This is Really Serious

 There is no way to downplay the seriousness of President Obama's belated ( and many would suggest ill-timed) decision to seek Congressional authorization on Syria. Has he done any vote counting? Suppose he gets the same treatment the Brits gave to Prime Minister Cameron? The repercussions around the world would be monumental with both our allies and enemies.

At the Last Minute, Obama Alone Made Call to Seek Congressional Approval

Change in president's thinking confounded White House insiders

By
• ADAM ENTOUS
and
• CAROL E. LEE

AFP/Getty Images

In this image released by the White House, President Barack Obama talked on the phone in the Oval Office with House Speaker John Boehner on Saturday, as Vice President Joe Biden listened.

After a 45-minute walk Friday night, President Barack Obama made a fateful decision that none of his top national security advisers saw coming: To seek congressional authorization before taking military action in Syria.
The stunning about-face after a week of U.S. saber rattling risked not only igniting a protracted congressional fight, which could end with a vote against strikes, but a backlash from allies in the Middle East who had warned the White House that inaction would embolden not only Syrian President Bashar al-Assad but his closest allies, Iran and Hezbollah.

ed in Damascus War Zone (8/23/2013)

Aides said the decision was made by Mr. Obama and Mr. Obama alone. It shows the primacy the president places on protecting his hoped-for legacy as a commander in chief who did everything in his power to disentangle the U.S. from overseas wars. Until Friday night, Mr. Obama's national-security team didn't even have an option on the table to seek a congressional authorization.
The only real discussion was a plan to punish Mr. Assad for what the U.S. and others have called a chemical-weapons attack amid Syria's grinding civil war. The final question, policy makers thought, was how many targets to hit and when to tell the Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean to open fire.
Yet Mr. Obama made no secret to aides he felt uncomfortable acting without U.N. Security Council backing. Current and former officials said his decision reflected his concerns about being seen as acting unilaterally—without political cover from Congress and without the U.K. at his side. Arab states, for their part, have offered little public support despite their private encouragement.
The change in Mr. Obama's thinking confounded White House insiders. Some raised concerns about the decision. They asked what would happen if Congress refused to authorize using force, a senior administration official said.
The move also took key allies from Israel to Saudi Arabia by surprise, diplomats said. They thought Mr. Obama was about to pull the trigger and were preparing for possible retaliation from Mr. Assad.
One official said the biggest concern for the Middle Eastern allies was that the passage of time during the congressional debate would reduce the sense of urgency for action.

President Obama said he is in favor of taking military action against Syria for the alleged use of chemical weapons against its own people, but that he will seek authorization from Congress before moving forward.

At a Situation Room meeting of his White House National Security Council on Aug. 24, three days after the Syrian bombing raid, Mr. Obama made clear his strong inclination was to take action.
During one meeting, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said something that left an impression on Mr. Obama: The timing of a strike didn't matter, officials said.
Gen. Dempsey's message to Mr. Obama was that whether the strikes were launched tomorrow, or a week from now, or a month from now, the military would be able to ensure the effectiveness of the operation, officials said.
On Thursday, the White House watched with alarm as U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron failed to secure parliamentary support for the U.K. to join the U.S. military operation. The takeaway for White House officials, aides say, was not to discount the level of war-weariness, both in the U.K. and at home.
Until Friday night, Mr. Obama's national-security team was focused on only consulting Congress, rather than seeking a vote on an authorization to use force. Mr. Obama's team concluded that Mr. Obama had the legal authority to act without congressional authorization and was proceeding on that basis.
During his daily wrap-up meeting with Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, Mr. Obama and Mr. McDonough went on a 45-minute walk around the White House grounds.

Enlarge Image

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

In this image released by the White House, Mr. Obama met in the Situation Room on Saturday with his national security advisers to discuss strategy in Syria.

During the walk, Mr. Obama told Mr. McDonough his thinking—that consulting with Congress wasn't enough—lawmakers should have to go on the record one way or the other.
Current and former officials said it was no surprise Mr. Obama would make such an important decision after consulting with Mr. McDonough, who in his previous role as deputy national security adviser emerged as a leading voice of caution against intervening in Syria. Mr. McDonough's successor on the National Security Council has overseen a gradual expansion of U.S. support to the Syrian opposition, but he doesn't have as close a relationship with the president.
In meetings devoted to Syria last year, Mr. McDonough would push to keep the U.S. off the "slippery slope" leading to a potentially unpopular intervention, according to officials involved in these meetings. One official, recalling Mr. McDonough's prior role, said "any time Denis would show his cards a little bit, they would ultimately line up with where the president would come down."
Dennis Ross, a longtime diplomat who served with Mr. McDonough in the NSC NSGP.FR +0.02% in the president's first term, said of Mr. McDonough: "He is very mindful of what the high cost of American intervention had been. So he approaches the issue of the use of force with a genuine caution and a genuine concern about really once you do this, where are you? And how do you get out of it?"
At 7 p.m. Friday, Mr. Obama called his top aides into his office, including National Security Adviser Susan Rice, to inform them of his plans. Aides say Mr. Obama came up with the idea himself to seek an authorization.
Many insiders were stunned because of the risk Congress will say "no." "You have to win the vote. You have to win," one senior administration official said after the decision was disclosed. "If Congress doesn't let him act, the consequences for him and for the country's standing in the world are enormous."
Later Friday night, Mr. Obama told aides the decision reflected his growing frustration with lawmakers who appeared to want to have it both ways—criticizing the president for not seeking congressional authorization, and then criticizing the decisions he makes.
House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) had sent a letter to Mr. Obama demanding more consultation with Congress and asking the White House to clearly lay out the goals of a military mission in advance. Other Republicans, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, have said Mr. Obama's plans for a limited strike didn't go far enough. And still other lawmakers, including a sizable minority of Mr. Obama's own party in Congress, have expressed opposition to any intervention in Syria.
Current and former officials said Mr. Obama wanted to force Congress to make the decision so lawmakers own it as much as the president does. He also thought the U.S. would be in a stronger position to act in Syria with Congress's full backing, officials said.
On Saturday, Mr. Obama held a two-hour long meeting of his National Security Council.
Gen. Dempsey repeated his assurances to Mr. Obama that the strikes can wait. The general told Mr. Obama and his advisers the U.S. military is confident that there would be no negative impact and that Navy destroyers could remain in place.
During the past week, White House advisers have said they were moving fast on Syria. One senior administration official cautioned that hesitation could embolden Mr. Assad.
"There is an urgency here in our view given that the further you get away from the event the less the attention is on what took place actually on the 21st of August and it becomes more about process and provides an opening for the Syrians and others who support them to obfuscate and delay and muddy the water," the senior administration official said earlier this week. "And frankly that sends its own message, which is you can essentially cover your tracks as it relates to using chemical weapons."
Mr. Obama made clear during the meeting that the decision was final and in the end, his advisers agreed.
Just before his Rose Garden address, Mr. Obama called President François Hollande of France. The U.S. still hopes to act with France.
A senior administration official voiced confidence Mr. Assad won't take advantage of the delay to push ahead with his offensive using chemical weapons. White House officials also predicted that Congress would authorize using force, citing the strength of the underlying intelligence being shared with lawmakers this weekend. With Congress's blessing, strikes could still be launched, officials said, within weeks.

