame.

At the end of the day, Joe, they have no desire here at NATO to get involved in a civil war where you will have two sides dividing up the spoils of war. They want to be clear that that U.N. resolution means that they help in a humanitarian capacity and they want to be able to stick to the parameters of that U.N. resolution and not really broaden those out. And that's a sticking point.

And when you think about the developments on the ground in Libya, and we saw what happened overnight in Misrata, these are the kinds of issues that every morning when these nations wake up and they look at what's going on, on the ground, they think to themselves, do we really want to be this involved? Do we want to go this far with this?

So these are the kinds of things that were brought to the table today. But again Secretary of State Clinton really having to work the phones to make sure they could get the agreement this quickly in order to meet that White House timetable to make sure that command can be handed over in a matter of days and not weeks -- Joe.

JOHNS: Just highlighting that issue of the rules of engagement for airstrikes, I have to ask you, originally, it was thought that the Arab League was fully on board on this issue. And after the airstrikes began, certain among them appeared to start pulling back.

Was it because of the rules of engagement and -- and the way the airstrikes were being handled?

NEWTON: It was because, again, it wasn't explicitly said exactly how far that coalition of the willing would go in order to make sure that there wasn't any kind of a massacre in Libya. They were afraid of seeing civilian casualties on the ground.

And, to a certain extent, they still are. Remember that NATO planes have already had to return to base with their bombs still strapped to their airplanes because they were afraid -- they looked at the situation on the ground and were afraid that they were risking civilian casualties. This is a real case on the ground.

A lot of phone calls made to those Arab partners saying, look, we understand what you're saying. We will really take a good, scrutinized look at those arguments and make sure that they absolutely have to be hit.

At the same time, though, and you will have many people here tell you this, that this situation can get messy. Mistakes are made. And for that reason, even more, Joe, Turkey had to push to make sure that any kind of ad hoc agreement, political agreement that France may have wanted was not on the table, that NATO had to make sure that they would be calling the shots here.

And that seems to have calmed down a lot of Arab heads of state in saying, look, we trust NATO to be able to conduct this, not forgetting of course that Turkey is at this table; they are one of the 28 countries in this alliance -- Joe.

JOHNS: Paula Newton, thanks so much for that. Get back to us, will you, if you have any updates.

Let's bring in now Hala Gorani, who is very familiar with all this. You have been doing a great job reporting.

It looks like they're very close to a deal, apparently still trying to get together on the issue of the rules of engagement for airstrikes. What do you make of it?

HALA GORANI, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Well, it's interesting that the deal is coming almost a week into the airstrikes themselves. It appeared when this effort started that there was some sort of agreement, that this was an organized coalition, where it was clear who was going to lead for how many days, who was going to then pass over power or command-and-control power to another country or to another entity such as NATO.

However, it does appear now that they have come to some sort of agreement. France wanted a political steering committee to call the shots with more the support, the military strategic day-to-day command going to NATO.

But now it appears as though NATO is going to be the umbrella entity and organization that's going to be conducting this operation. And this is calming, as Paula Newton just mentioned there in Brussels, calming nerves a bit with Turkey and other Arab and Muslim countries, Joe.

JOHNS: So, one of the big questions when you look at this is, where is Moammar Gadhafi going to end up? Number one, does he have to fight to the death?

NEWTON: Right.

JOHNS: Is there any other option for him? Could he go to Yemen or what have you, or is that just ridiculous?

NEWTON: Well, everything that he has said publicly, every state television appearance, every sort of theatrical, you know, tirade that he's made, from the -- from the destroyed window of the compound that was bombed by the Americans in '86, points to the contrary, that he is planning on staying.

His son, as well, Saif al-Islam Gadhafi, has said it as well. The question is how long will this situation where two sides are fighting each other, where NATO and this coalition of countries that have decided to intervene in Libya will maintain a stalemate, where there's no airpower directed at civilian targets in Libya, but there is a street-to-street, sort of house-to-house fight? That's the question. How long will this situation go on? And when does NATO decide, all right, we have kind of done our job here; we're done?

