Articles and More!: divided

Showing posts with label divided. Show all posts

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Divided vote foreshadows Obama challenge on Syria

Secretary of State John Kerry testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 4, 2013, before the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing to advance President Barack Obama’s request for congressional authorization for military intervention in Syria, a response to last month’s alleged sarin gas attack in the Syrian civil war. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Secretary of State John Kerry confers with U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford, right, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 4, 2013, during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on President Barack Obama’s request for congressional authorization for military intervention in Syria, a response to last month’s alleged sarin gas attack in the Syrian civil war. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel sits at left. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senate Foreign Relations Committee members Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, center, and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., left, talk on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 4, 2013, during the committee’s hearing to consider the authorization for use of military force in Syria. Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. is at right. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Buy AP Photo Reprints

WASHINGTON (AP) â€” A Senate panel’s deep divide over giving President Barack Obama the authority to use U.S. military force against Syria underscores the commander in chief’s challenge in persuading skeptical lawmakers and wary allies to back greater intervention in an intractable civil war.

The administration was pressing ahead Thursday with its full-scale sales job, holding another round of closed-door meetings for members of Congress about its intelligence on Syria. On another continent, Obama was certain to face questions from world leaders when he arrives in St. Petersburg, Russia, for an economic summit.

The event’s host, Russian President Vladimir Putin, stands as a reminder of resistance to U.S. pleas for Moscow to intervene with its ally Syria and President Bashar Assad.

Obama has called for military action after the administration blamed Assad for a chemical weapons attack on Aug. 21 that it says killed more than 1,400 civilians, including at least 400 children. Other casualty estimates are lower, and the Syrian government denies responsibility, contending rebels fighting to topple the government were to blame.

Responding to Obama’s request, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 10-7 Wednesday to authorize the “limited and specified use” of the U.S. armed forces against Syria, backing a resolution that restricts military action to 90 days and bars American ground troops from combat.

Secretary of State John Kerry, testifying for the second consecutive day before Congress, insisted that the U.S. military response would be restricted as Americans fatigued by more than a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan show little inclination to get involved in Syria.

“I don’t believe we’re going to war, I just don’t believe that,” Kerry told the House Foreign Affairs Committee, citing the ground troops and long-term commitment that he said wars entail. “That’s not what we’re doing here. The president is asking for permission to take a limited military action, yes, but one that does not put Americans in the middle of the battle.”

In the Senate, five Republicans, including potential presidential candidates Rand Paul and Marco Rubio, and two Democrats opposed the resolution, which is expected to reach the Senate floor next week. The timing of a vote is uncertain.

“I believe U.S. military action of the type contemplated here might prove to be counterproductive,” Rubio said. “After a few days of missile strikes, it will allow Assad, for example, to emerge and claim that he took on the United States and survived.”

Paul, a Kentucky conservative with strong tea party ties, has threatened a filibuster, although he acknowledged that proponents have the votes to prevail in the Senate, and he pinned his hopes on the House.

The notion of a contained operation has failed to sway many Republicans and Democrats in the House, who question why the U.S. should get involved now in a Syrian civil war that has killed an estimated 100,000, displaced millions and is in its third year. While House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., have expressed support for military action, but rank-and-file Republicans remain reluctant or outright opposed.

Republican Rep. Chris Collins said voters in his western New York district are “overwhelmingly against involvement.” The freshman congressman is undecided.

“Really, I’m looking for the president to justify limited military strike and establish what are the objectives he’s seeking and what is the mission,” Collins said in a phone interview.

Kerry told the Foreign Affairs Committee that he believed Obama would address the nation on Syria in the next few days. The president returns home from overseas Friday night.

Speaking in Sweden on Wednesday, Obama left open the possibility he would order retaliation for the deadly chemical weapons attack even if Congress withheld its approval.

“I always preserve the right and responsibility to act on behalf of America’s national security,” he told a news conference. In a challenge to lawmakers back home, he said Congress’ credibility was on the line, not his own, despite saying a year ago that the use of chemical weapons would cross a “red line.”

The Senate panel’s vote marked the first formal response in Congress, four days after Obama unexpectedly put off an anticipated cruise missile strike against Syria and instead asked lawmakers to unite behind such a plan.

The vote capped a hectic few days in which lawmakers first narrowed the scope of Obama’s request and then widened it.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a proponent of aggressive U.S. military action in Syria, joined forces with Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware to add a provision calling for “decisive changes to the present military balance of power on the ground in Syria.”

At their urging, the measure was also changed to state that the policy of the United States was “to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria so as to create favorable conditions for a negotiated settlement that ends the conflict and leads to a democratic government in Syria.” McCain, who long has accused Obama of timidity in Syria, argued that Assad will be willing to participate in diplomatic negotiations only if he believes he is going to lose the civil war he has been fighting for more than two years.

___

Associated Press writers Julie Pace and Josh Lederman in Sweden and Bradley Klapper, Alan Fram, Deb Riechmann, Kimberly Dozier, Lolita C. Baldor and Andrew Taylor in Washington contributed to this report.

Associated Press

U.S. Headlines

Divided vote foreshadows Obama challenge on Syria

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Congress divided on using aid to pressure Egypt

This handout photo provided by the White House, taken July 3, 2013, shows President Barack Obama meeting with members of his national security team to discuss the situation in Egypt in the Situation Room of the White House in Washington. The Obama administration is treading carefully after Egypt’s military overthrew its president, wary of taking sides in a conflict that pits a democratically elected leader against a people’s aspirations for prosperity and inclusive government. (AP Photo/White House Photo, Pete Souza)

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney speaks during the daily news briefing at the White House in Washignton, Monday, July 8, 2013. The overthrow of Egypt’s Islamist president, and National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, were among the topics Carney discussed. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Supporters of the ousted President Mohammed Morsi shout slogans in Nasr City, a suburb of Cairo, Egypt, Monday, July 8, 2013. Egyptian soldiers and police opened fire on supporters of the ousted president early Monday in violence that left dozens of people killed, including one officer, outside a military building in Cairo where demonstrators had been holding a sit-in, government officials and witnesses said. (AP Photo/Nasser Shiyoukhi)

Buy AP Photo Reprints

WASHINGTON (AP) â€” While the Obama administration throws its support behind Egypt’s military, some members of Congress are looking at withholding some or all of America’s annual $ 1.5 billion aid package if a civilian government isn’t quickly restored.

