KAGAN: There is no one-size-fits-all. Every situation is different. I'd be very surprised if this particular method worked elsewhere. We're just going to have to get used to it. But I'm afraid the administration's moved from, you know, leading from behind to leading in reverse. They are just pulling back and hoping that they can still provide leadership in the world. I'm very dubious.
RADDATZ: Can I make one...
STENGEL: Well, but this 21st century statecraft, which the secretary talks about, is different than that old model. I mean, leading from behind is an unfortunate phrase. Americans don't like that idea. We're like leading from the front, you know, charging in there. But, A, we have budget problems. B, there is a new world going on there with social media. We're seeing it in the Arab Spring. We cannot dictate to other countries what they want. We cannot tell other countries, "This is what your national interest is," and that's what we've done for a long time.
RADDATZ: Christiane, I just want to make one quick point about -- about what -- what Biden said, and that is, when you look at war and you look at the changing face of war, and you look at drones, and you look at air strikes, it's sort of "Back to the Future" for me, of looking back and people thought airpower could solve all things.
RADDATZ: Yeah. In -- in one way, it -- it makes war easier. It's so clinical. The drones strikes are so clinical. No one dies from our side. No one dies from the American side. So is it easier for a president to go to war, to -- to not involve Congress as much? And I think that's a question the American people have to ask one another. And it really has not been debated.
Let me ask you, Senator McCain, when you hear this debate now about how war might be conducted in the future, and you look around yourself, next door in Syria, for instance, should the United States do what they successfully supported in Libya? Should Syria have the sort of NATO treatment?
MCCAIN: Well, first of all, let me just point out that if we had an imposed a no-fly zone, if we had used the full weight of American airpower, we would not have -- this conflict would've not been prolonged as long as it -- it has. But that's -- that's over.
But we really need to provide medical help for the Libyans. We need to get these militias consolidated under the transition national council, or there's going to be a big problem. We have to, from human rights standpoint, see that prisoners are treated well. And I think that those things are what we can focus on.
I don't think that airpower would work in many other places. I think this was a unique situation. By the way, no British or French person died, either, and they led, and we followed.
But I -- I think that Syria cannot be allowed to continue to slaughter its own citizens indefinitely. Now, the Arab League foreign ministers are going to Damascus and make demands, which Assad will not agree to. So this is a step-by-step process. But I would not completely rule out actions to prevent over time Bashar Assad from continuing to slaughter his own people.
AMANPOUR: Well, you raised some very interesting questions which we'll obviously look at to see where that goes.
And in the meantime, Bob, it is the first elections in Tunisia. Libya is being liberated formally today. Where do we think it's going to go in the Arab world?