This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lawmakers-weigh-giving-obama-authority-to-wage-war-against-islamic-state/2014/09/10/59f057b0-38fd-11e4-8601-97ba88884ffd_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Obama announces ‘broad coalition’ to fight Islamic State extremist group Obama announces ‘broad coalition’ to fight Islamic State extremist group
(35 minutes later)
President Obama began outlining a sweeping and long-term strategy Wednesday night for combatting the threat posed by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, launching what could be the biggest counterterrorism campaign of his presidency. President Obama outlined an open-ended campaign Wednesday night to combat the threat posed by the Islamic State, significantly expanding the counter-terrorisim strategy that has been a hallmark of his presidency.
“Tonight, I want to speak to you about what the United States will do with our friends and allies to degrade, and ultimately destroy, the terrorist group known as ISIL,” Obama said in a prime-time speech delivered from the White House. Obama said in a prime-time speech delivered from the White House that America will join “with our friends and allies to degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL,” using an alternative acronym for the group that has emerged in Iraq and Syria.
According to prepared remarks, Obama said the offensive against the militant group will not involve combat troops but a “steady, relentless effort” through airstrikes in both countries and support for military partners on the ground. Saying the U.S. is meeting the threat with “strength and resolve,” the president also sought to assauge the concerns of Americans who are wary of another foreign entanglement, insisting that the offensive against the militant group will not involve combat troops but instead will be a “steady, relentless effort” conducted through air strikes in both Syria and Iraq, and by supporting military partners on the ground.
“In a region that has known so much bloodshed, these terrorists are unique in their brutality. They execute captured prisoners. They kill children. They enslave, rape and force women into marriage,” Obama said. “They threatened a religious minority with genocide. In acts of barbarism, they took the lives of two American journalists — Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff.” “I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil,” he said. Obama compared the new initiative to other smaller-scale fights the U.S. has engaged in the past. “This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.”
Obama sought to make clear to a war-weary public that this new offensive will not resemble the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but instead will be more in the vein of other more covert missions against terrorists. But the scope of the new operation--which will immediately involve expanded airstrikes, additional U.S. personnel in Iraq and new support for the moderate Syrian rebels--is likely to overshadow those two efforts. Obama did not give a fixed date for when it might end in his 13-minute address, and his top aides have suggested it might last beyond his time in office.
“I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil,” Obama said. The president believes he has the legal authority to conduct the expanded military operations without new congressional approval. “This is a core principle of my presidency: if you threaten America, you will find no safe haven,” he said.
“This counterterrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist, using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground. This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.” Still, he has asked Congress to explicitly authorize U.S. military personnel to train Syrian . Iraqis and others to combat the Islamic militants in both countries, saying: “I welcome congressional support for this effort in order to show the world that Americans are united in confronting this danger.”
Ahead of Obama’s speech, debate over how to confront the threat moved to Congress Wednesday, where leaders were already debating legislative proposals that could bolster the president’s authority to wage war on the Islamist group. The key proposal would explicitly authorize U.S. military personnel to train foreigners to combat the militants. Saudi Arabia has agreed to host and help fund the training program, according to White House officials. Obama called Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Wednesday to discuss the operation.
If such authority is granted, it is unclear whether American military personnel would be sent into Syria to train those foreign fighters. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) signaled Wednesday that he supports Obama’s approach. “It’s clear to me that we need to train and equip Syrian rebels and other groups in the Middle East that need some help,” Reid said.
Support for Obama’s effort appears to be growing. House Republicans abruptly postponed a vote scheduled for Thursday on a short-term spending bill in which the White House asked that the legal authority to train fighters be included. Republicans deferred the vote to consider Obama’s request. Obama had initially resisted arming the rebels, but asked in June for lawmakers to give the Pentagon--as opposed to the Central Intelligence Agency--the authority to train and equip them. He also asked for $500 million to fund the effort.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) signaled Wednesday that he supports legislation to meet Obama’s request. “It’s clear to me that we need to train and equip Syrian rebels and other groups in the Middle East that need some help,” he said. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) issued a statement Wednesday night saying Obama “recanted his earlier dismissals of ISIL’s capabilities and rightly acknowledged the grave and growing threat posed by the spreading global epidemic of radicalized Islam.”
But House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she would support the move only if rebel fighters were trained “out of country” and not in Syria. Boehner said he remained concerned that even as Obama made “a compelling case for action” the training program “could take years to implement” and the strategy may not go far enough.