JOHNS: Hala, now, let me just go to Arwa Damon, who is in Libya on the ground there.

And I think, Arwa, the first question for you is, does the resistance in that country even care whether it's NATO, the U.S., France, anybody else leading the airstrikes?

ARWA DAMON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: No, Joe, at this stage, they absolutely do not.

What they do care about is that the airstrikes continue, that the no-fly zone continue. And another thing that they care about is receiving weapons and equipment, because we do see them very outgunned. They do not have military experience. And what we're also seeing on the various front lines right now is, despite those airstrikes, they are still struggling to be able to gain back strategic locations.

We were just down at the front line outside of Ajdabiya earlier today. We were there yesterday. The front line had not moved all that much and they were still coming under fairly heavy tank and artillery bombardment, those tanks, the artillery coming from areas they're telling us that the airstrikes have not yet been able to reach. So, most certainly, they do not care who or which country is commanding this mission. What they do care about is that it continue.

JOHNS: And just how much of a settled question is it as to whether the airstrikes simply just started too late and perhaps Moammar Gadhafi now has an advantage that the resistance would not be able to recover from? DAMON: Yes, Joe, the opposition will tell you here that the airstrikes did happen too late, saying -- that being said, the fact that they happened when they did in fact save many, many hundreds of thousands of lives, I will tell you, as well.

The issue with the delay in the airstrikes starting could be viewed from the perspective that it allowed Gadhafi's forces enough time to entrench themselves in certain locations, meaning that, without causing severe perhaps collateral damage, civilian casualties, his troops are in locations that these aircraft cannot simply drop bombs on. That then turns the battle squarely into the lap of the opposition in terms of whether or not they have the capability to actually root Gadhafi's forces out of these cities and towns.

And I have to tell you, going back to the fight for Ajdabiya, for days now, they have been trying to regain control of the northern entrance and they have been unable to do so. We see them out in the desert. They're trying to launch operations through the desert roads, trying to reach this what they call a small unit of Gadhafi forces to defeat them, to deliver them that final blow, and they have been unable to do so.

And if this is any indication of the progress moving forward, it most certainly seems like it's going to be a very drawn-out, long and bloody battle here.

JOHNS: Is there a consensus among the rebels as to whether they have momentum? Do they think they're winning; do they think they can win?

DAMON: They do firmly believe that they can win. And they're willing still to sacrifice everything for this.

There was a lot of momentum, a lot of jubilation after those airstrikes began with the opposition forces effectively driving Gadhafi's troops from the gates of Benghazi around 100 miles, 160 kilometers, to the west to Ajdabiya. But there they have come to a grinding halt.

And I think this has led to the realization that this is not going to be a simple case where cities and towns are going to begin to fall simply because a no-fly zone is in place or because foreign fighter jets are launching airstrikes.

There is the growing realization, there's a growing sense of frustration amongst the fighters because, as they say, they're civilians at the end of the day and they're trying so hard they keep telling us with the weapons that they have, with the equipment that they have, but they're beginning to realize more and more that this is not going to be an easy task.

Removing Gadhafi, yes, they realized it was going to be difficult, but perhaps it's going to be much more difficult than anyone was aware of at this stage, Joe.

JOHNS: Arwa Damon, thanks so much for your reporting. Stay safe there.

We're going to take a break now. But, when we come back, we will talk to Chris Lawrence at the Pentagon as the breaking news continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JOHNS: Back here on breaking news. I'm Joe Johns, with Hala Gorani.

And you're seeing us through the worldwide reach of CNN.

The breaking news is that, at this time, we're awaiting word from NATO that they are likely to take over control of airstrikes, the no- fly zone in Libya from the United States, possibly within the next several days. There's still an issue of working out the rules of engagement on airstrikes, which were so much of a concern among Arab countries and others because of the fear of civilians being hit.

Looking forward to getting an announcement from NATO on that.

