Divided Senate Panel Approves Resolution on Syria Strike
Christopher Gregory/The New York Times
Senators John McCain, Bob Corker and John Barrasso on Wednesday after the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved the authorization of force against the Syrian regime.
By JONATHAN WEISMAN
Published: September 4, 2013
WASHINGTON — A divided Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday approved an authorization of force against the Syrian government, setting up a showdown next week in the full Senate on whether President Obama should have the authority to strike.
Tracking the Syrian Crisis
The Times is providing updates, analysis and public reaction from around the world.
Multimedia
Related
Obama Says ‘World Set a Red Line’ on Chemical Arms(September 5, 2013)
In Hearing, House Panel Seems Split on Syria Strike (September 5, 2013)
The 10-to-7 vote showed bipartisan support for a strike, but bipartisan opposition as well. Republicans voting yes included Senators John McCain of Arizona, Bob Corker of Tennessee and Jeff Flake of Arizona. Democrats against the authorization included Senators Tom Udall of New Mexico and Chris Murphy of Connecticut. The Senate’s newest member, Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, voted present.
The panel had struggled to draft the resolution, with the senators deeply divided over how much force should be brought to bear to punish Syria’s government for the use of chemical weapons.
The committee’s bipartisan leaders pressed forward with a resolution limiting the duration and nature of military strikes, while Mr. McCain demanded more – not less – latitude for the military to inflict damage on the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
The approved resolution would limit strikes against the Syrian government to 60 days, with the possibility of 30 more days upon consultation with Congress, and it would specifically block the use of ground troops. But to retain the support of Mr. McCain, considered crucial to the authorization’s final passage, the committee toughened some of the language.
Before the vote, the balance of power appeared to lie with the interventionists. The panel set aside a resolution by Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican leading the opposition to the strikes, that would have declared that the president has the authority to act unilaterally only when the nation faces attack, then approved language by Mr. McCain and Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware, to toughen the resolution.
The McCain-Coons language noted “absent decisive changes to the present military balance of power on the ground in Syria, sufficient incentives do not yet exist” to force a political settlement of the Syrian civil war.
It also reiterated that “it is the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria,” urging “a comprehensive U.S. strategy” to not only degrade the government’s weapons of mass destruction but also to improve the fighting abilities of “elements of the Syrian opposition.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.