Another Fine Mess

As Oliver Hardy used to say to Stan Laurel, "Well, that's another fine mess you've gotten me into!" The Prez has really created a dilly of a situation. On the one hand, the former constitutional lecturer has come to his senses on where the Constitution places the war making power. That's good. On the other hand, he has now painted Congress into the box that he created. What happens if he doesn't get the votes? He is now totally tied to Congress; if he acts unilaterally he could seriously set up a case for impeachment. The politics could get really ugly here especially since there does not seems to be any overwhelming popular support for this mission.

 

Obama Seeks Approval by Congress for Strike in Syria

Evan Vucci/Associated Press

Obama Seeks Support on Syria: American presidents generally want support from three places: Congress, the American people and allies abroad. In the case of a possible military strike in Syria, support may be in short supply.

By PETER BAKER and JONATHAN WEISMAN

WASHINGTON — President Obama abruptly changed course on Saturday and postponed a military strike against the Syrian government in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack so he could seek authorization first from a deeply skeptical Congress.

Enlarge This Image

Michael Reynolds/European Pressphoto Agency

President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. before Mr. Obama’s remarks Saturday.

Readers’ Comments

Share your thoughts.

• Post a Comment »
• Read All Comments (1802) »

In one of the riskiest gambles of his presidency, Mr. Obama effectively dared lawmakers to either stand by him or, as he put it, allow President Bashar al-Assad of Syria to get away with murdering children with unconventional weapons. By asking them to take a stand, Mr. Obama tried to break out of the isolation of the last week as he confronted taking action without the support of the United Nations, Congress, the public or Britain, a usually reliable partner in such international operations.

“I’m prepared to give that order,” Mr. Obama said in a hurriedly organized appearance in the Rose Garden as American destroyers armed with Tomahawk missiles waited in the Mediterranean Sea. “But having made my decision as commander in chief based on what I am convinced is our national security interests, I’m also mindful that I’m the president of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy.”

Although Congressional leaders hailed his decision to seek the permission of lawmakers who had been clamoring for a say, the turnabout leaves Mr. Obama at the political mercy of House Republicans, many of whom have opposed him at every turn and have already suggested that Syria’s civil war does not pose a threat to the United States. His decision raises the possibility that he would be the first president in modern times to lose a vote on the use of force, much as Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain did in Parliament last week.

Mr. Obama overruled the advice of many of his aides who worried about just such a defeat, and Republican Congressional officials said Saturday that if a vote were taken immediately, the Republican-controlled House would not support action. Interviews with more than a dozen members of Congress made clear that the situation was volatile even in the Senate, where Democrats have a majority.

“Obama hasn’t got a chance to win this vote if he can’t win the majority of his own party, and I doubt he can,” Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma, a leading Republican, said in an interview. “Democrats have been conspicuously silent. Just about his only support is coming from Republicans. He is a war president without a war party.”

Yet the debate may also put on display the divisions in the Republican Party between traditional national security hawks and a newer generation of lawmakers, particularly in the House, resistant to entanglements overseas and distrustful of Mr. Obama.

“It will be an uphill battle for the president to convince me because I think he has handled this entire situation quite poorly,” said Representative Tim Griffin, Republican of Arkansas. “And frankly I am reluctant to give him a license for war when, with all due respect, I have little confidence he knows what he is doing.”

Even Senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, two Republicans who have pressed Mr. Obama to intervene more aggressively in Syria, said Saturday that they might vote no because the president’s plan was too limited. “We cannot in good conscience support isolated military strikes in Syria that are not part of an overall strategy that can change the momentum on the battlefield,” they said in a statement.

Against that backdrop, the wording of the authorization of force may be critical. White House officials drafted a proposed measure that tried to strike a balance between being too expansive and too restrictive, and sent it to Congress on Saturday evening.

The proposal would empower Mr. Obama to order military action to “prevent or deter the use or proliferation” of chemical or biological weapons “within, to or from Syria” and to “protect the United States and its allies and partners against the threat posed by such weapons.” Still, White House officials indicated that Mr. Obama might still authorize force even if Congress rejected it.