GORANI: And it's interesting. Turkey was part of this discussion that has led to this deal. We expect Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the NATO secretary-general, to make an announcement. We were expecting it a few minutes ago. I'm sure the time -- the schedule has slid a bit here and there with all these discussions.

Let's go to Nic Robertson, Joe. He's live in Libya, in Tripoli, in the capital there.

And I understand there have been renewed explosions there. Tell us what you're hearing and what you're seeing, Nic.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hala, it's just after 9:00 here. And literally while NATO is deciding whether it should take over lead of this operation, the operation is continuing unabated.

Just a few minutes ago, the sound of heavy anti-aircraft gunfire that was triggered by at least one explosion we could hear. Then, after that anti-aircraft gunfire began, one of the heaviest explosions that we have heard from our location here in Tripoli. We know that the targets here have been military bases to the west and to the east of the city. Fuel storage depots have been damaged and set on fire in the south of the city, according to government officials here.

The damage in the east of the city at the military base there seems to be around a large military airfield, used to be a U.S. military airfield, and there we understand that at least some of the communication equipment there has been part of the target. So, it seems that the command-and-control parts of the -- Gadhafi's army based here in the capital are being targeted, and quite a concentration in the last couple of nights on those particular sites in and around the city here -- Hala.

GORANI: Now, we heard from French defense officials that they shot down, not from the air, but while it was on the runway in Misrata a Libyan airplane. Does that mean that the Libyan air force is not completely disabled? Clearly, they were still flying a plane today, Nic.

ROBERTSON: Well, it seems listening to coalition commanders over the weekend when the air campaign began that they were implying that actually from really -- from the announcement of the U.N. Security Council resolution that the Libyans have stopped flying their aircraft.

It seemed to be a protective move on their part. Libya has quite a wide array of airfields, not just the military airfields, for example, here in Tripoli, but it has a very large international airport here, several other large international airports across the country, airstrips that service many of the oil facilities in the country here.

So, it has a lot of options of where to take off its aircraft from. And as we have seen on our visits to the international airport, the military airfield here, the international airport at Surt, which sort of halfway between here and the east of the country along the Mediterranean, these airfields have military installations there, and they're quite extensive.

It would seem to me to be probably implausible to think they had all been damaged by this stage by the level of bombardment knowing all the different targets that are being hit. There are so many targets here at the military air bases, it would seem to take a long time I think to be able to impact them, so not surprising perhaps that the air force here still has aircraft and airfields that it can still use -- Hala.

GORANI: Nic Robertson live in Tripoli, thanks.

Let's bring in Chris Lawrence now live at the Pentagon.

And you have been keeping up with all of this. What do you know?

CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Joe, there's been a tremendous amount of pressure on the Obama administration to come out and explain itself, not only the ultimate aims of this mission, what it hopes to achieve, but also the cost, what ultimately is going to be the cost to the American people.

Well, CNN has now learned that next Wednesday afternoon, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mike Mullen, and the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, will all be on Capitol Hill to brief some members of the House of Representatives.

The day after that, there's also going to be a hearing in the House Armed Services Committee, so a lot of activity on Capitol Hill next week in regards to what's happening now with this mission.

One of the things again I said is, they're going to want to look at the cost. When you look at a 160 Tomahawk missiles that were fired, those are over $1 million each. The F-15 fighter jet that went down, that's $30 million. The planes, the rounds they're firing to take out some of these targets in Libya, as well as the tankers that have to refuel a lot of jets in these midair, all of that adds up.

And those are questions that are going to have to be answered and accounted for -- Joe.

JOHNS: And there's this real sense also that there was not a lot of consultation between the administration and Capitol Hill, and apparently that somebody there in Washington, D.C., is going to have to make amends for that. Is that what you're hearing there?

LAWRENCE: Yes, exactly.

Eventually, there will have to be some sort of accounting, some sort of rapprochement done to try to get more people on board with the mission going forward, because even though you say, yes, we hand off to NATO, that doesn't absolve the U.S. of its role. And, you know, the U.S. is still going to have a role. In fact, who is the supreme commander of NATO? Well, it's Admiral James Stavridis, United States Navy.