Obama has long signaled that he does not believe he needs formal congressional approval to launch airstrikes into Syria, be he is working hard to build support for his plan. On the left, some Democrats insisted Congress should vote on the expansion of the military operation . “I will not give this president — or any other president — a blank check to begin another land war in Iraq,” said Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) in a statement.
In a sign of intensified White House engagement, the president personally called lawmakers to ask for their support. Seeking to address some of the legal concerns, administration officials said the president could expand the airstrike campaign into Syria under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF): That authorization allows for “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons” responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks and those who “harbored such organizations or persons.”
Senior House Republican aides couldn’t say Wednesday whether granting authority to train foreign troops to lead the fight against the terrorist group would be part of the spending package, which was introduced Tuesday night. House Republicans scheduled a meeting for Thursday morning to gauge members’ reactions to Obama’s speech, and lawmakers will have a chance to attend closed-door briefings with top military and national security officials Thursday afternoon, aides said. While the Islamic State is now at odds with al-Qaeda, the target of the original law, officials said the Islamic State’s “longstanding relationship” with al-Qaeda and Usama bin Laden is a sufficient to be covered by the statute.
Reid said that if the legal authority isn’t included in the House spending measure, he will introduce a standalone bill in the Senate. The administration’s new military strategy marks a shift to offense against radical Sunni militants in Iraq, as opposed to the defensive and humanitarian effort that has been underway since last month. The United States already has conducted 154 airstrikes since they began last month and has 1,043 troops stationed there, according to the Pentagon; Obama said he would send another 475 personnel to Iraq to expand the mission.
Rep. Harold Rogers (R-Ky.), who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, said he received a call from Obama at 5 p.m. Tuesday asking that language giving the president authority to train foreign fighters be added to the spending bill. The call was the first of its kind Rogers has received from the president. A “broad coalition” would join the U.S. in fighting the Islamic State, Obama said. On Wednesday French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said his nation would help in conducting airstrikes in Iraq, and called for other countries to join in the international fight against “this transnational danger that could reach all the way to our soil.”
“I don’t recollect a previous time,” he said. The State Department released a report Wednesday on the efforts that three dozen countries, from Albania to the United Arab Emirates, have undertaken to either combat the Islamic militants or ease the humanitarian crisis in Iraq and Syria.
Meanwhile, the president huddled Wednesday in the White House Situation Room with his top national security advisers, including Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, national security adviser Susan E. Rice, CIA Director John Brennan and Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. While Obama has come under fire from lawmakers of both parties after admitting that he not yet formulated a strategy to deal with ISIS, his aides said the president was determined to take a deliberate approach and was waiting for key developments, such as the formation of a new government in Iraq. Secretary of State John F. Kerry met with Iraq’s new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, Wednesday.
The United States already has conducted 154 strikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq, according to the Pentagon, and has 1,043 troops stationed there. The forces include 754 U.S. personnel providing support to diplomatic security in Baghdad and 289 personnel manning two joint operations centers. Abadi, who called the Islamic State “a terrorist nation,” pledged “to include all people in the Iraqi society from all sections of this society in this government and in the mobilization process” as the country sought to establish regional stability.
At least one European ally is willing to help the United States launch airstrikes in Iraq. On Wednesday, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius called for other countries to join in the international fight against “this transnational danger that could reach all the way to our soil.” Back at home, the president and his top aides have worked hard to muster bipartsan support for his plan. Obama called House Appropriations Committee Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) Tuesday night to ask him to give him the legal authority to train foreign fighters, while some of the president’s senior national security advisers briefed a bevy of senior House members on the respective committees of jurisdiction Wednesday.
Obama also seems to be receiving bipartisan support at home for his initiative, although Republicans continued to criticize how he has managed Middle Eastern affairs. Rogers said it was the first time he had received such a call. “I don’t recollect a previous time” he said. “In good faith, we’re trying to get briefed up on what the request is, and it’s a complicated, big-time change in policy that I’d hate to see us attach to a continuing resolution at the very last minute.”
Reid said on the Senate floor that he supports Obama’s use of airstrikes and unmanned aerial drones to go after the Islamic State, calling it “a smart, strategic and effective approach.” While GOP leaders expressed frustration at the last-minute request, lawmakers are eager to embrace a strategy that will reverse the gains the Islamic State has made recently. Obama’s proposal would insert the measure into a broader bill funding federal agencies, which appeared poised for passage next week.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), by contrast, said in a floor speech that Obama “has yet to find his footing when it comes to dealing with this group that clearly has the will, the means and the sanctuary it needs to do more.” Announcing the spending bill’s delay on the House floor, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, “We stand ready to listen and work with the president to confront this growing threat,” drawing thunderous applause from members of both parties.