Without the administration’s support, that’s a high hurdle. But after watching the violence spiral in recent days in Cairo and elsewhere, more lawmakers are questioning whether the Egyptian military’s ouster of Mohammed Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood-led government last week must be defined as a “coup” and how the U.S. should leverage the only significant element of influence it has in Egypt.

The administration insisted Monday that it won’t withhold funds from Egypt’s army after its second takeover of a civilian government in the past 29 months. Most of the money goes to the military under an arrangement U.S. leaders have honored since Egypt’s 1979 peace treaty with Israel. Despite rocky relations since the ouster of longtime autocrat and longtime U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak in February 2011, the U.S. has continued to financially support the institution it sees as Egypt’s guarantor of stability.

Some in Congress say the latest military action should change the calculation because it unseated a democratically elected president.

“We need to suspend aid to the new government until it does in fact schedule elections and put in place a process that comes up with a new constitution,” Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters Monday. He said he’d support such a measure, but acknowledged it would be unlikely to gain majority support in Congress.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was another who demanded an aid cutoff. “Regardless of what anyone thinks about Mohammed Morsi, he was elected by a majority of Egyptians last year,” he said Monday.

“It is difficult for me to conclude that what happened was anything other than a coup in which the military played a decisive role,” McCain added. “I do not want to suspend our critical assistance to Egypt, but I believe that is the right thing to do at this time.”

In an era of tight budgets and increased doubts about the merits of financially supporting sometimes lukewarm allies like Pakistan, that position is bringing together some unusual allies.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., judged Morsi’s tenure as a “disappointment” but noted that U.S. law unequivocally opposes military coups. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., lamented Monday: “In Egypt, governments come and go. The only thing certain is that American taxpayers will continue to be stuck with the $ 1.5 billion bill.”

Under current law, however, it’s President Barack Obama and his administration who decide whether Morsi’s overthrow was a coup, which would trigger automatic suspension of most American support. The law was first drafted in 1985 pertaining to Guatemala’s civil war; it was subsequently broadened to apply to all military overthrows of democratically elected governments and has become a key lever of congressional influence in U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. halted non-humanitarian aid to Mali last year after a coup there.

U.S. officials say they’re reviewing developments in Egypt, but the White House and State Department strongly backed continued U.S. military and economic assistance to Egypt on Monday.

“I’ll be blunt â€” this is an incredibly complex and difficult situation,” White House press secretary Jay Carney answered when asked whether what occurred in Egypt was a coup. “There are significant consequences that go along with this determination, and it is a highly charged issue for millions of Egyptians who have different views about what happened.”

He added, “It would not be in the best interests of the United States to immediately change our assistance program to Egypt.”

Congress, like the administration, is trying to reconcile democratic principles and U.S. interests.

Obama and his national security team have condemned the violence, which killed at least 51 Islamist protesters and three security forces on Monday alone, but haven’t condemned the military for seizing power.

Several lawmakers have followed that lead, rejecting any immediate move to cut off aid at a time when the Muslim Brotherhood is calling for all-out rebellion against the army and any power vacuum could be filled by Islamic militant groups that might threaten stability in the Arab world’s most populous country, or in Israel next door.

“It’s important that we not just shoot from the hip on that,” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told reporters Monday.

Kaine, who joined five Republican senators on a trip to the Middle East last week, said close U.S. allies in the region strongly advised against halting U.S. funds for Egypt. Four-fifths of the money goes to the military and supports operations that include isolating extremist groups and helping secure Israel’s borders.

Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., the heads of the Senate Foreign Relations and the House Intelligence committees, respectively, want continued support for Egypt’s military. “Cut off all aid immediately and you will take an economy that is already floundering and probably drive it into chaos, and that is not in anyone’s national security interests,” Menendez told reporters Monday.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, was more dismissive, crediting Egypt’s military leaders for doing “what they had to do in terms of replacing the elected president.”

Ardent Israel supporters in the Capitol, along with evangelicals who’ve criticized Morsi for failing to protect Christians sufficiently and foreign policy “realists” who value stability, have refrained from undercutting Egypt’s military. The powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC has stressed that while Morsi was “surprisingly compliant” to Israel, of paramount importance now is preventing extremists from using Egypt’s turmoil to carry out attacks or smuggle arms into the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

And even as he was calling for an aid cutoff, McCain said the administration and Congress needed to come up with “creative and lawful,” if limited, forms of cooperation with Egypt’s military to fight terrorism, share intelligence and maintain regional peace.

No one in the House or Senate has outlined specific proposals yet with regard to Egypt. And without an administration declaration of a coup, there is little Congress can do about aid already approved through the end of September. Secretary of State John Kerry has waived requirements demanding that he certify Egyptian progress on a democratic transition. Lawmakers would have to rewrite the law if they were to hold up money they’ve appropriated but the administration hasn’t spent.

That leaves fiscal year 2014, where options are not significantly different. In the unlikely event Congress votes to cut funding to Egypt, it almost surely would need Obama’s approval. And his administration has shown no interest so far in such action.

Associated Press

Top Headlines

Congress divided on using aid to pressure Egypt

Buy AP Photo Reprints