So of course the U.S. is still going to be involved in this. A lot of what's going to be interesting when you look at what happens if and when NATO does sort of assume control, I talked to a defense official here just a day or two ago. And he said NATO is the easiest, best way to do the handover. They have got the framework.

It would be the easiest in terms of no disruption to the patrol flights, the least risk to the pilots that are flying. But he said the one thing is, NATO works by consensus. Everyone has to agree. So you wonder in getting everyone to agree what sort of framework is going to be in place going forward as to what the mission will be?

So have all these nations agreed to, say, continue some of these attacks on Moammar Gadhafi's ground forces? That was key in driving his forces out of the city of Benghazi. They have been taking multiple shots at ground forces, tanks, artillery positions.

If, say, that was scaled back and you were only going after air defenses, that could very much change the dynamic there on the ground.

JOHNS: And I wanted to ask you also, Chris, the question that seems to be coming up again and again. And this is the issue of the U.N. resolution essentially saying that it's not interested at all in regime change, but the president of the United States saying he thinks Moammar Gadhafi needs to go.

Does that put our Pentagon people in sort of a difficult situation as they navigate the lanes between the White House and NATO?

LAWRENCE: Well, as you know from all your years in Washington, Joe, no one from the Pentagon is ever going to come out publicly and say the orders are vague or we don't exactly get the exact parameters of where this is going.

But -- so they're pretty much strictly following what the U.N. mandate is, and that's to, they say, protect civilians and to try to drive his forces out of these key cities that the president mentioned. But when you go to start talking about regime change, all everyone I have spoken with in the Pentagon is saying, ultimately, that that is not their mission.

You know, but at some point, the U.S. coalition mission may end at one point and there may be another mission beyond that. But that's not what this mission right now is designed to do.

JOHNS: Chris Lawrence at the Pentagon, thanks so much for that.

LAWRENCE: Yes.

GORANI: All right, we're going to take a short break. When we come back, more breaking news out of the United Nations. We will take you there live next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GORANI: All right. More breaking news on Libya right now.

Richard Roth is at the United Nations.

As we're awaiting that NATO secretary general announcement, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, and a possible deal, what is happening right now at the United Nations, Richard?

RICHARD ROTH, CNN SR. UNITED NATIONS CORRESPONDENT: U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon just briefed the U.N. Security Council in open session, telling ambassadors that Libya is not living up to its declaration of a cease-fire and is not abiding by two existing and recent U.N. Security Council resolutions -- the resolutions that ignited the attacks from ships and planes on Libya.

Secretary Ban is not free of this issue. The U.N. is heavily involved, a lot of it on technical patters. The U.N. has to keep an eye on the sanctions that were voted on Libya. And he also has a special envoy in the region who he told the Security Council will travel to Ethiopia to meet with Libyan representatives and African Union representatives.

Right now, Hala, the U.N. Security Council is having its first major closed door discussion on what's happened since their historic vote one week ago as you remember, a vote that approved this resolution 10 votes in favor, five abstention is its. China and Russia and probably Brazil and India and Germany are likely to once again lodge their verbal protests about what has happened. But at the moment, there's not expected to be any type of redo of this resolution. It's on the books and many diplomats have told pea in the last few days, it's such a fluid uncertain situation, everybody's just waiting to see what happens -- Hala.

GORANI: All right. And, briefly, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 calls for the protection of civilians. If that is the end game, what are your sources at the U.N. saying NATO should do? When is sort of the mission accomplished, if you will, to use that expression, in Libya?

ROTH: Yes, that expression is certainly tainted over the years. Russia and China and others will probably want to proclaim this as mission accomplished over. But because Gadhafi has not been able to really trot out any major civilian casualties, catastrophe from missile fire, so far, the U.S., France, Britain, Lebanon and those that were strongly in favor of the resolution, in the end, have been able to carry the day.

No one wants to -- no one will say when it's over, though everyone privately will tell you they'd like to see Gadhafi go, but they just don't know how to get from here to there. The resolution, as we know, does not state there should be regime change. It's still all about protecting civilians. And the rebels have certainly not been able to make much traction on the ground.

