Email
Congressional leaders shrugged off concerns over the legality of White House plans to bomb Isis in Syria on Thursday, agreeing instead to grant separate authorisation to train and equip rebels in votes scheduled for next week.
“We ought to give the president what he’s asking for,” said House speaker John Boehner despite admitting some concern among fellow Republicans that Obama’s military plans may not go far enough to defeat the Islamic State fighters known as Isis.
“An F-16 is not a strategy. And air strikes alone will not accomplish what we’re trying to accomplish,” he added. “And the president’s made clear that he doesn’t want US boots on the ground. Well, somebody’s boots have to be on the ground.”
Senior Democrats were less enthusiastic about further US escalation but equally adamant that the president was right to seek military escalation in the region without a vote in Congress.
“He has the legal authority. I know he does. I’ve studied the issue for a very long time,” said House minority leader Nancy Pelosi.
“It’s up to Congress to rally around Obama and his decisive strategy,” added Senate leader Harry Reid. “This is the time for America to close ranks and engage our adversaries as one united nation.”
Only at the edges of both parties was there any suggestion that the president may be overstepping his authority by launching open-ended strikes in Syria and Iraq without first seeking congressional approval.
“I believe any expanded US military role beyond air strikes in the fight against Isis in Iraq must be approved by Congress,” said Colorado Democrat Mark Udall.
“The American people must be assured that we are not pursuing another open-ended conflict in the Middle East, and I will not give this president — or any other president — a blank check to begin another land war in Iraq.”
Tim Kaine of Virginia also questioned whether there should formal war authorisation beyond that already granted after 9/11, though he acknowledged the president “made a strong case on the need to degrade and destroy Isis.”
Among Republicans, there was more concern about whether relying on moderate Syrian rebel groups to help defeat Isis would be enough.
Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who is standing down in November, said she would not vote in favour of any bill authorising US training for the groups out of fears they were allies of Isis rather than enemies and she questioned whether so-called “boots on the ground” could be avoided
“Whether they are called advisers or not, they still have boots on,” she said. “American boots are on the ground.”
Another hawkish Republican, New York congressman Peter King, said he thought the US battle against Isis was likely to go on “another 10 to 15 years”.
A House vote allowing the Pentagon to spend $500m training and equipping Syrian rebel groups – known as article 10 authorisation – is likely to take place early next week, followed by a Senate bill later in the week.
Boehner said there had yet to be a decision among House Republicans on whether it would be included alongside other budget measures in a previously planned continued resolution, or whether it would be voted on separately.
But few were in any doubt that Congress would stand in the way of the president’s desire to expand strikes in Syria and Iraq.
“I expect the proposal to pass Congress by the end of next week,” said Reid.
;