But McConnell added, “If the president develops a regional strategy, builds a combat-effective military coalition and explains how his strategy will lead to the defeat of ISIL, I believe he’ll have significant congressional support.” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, predicted Wednesday that most House Republicans would support legislation to grant the president the authority to fund training for foreigners to fight the Islamic State.
That process is underway, said Jon B. Alterman, who directs the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Alterman noted that much of the administration’s effort is focused on working with several allies — including the newly formed Iraqi government as well as leaders in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Europe — and in parallel to Iran. “My impression is that he would get a strong bipartisan vote for just about anything he wants to do and he should take advantage of that opportunity,” Cole said.
However some lawmakers, from both parties, expressed concern that Obama missed a critical opportunity to bolster the Syrian opposition. Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker, who as the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee helped author language in May 2013 that would have expanded aid to the moderate rebels in their fight against Syrian President Bashir al-Assad, said this week’s request from the administration represented a “speck of sand” in terms of the situation there.
”You just worry, we’ve let them become so diminished,” Corker said.
And Rep. Gerald E. Connelly (D-Va.), who praised Obama in a phone interview after the speech for outlining “a very bold and decisive strategy,” said the president’s rebel training request is “the toughest ask and, I also think , the toughest of the goals to achieve” because it was so difficult to determine which rebels are trustworthy.
While much of the public debate has focused on the military component of the White House’s new plan Jon B. Alterman, who directs the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said how administration works with the newly formed Iraqi government as well as leaders in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Europe — and in parallel to Iran — will be critical.
“The mistake is thinking this is principally a military operation,” he said. “This is principally a political operation about what political entity controls a broad swath of territory.”“The mistake is thinking this is principally a military operation,” he said. “This is principally a political operation about what political entity controls a broad swath of territory.”
As part of that diplomatic outreach, Obama called Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz on Wednesday from the Oval Office as four aides, including Rice and Lisa Monaco, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, sat nearby. And even as the president emphasized the United States had a compelling interest in dismantling the Islamic State, his top deputies said there is no credible information that the Islamic State is planning to attack the United States.
Meanwhile, Secretary of State John F. Kerry was spending Wednesday in Iraq, where he met with the nation’s new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi. Abadi, who called the Islamic State “a terrorist nation,” pledged “to include all people in the Iraqi society from all sections of this society in this government and in the mobilization process” as the country sought to establish regional stability. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said in a speech Wednesday the group poses “a certain level of danger that constitutes a threat” to U.S. vital interests and that his agency, the FBI and other intelligence agencies are “making enhanced and concerted efforts” to track Syrian foreign fighters who leave or wish to enter the United States.
Kerry told Abadi that he was “very encouraged by the comments you’ve made here today and by your commitment” to make reforms that would build trust among Sunnis as well as Kurds in Iraq. Paul Kane, Katie Zezima and Robert Costa contributed to this report
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson warned Wednesday that the Islamic State has demonstrated “a certain level of danger that constitutes a threat” to U.S. vital interests. He said his agency, the FBI and other intelligence agencies are “making enhanced and concerted efforts” to track Syrian foreign fighters who leave or wish to enter the United States. He said the United States is working with international allies to share information about tracking Syrian foreign fighters.
Johnson said there is no credible information that the Islamic State is planning to attack the United States.
“After 13 years of war since 9/11, the decision by the president to take on a new fight against this enemy was not an easy one,” Johnson said Wednesday at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. “But the president recognizes the serious threat” posed by the Islamic State.
Rogers, however, said he is upset that Obama would make such a significant request at such a late hour.
“They’ve known about this problem for over a year, they’ve known that we were getting to do a [spending bill], and just as I was ready to drop it in the hopper, the president calls and asks if we would consider this,” Rogers said. “In good faith, we’re trying to get briefed up on what the request is, and it’s a complicated, big-time change in policy that I’d hate to see us attach to a continuing resolution at the very last minute.”
Related:Related:
The Fix: Five takeaways from Obama’s speechThe Fix: Five takeaways from Obama’s speech
Action against Islamic State a ‘legacy issue’ for ObamaAction against Islamic State a ‘legacy issue’ for Obama
Officials say Islamic State not an immediate threat to U.S.Officials say Islamic State not an immediate threat to U.S.
Full text of President Obama’s speechFull text of President Obama’s speech