So, reporters keep asking, where are you going with this? Aare you worried what's going to happen with this resolution. But, so far, the diplomats are throwing up their hands and saying look, it's in the military commanders' hands now essentially if there's progress at NATO. There was concern here about mission commander flux problems.

So, right now, the Security Council is, you might say, heavily- engaged with the issue, but we're not going to have any historic votes like we had one week ago. The Russian ambassador didn't comment on his way into the Security Council.

GORANI: Thanks, Richard Roth, at the U.N. -- Joe.

JOHNS: So much uncertainty right now. Let's get to Elise Labott at the State Department. Oh, they're asking me to take a break.

We'll come back with Elise Labott right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JOHNS: Back now on the developing story we're reporting right now on the fact that an agreement has apparently been reached for the United States to hand over control of its no-fly zone to NATO in Libya.

Let's get Elise Labott at the State Department.

We're getting word now about a timeline perhaps, Elise?

ELISE LABOTT, CNN SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT PRODUCER: Well, Joe, it could happen as early as this weekend. We understand that in the last few hours, really intense negotiations going on at NATO, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton having a phone call with the foreign ministers of France, Turkey, and the United Kingdom, all to set up not just about the military mission but also the political direction of this.

We know that there are NATO members in this coalition but also non-NATO members. So, what they want to be into your is that some of these non-NATO members will be able to sit at the table with those NATO coalition members and talk about the direction of the mandate.

There's been a lot of talk -- some members don't want to go as far as others. We've heard that the French -- you know, this resolution said all means necessary to protect the people. Well, countries such as Turkey don't want to go that far. They want to limit it to a no-fly zone.

So, the issue is getting everybody at the table. There's going to be a meeting next week in London on Tuesday. We understand Secretary of State Clinton will be attending that meeting. She's expected to make a statement later tonight on the deal.

And so, this is what seems to be happening -- over the next few days, the technical details will be sorted out. Well, we think it's going to be around the model of Afghanistan where the ISAF force is leading the coalition. This is a NATO-led coalition. But, at the same time, all of these other states, some of them are Arab states, will be at the table talking about the direction of this strategy -- Joe.

JOHNS: So, one of the things you are hearing is that there is some disagreement over whether the language of that the U.N. resolution needs to be massaged, specifically having to do with the use of force, by every means necessary?

LABOTT: Well, all means necessary is a very wide spectrum. At first, it was a no-fly zone -- but all means necessary could mean targeted strikes against Gadhafi's forces, as we've seen. It also could mean arming the rebels, training the rebels. So, that's why in addition to NATO taking over command and control, the technical structure of this mission, it's about all these countries sitting at the table together and hashing out how this is going to go forward.

As we know, a lot of people, not only around the world but here in the United States, the Congress has said that this mission just isn't clear. So, over the next couple days, those technical agreements on planes, on command, on who's going do what, militarily, will be sorted out. But I think on Tuesday, there's going to be a robust debate among countries in the coalition about just where to go from here, Joe.

JOHNS: Yes. And you also get the sense that there are some countries who have been very concerned about the experience with the United States over the past several years or even the past decade when the United States would go it alone in many respects. And this is a situation where the United States president is very much trying to bring a bunch of different countries into the picture -- different scenario from, say, five years ago.

LABOTT: That's right. And that's why you've really heard the administration try to avoid the words coalition of the willing -- what you had in Iraq. That's why really making a real effort to go to the Security Council, to get the widest possible support, the broadest possible authority, really trying to get those Arab states on board. The administration was very clear to the Arab states, Secretary Clinton last week in the region saying, Arabs, we need your skin in the game. We need you alongside with us.

And there's been a little bit of consternation that those Arab states that said they would support a no-fly zone which really gave the contempt and the pretext for this resolution at the United Nations haven't been really joining the coalition. We see Qatar taking -- making some measures, but a lot of Arab states want to see others, they don't want to be the first one.

