|
 The White House wants Congress to approve $500 million to train
and arm moderate Syrian rebels to battle Islamic State militants, a
show of confidence for administration officials as they try to form
an international coalition.
The beheadings of two U.S. captives by Islamic State have steeled
lawmakers to the need for more military action, and both Democratic
and Republican congressional leaders were supportive of Obama's plan
on Wednesday.
But some Republicans in particular say they want more information
from the administration about its wider strategy to combat global
terrorism, and many would prefer a broad vote rather than one
focused on funding.
"This could be taken by some as a war vote," said House
Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers, adding that he has
reservations about providing weapons that could fall into enemy
hands.
"There are so many unknowns that we are dealing with here, it's too
early to make any decisions," the Kentucky Republican told reporters
shortly before Obama told Americans in a speech on Wednesday night
that he had authorized an escalation of his campaign against Islamic
State.
Republican Senator Rand Paul, also from Kentucky and normally a
leader of his party's isolationist wing, said he would support
military action against Islamic State, but wants Obama to "follow
the Constitution" and seek congressional authorization.
Just a year ago, U.S. lawmakers recoiled at the thought of military
strikes against Syria's government for using chemical weapons. They
handed Obama an embarrassing foreign policy defeat as anti-war
Democrats joined isolationist Republicans in a rare show of
bi-partisanship that killed his request for strikes.
Democrats are crossing the aisle again, this time as they voice
strong support for attacking Islamic State, though the overwhelming
majority of lawmakers from both parties oppose the idea of sending
in any U.S. ground troops.
"I often disagree with the president's foreign policy, but you've
got to come together as a nation to stand up to ISIS," said
Representative Luke Messer, an Indiana Republican, using another
name for Islamic State.
While criticizing Obama's previous handling of the threat from
Syria, Representative Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican, predicted
Obama would ultimately get bipartisan support.
"You back presidents up in a situation like this," Cole said.
Obama has requested that funds for training rebels be included in a
stop-gap funding bill that would avert a U.S. government shutdown on
Oct. 1, the start of a new fiscal year.
The White House has said Obama he does not believe he needs
Congress' formal authorization to attack Islamic State.
CONGRESSIONAL OUTREACH
Obama is making a concerted effort to court lawmakers. A day after
the speech, the White House is dispatching top administration
officials to conduct closed-door briefings for the full Senate and
House on Thursday.
Obama hosted the four leaders of Congress at the White House on
Tuesday, and on Wednesday Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a
Democrat, backed the plan to train Syrian rebels.
[to top of second column] |
Connecticut Democratic Senator Chris Murphy said he, like Obama,
favored working with partners in the region. "I think he laid out
a very compelling case," he said.
Still, Murphy had misgivings about arming and training Syrian
rebels. "I have long been a skeptic of our ability to maneuver the
nuances of an increasingly complicated civil war inside Syria," he
said.
Islamic State's brutality and lightning takeover of large swathes of
Iraq and Syria have galvanized the public, and their elected
representatives.
"There was absolutely zero appetite ... a year ago for any
initiation of hostilities beyond what was absolutely necessary to
protect us in a very direct way. Now you see, (poll ratings) in the
70s, people saying ISIS must be stopped," said House of
Representatives Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, a leading liberal
voice in Congress.
Members campaigning ahead of the Nov. 4 elections - in which the
entire House and one-third of the Senate are up for grabs - said
they had been hearing concerns about Islamic State from voters, a
departure from Americans' typical focus on domestic issues.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll this week showed that 71 percent of
all Americans support the air strikes in Iraq, up from 54 percent
three weeks ago and from 45 percent in June.
Democratic congressional aides said privately that some party
members in tough re-election contests are asking that there be no
broad authorization vote, to avoiding any chance at alienating their
anti-war supporters.
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent allied with the
Democrats, denounced ISIS as a "threat to the world" a "savage group
of people".
But Sanders, who voted against the authorization for the use of
military force in Iraq in 2002, said it was crucial to avoid
following the approach of former President George W. Bush and former
Vice President Dick Cheney.
"We were strong and tough under Bush and Cheney and it was the worst
foreign policy blunder in the modern history of the United States. I
don't think we want to repeat that," he said.
(Additional reporting by Emily Stephenson and Roberta Rampton in
Washington, and Jason Szep in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Editing by Caren
Bohan and Peter Henderson)
[© 2014 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2014 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
