President Barack Obama gained ground Tuesday in his drive for
congressional backing of a military strike against Syria, winning
critical support from House Speaker John Boehner while key Senate
Democrats and Republicans agreed to back a
no-combat-troops-on-the-ground action in retaliation for a chemical
weapons attack.
Officials said the emerging Senate measure would
receive a vote Wednesday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Approval is likely.
"You're probably going to win" Congress'
backing, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a conservative and likely opponent
of the measure, conceded in a late-afternoon exchange with Secretary of
State John Kerry.
The leader of House Republicans, Boehner emerged
from a meeting at the White House and said the United States has
"enemies around the world that need to understand that we're not going
to tolerate this type of behavior. We also have allies around the world
and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be
there and stand up when it's necessary."
Boehner spoke as
lawmakers in both parties called for changes to the president's
requested legislation, insisting it be rewritten to restrict the type
and duration of any military action.
In
the Senate, the compromise was the work of Sens. Bob Menendez, D-N.J.,
and Bob Corker, R-Tenn., among others. They are the chairman and senior
Republican, respectively, on the Foreign Relations Committee, which held
a lengthy hearing during the day on Obama's request for congressional
legislation in support of the military reprisal he wants.
The
measure would set a time limit of 60 days and says the president could
extend that for 30 days more unless Congress votes otherwise.
The measure also bars the use of U.S. ground troops for "combat operations."
The
White House had no immediate reaction to the Senate measure, although
Kerry, testifying earlier before the committee, signaled that the troop
restriction was acceptable to the administration. "There's no problem in
our having the language that has zero capacity for American troops on
the ground," he said.
"President Obama is not asking America to go
to war," Kerry said in a strongly worded opening statement. He added,
"This is not the time for armchair isolationism. This is not the time to
be spectators to slaughter."
Obama
said earlier in the day he was open to revisions in the relatively
broad request the White House made over the weekend. He expressed
confidence Congress would respond to his call for support and said
Assad's action "poses a serious national security threat to the United
States and to the region.
The administration says 1,429 died from
the attack on Aug. 21 in a Damascus suburb. Casualty estimates by other
groups are far lower, and Assad's government blames the episode on
rebels who have been seeking to overthrow his government in a civil war
that began over two years ago. A United Nations inspection team is
awaiting lab results on tissue and soil samples it collected while in
the country before completing a closely watched report.
The
president met top lawmakers at the White House before embarking on an
overseas trip to Sweden and Russia, leaving the principal lobbying at
home for the next few days to Vice President Joe Biden and other members
of his administration.
Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and
Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sat
shoulder-to-shoulder at the Senate committee hearing while, a few
hundred miles away, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged
caution. He said any punitive action against Syria could unleash more
turmoil and bloodshed, and he advised that such strikes would be legal
only in self-defense under the U.N. Charter or if approved by the
organization's Security Council. Russia and China have repeatedly used
their veto power in the council to block action against Assad.
In
the Middle East, Israel and the U.S. conducted a joint missile test over
the Mediterranean in a display of military might in the region.
Obama
set the fast-paced events in motion on Saturday, when he unexpectedly
stepped back from ordering a military strike under his own authority and
announced he would seek congressional approval.
Recent presidents
have all claimed the authority to undertake limited military action
without congressional backing. Some have followed up with such action.
Obama
said he, too, believes he has that authority, and House Democratic
leader Nancy Pelosi said during the day that even Congress' refusal to
authorize the president wouldn't negate the power of the commander in
chief.
Still, the president also has stated that the United States
will be stronger if lawmakers grant their support. But neither Obama
nor his aides has been willing to state what options would be left to
him should Congress reject his call.
As Obama has often noted, the
country is weary of war after more than a decade of combat deaths in
Afghanistan and Iraq, and there is residual skepticism a decade after
Bush administration claims went unproven that Saddam Hussein possessed
weapons of mass destruction. Additionally, a spate of polls indicates
the public opposes a military strike against Syria, by a margin of 59-36
percent if the United States acts unilaterally, according to a new
Washington Post-ABC survey, and a narrower 46-51 if allies take part.
Among
major allies, only France has publicly offered to join the United
States in a strike, although President Francois Hollande says he will
await Congress' decision. The British House of Commons rejected a
military strike last week.
Yet the president's decision to seek congressional approval presents lawmakers with a challenge, as well.
Even some of Obama's sternest critics in Congress expressed strong concerns about the repercussions of a failure to act.
House
Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, R-Va., said after Tuesday's White House
meeting that a failure to respond to the use of chemical weapons "only
increases the likelihood of future WMD (weapons of mass destruction) use
by the regime, transfer to Hezbollah, or acquisition by al-Qaida."
America's largest pro-Israel organization, AIPAC, also announced its support for legislation to authorize a military strike.
Apart from the meeting with Obama, the White House provided closed-door briefings for members of Congress.
Sen.
Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said after attending one session that
administration officials told lawmakers that the targets the military
had identified last week were still present, despite the highly public
discussion of a possible attack. "Seems strange to see some targets
still available several weeks later," Flake said, adding that he was
"still listening" to the administration's lobbying.
Dempsey
addressed the same point later in the day. "Time works both ways," he
told the Senate panel. He said the United States has significant
intelligence about Assad's actions, and "we continue to refine our
targets."
Others were firmly opposed. Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma
said on Fox News, "It may sound real easy when people like Secretary
Kerry say that 'it is going to be quick and we're going to go in, we're
going to send a few cruise missiles, wash our hands and go home.' It
doesn't work that way. This could be a war in the Middle East, it's
serious."
Paul, the Kentucky Republican who has close ties to tea
party groups, said he probably would vote against authorizing Obama to
use force. But he said it also wouldn't be helpful to amend the
resolution in a way that constrains the president too much to execute
military action, if authorized.
He
made his prediction that the White House would get its way in an
exchange with Kerry in which he said Obama should agree to abide by
Congress' decision, rather than reserve the right to order a strike even
if the vote goes against him.
Democrats, too, were divided,
although it appeared the administration's biggest concern was winning
support among deeply conservative Republicans who have battled with the
president on issue after issue since winning control of the House three
years ago.
The United States maintains a significant military
force in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. The U.S. Navy released one of
the warships that had been in the region, leaving four destroyers armed
with cruise missiles, the USS Stout, USS Gravely, USS Ramage and USS
Barry. Also in the area was an amphibious warship, the USS San Antonio,
with about 300 Marines aboard.
In addition, there are two aircraft
carriers in the region — the USS Nimitz strike group, which is in the
southern Red Sea, and the USS Harry S Truman, which is in the Arabian
Sea.
No comments:
Post a Comment