So, the U.S. really looking for more Arab states and really want to avoid that this is anything like Iraq. Really want to get the broadest possible support in the international community -- and it does seem that most people do want to get rid of Colonel Gadhafi. So, it's just a question of what are they going to do to do that.

JOHNS: And, certainly, there was that concern about, you know, not only what happened several years ago, but also the fact that you authorize a no-fly zone, as well air strikes, and then the concerns begin about civilians being hit, and that at least in report from our reporting today suggests why some of these Arab countries started backing away.

So, thanks so much for that, Elise Labott. And keep in touch with us -- if you have anything else, please get back to us.

GORANI: All right. We are still waiting for the NATO secretary general to come out and speak to reporters and CNN about this deal we believe has been struck between France, the U.K., the U.S., Turkey and other partners. And that is the stake out microphone and podium.

We're going to take a short break here on CNN. When we come back, breaking news out of Syria. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GORANI: OK. Breaking news on many fronts in the Arab world.

First off, we're expecting the NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen to speak to reporters about a deal reportedly struck between the key coalition members of the alliance of countries that are now conducting this military operation over Libya.

And there's also Syria.

JOHNS: Right, there is Syria.

If you haven't heard what's occurring right now in Syria, this will give you some idea. Listen up.

Let me try to explain what we're seeing. A video was shot in a town south of Damascus, the town was called Daraa. Reports from the town say security forces fired on anti-government protesters yesterday. The estimated number of dead varies according to sketchy reporting from several dozen to upwards of 100.

And here's what is clear: though wave of unrest in the Arab world has now reached the shores of this place, which is really been a rock solid bastion of repression, Syria is led by one guy, Bashar Assad. A decade ago, he succeeded his father, Hafez Assad, whose unshakeable rule lasted 30 years.

And now, we ask the obvious question: is Syria next?

Joining me by phone from Damascus, Wissam Tarif.

I'd like to ask you about Daraa. Killings yesterday, we're hearing another big protest today, and many more planned for tomorrow. What's happening there right now?

WISSAM TARIF, HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST (via telephone): Well, Joe, definitely, Syria is next. It's happening now.

In Daraa, things at the moment are calmer than it was last night, but as we have here, it's around 10:00, and generally the clashes happen after midnight. A number of people who were killed by ammunition, by security forces and Syrian troops exceeds 51 persons -- 51. We have registered and undocumented (INAUDIBLE) there was bad intention. It was planned. They shot people in the head.

At the moment, there are more demonstrations that happened in other places in Syria at a smaller number and without much violence. The number of (INAUDIBLE) in Syria in the last four or five days is exceptionally extraordinary. We are working with a huge numbers which will be released hopefully by tomorrow afternoon.

GORANI: I just want to ask one question before we get to Mohammed Jamjoom.

Are protesters saying anything about the government has just announced on state television that those who have been detained over the last few weeks in Daraa, that they will be released? Is that enough to the quiet the protesters, do you think, tomorrow, Friday?

TARIF: The main problem with a speech of Shaaban, Dr. Shaaban was the auxiliary head. She has put on a lot of promises. It's the same promises that people have been listening for in Syria for the last 11 years.

Nevertheless, they have acknowledged that they have to issue (INAUDIBLE) for the media (INAUDIBLE) tomorrow which the country has been under for 50 years. This is actually as a matter of fact. It has more anger, because in her statement, she has called that there are indications and the proof that there is financial support to the protesters in Daraa, and this as a matter of fact is ridiculous.

GORANI: OK. Thank you, Wissam Tarif, who is in Damascus.

And, Joe, it's interesting because he -- a gentleman we were speaking with just now was referring to Shaaban. That is Buthaina Shaaban, the minister who went on state television about an hour and a half ago and spoke to the Syrian people, and said, "We promise that we'll implement reforms. We promise that some of those who have been detained will be released." You heard, though, Joe, from the protest organizers, they just don't believe them.

JOHNS: No, and it doesn't look like there will be much mo them, at least in what these current statements are coming out.

GORANI: Absolutely.

