|
 Obama has defended his authority to lead an international
coalition against Islamic State since Aug. 8 when U.S. fighter jets
began attacking the jihadists in Iraq. But he has faced criticism
for failing to seek the backing of Congress, where some accuse him
of breaching his constitutional authority.
Facing pressure to let lawmakers weigh in on an issue as important
as the deployment of troops and chastened by elections that handed
power in Congress to Republicans, he said in November he would
request formal authorization for the use of military force (AUMF).
An outline of that request, expected to be handed to Congress on
Wednesday, could stir debate over how U.S. troops should be deployed
and the extent of U.S. engagement in Iraq and Syria.
The proposal would allow the use of special forces and advisors for
defensive purposes but bar "enduring offensive ground forces,"
lawmakers and aides said. It would not, however, set geographic
limits for the campaign against the group.
Until now, Obama has justified U.S. air strikes in Iraq and Syria
under a 2001 authorization passed after the Sept. 11 attacks and a
2002 authorization used by President George W. Bush in the Iraq war.
The new proposal would repeal the 2002 authorization but leave in
place the 2001 AUMF, which has been invoked by the White House to
carry out drone and missile strikes against suspected al Qaeda
militants in Yemen and Somalia.
VOTE IN MARCH?
Fueled by outrage over the death of aid worker Kayla Mueller, the
last-known U.S. hostage held by Islamic State militants, as well as
the slayings of journalists and a Jordanian pilot, lawmakers said
they planned quick hearings on the authorization, and a vote within
weeks of Congress' return from a Feb. 16-20 recess.
Both Republicans and Democrats said there had been unusually close
consultations between the administration and Capitol Hill on the
authorization.
Many of Obama's fellow Democrats, war-weary after more than a dozen
years of fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, say they will oppose any
AUMF that includes "boots on the ground."
[to top of second column] |
Obama's opposition to the Iraq War helped propel him to victory in
the 2008 campaign and bringing troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan
has been a focus of his presidency.
"I worry that this AUMF gives the ability for the next president to
put ground troops back into the Middle East," said Senator Chris
Murphy, adding that that would be a sticking point for himself and
many other Democrats.
Some hawkish Republicans oppose restrictions on military commanders
such as a ban on ground troops. Others are calling for a more
extensive authorization allowing U.S. forces to challenge President
Bashar al-Assad of Syria, where a four-year-long civil war has
fueled the rise of the Islamic State group.
"If the authorization doesn't let us counter Assad's air power, I
think it will fail," said Senator Lindsey Graham, a leading
Republican foreign policy voice.
The White House has declined to discuss the specific time frame or
details of its planned AUMF.
(Additional reporting by Roberta Rampton, David Lawder and Susan
Cornwell; Editing by Jason Szep and Christian Plumb)
[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