JOHNS: I want to talk now a little bit more with Mohammed Jamjoom in Abu Dhabi.

In this wave of Arab unrest we've seen that once the genie is out of the bottle, this longtime rulers have been unable to stuff it back in. Are we at that stage in Syria? Is the genie out of the battle yet?

MOHAMMED JAMJOOM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, when you speak also to opposition forces there, when you speak also to the protester and the eyewitnesses, they say the genie is out of the bottle. They say that they've basically gone past the stage where they're afraid anymore. They're out on the streets and are going to continue to be out of the streets.

But let's talk about this wave of anger and this protest movement that's sweeping through the countries here in the region. What you've seen happen in Bahrain and Yemen seems to be happening in Syria.

And if you look at that press difference earlier in the day by Buthaina Shaaban, she was parroting a lot of the lines we have heard the past few weeks from other leaders who've come under condemnation from their populations. I mean, she's saying that the government there regrets mistakes that have been made. She's saying -- she's promising certain reforms will happen. But she's also blaming foreign forces and blaming the media for distorting facts.

All of these leaders that have come until pressure from their populations, these populations that are asking for reform and regime change, when they first start answering, they seem to be saying this, taking this tone. But the protesters on the ground, they say, "No, this isn't enough, we don't believe these regimes," and they say they're going to continue to come out into the streets -- Joe.

JOHNS: Mohammed, there's been some speculation in Western media and elsewhere that Bashar Assad is less ruthless than his father who we know was quite ruthless.

Now, this, though, will be a real test of just how far the man in power now will go.

JAMJOOM: Oh, absolutely right. And when Bashar al-Assad came to power, he promised reform. He said he was going to open up Syria more. He said he was going to reforms to the people, economic reforms, more liberalization.

That was extraordinary at the time, because Syria is known to have an authoritarian regime. His father was known to rule with an iron fist. And he promised this. And people kept waiting and waiting, and now, you have protesters in the streets in southern Syria, in Daraa, they said they've waited long enough. They said they're not going to wait any more.

And Bashar al-Assad has a very fine line to work here. It's very interesting that he's been conciliatory at times as he has, but at the same time, you're seeing a crackdown happening. And the despite the fact that the government is saying they're not responsible, that they're not using live ammunition, that the president never said to fire on the people -- more and more eyewitness accounts say that they are. And they say -- and it seems to indicate that the government is nervous and they don't know quite how to deal with this.

GORANI: Yes.

JAMJOOM: So, the fact of the matter is, Bashar al-Assad is in a very tight spot right now, not sure how he's going to deal with it in the coming days -- Joe.

GORANI: And let's talk -- it's Hala, Mohammed -- about regionally how important Syria is. Libya has its importance in the region. But Syria is interconnected with so many very important things in the Middle East. That's Israel, Lebanon, Iran -- countless things will change if the leadership in that country changes. So, it's very important what happens there.

JAMJOOM: Absolutely. I mean, the simplest way to try to put it, and it's a very complex and thorny subject. But the simplest way to put it there can be no comprehensive Middle East peace ever without Syria's backing. Syria is very close to Lebanon. Syria also is very closely allied with Iran.

Now, Syria was isolated for many years by Western countries. In the past several years, you've seen more movement and a warming of relationships between the U.S. and Syria. Syria has been navigating this very fine line, this delicate dance in an area with so much conflict and so much strife, and because it has so many tentacles in so many different countries and backs so many different groups, it really is a key player in the region.

And if Bashar al-Assad were to go, nobody knows what would happen next. So, it's a big question mark -- Hala.

GORANI: It is a big question. Mohammed Jamjoom, thanks very much.

And, Joe, Mohammed there mentioned it -- so many tentacles in so many countries. What happens there is really crucial for the region.

JOHNS: Yes. You would want to say that it would actually be a domino effect, but the domino effect started a loan time ago.

GORANI: It did.

JOHNS: Tunisia.

GORANI: Is it spreading to Syria is the question? Because so far, it's been in the south. Is it going to spread to Damascus and to another big urban centers? That we'll see tomorrow.

JOHNS: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GORANI: All right. Welcome back. We are still waiting for the U.N. secretary general to come to the microphone. He is going to update us on a deal that we believe has been struck between the key coalition countries conducting that military operation in Libya. But we haven't -- we were expecting him about 45 minutes ago.

JOHNS: He's taking his time certainly.

Meanwhile, we have Wolf Blitzer joining us now. We want to talk a little bit about Libya with him.

Wolf, are you there? Where are you, Wolf?

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, I'm here, Joe. Can you hear me?

JOHNS: All right. So, take a look at this. I guess we first would want to talk to you just a little bit about your perspective on what is going on right now in Libya, and this talk now of NATO taking over this operation.

BLITZER: A lot will depend, Joe and Hala, on the details. As they say, the devil is in the details. And we'll get those details because it's not just a NATO operation. There are several countries involved who are not members of NATO and there are several NATO members who are not very happy with what's going on, with the scope of the mission, the operation itself.

NATO has to operate with what they call consensus, or virtual unanimity. They don't do things unless all the NATO partners, all the NATO allies agree. So, they're trying to finesse this to make sure that they got the right formula, if you will, what NATO is going to do, what some non-NATO countries would do and who would be in charge.

As we know, there is a NATO supreme allied commander, who is an American, but there could be a French general or a British admiral or somebody else who is specifically in charge of this operation.

And then it gets a little confusing for U.S. military personnel. Who do they report do? They don't like taking orders from non-U.S. officers. So, it's -- it gets a little sensitive. They're going tot finesse all the details, work it out.

We'll hear from the NATO secretary-general, and then we'll probably hear from the secretary of state.

JOHNS: So, one thing that, you know, in all your years of covering Washington, D.C. and the world, have you often seen this kind of uncertainly while there's actual hostilities going on in a particular country? Is this sort of exceptional uncertainly at this stage in the game?

BLITZER: Well, you know, there was a lot of certainty going into Bosnia and Kosovo. They finessed that. They've got some sort of arrangement going on. There's been uncertainty in other times. They have had to come up with an audible, if you will, in the first Gulf War 20 years ago when the U.S. and its coalition partners, including some Arab countries -- Egypt and Syria were even involved, at least -- at least a little bit, not much, but a little bit -- they had to come up with some sort of formula then. It was not a NATO operation. It was a U.S.-led operation, but there were a lot of members of what they called the coalition of the willing.

So they come up with these formulas, diplomatic formulas, military formulas. The key is, I think the big picture, how long is it going to take to achieve what the U.S. says is its ultimate goal in Libya, which is not necessarily simply to protect the civilians? That's the United Nations Security Council goal.

The U.S. goal, as the president repeatedly has said, it is to get rid of Gadhafi once and for all. That's what the U.S. objective has been, is, and we will see if they're able to achieve that objective anytime soon.

JOHNS: But that's very different from the goal of the U.N. resolution, which sort of creates a problem.

BLITZER: Right.

JOHNS: Right. The United Nations Security Council resolution, they reached a consensus, the Arab League, the 10 members of the United Nations Security Council that voted for it. Five members abstained, including Russia and China.

But there is a difference between what the U.N. has authorized, what the military is now directly charged with doing, the U.S., British, French the others charged with doing, and what the president of the United States for weeks has now said is the U.S. policy, what the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, as recently as yesterday said is the U.S. policy, which is Libya without Gadhafi.

So how do you achieve that? That's easier said than done. And if -- if in the end there's a stalemate, Gadhafi remains in charge of Tripoli in the west, the rebels remain in charge of Benghazi in the east, that's something that the U.S., at least the Obama administration will not be happy with. And they're going to see that as a setback.

So they're taking it one step at a time right now. But as they say, they have got a lot of explaining to do, and a lot of members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, want more details and presumably in the coming days, they will get them.

JOHNS: Wolf, thanks so much for that perspective. Comes from years of covering Washington, D.C., and the world. And stay close with. We will go back to Syria in just a moment.