Kerry and Dempsey Take Obama's Chemical Weapons Case to Congress

We are now watching the unfolding in the US Congress of the tragi-comedy surrounding President Obama's indecisive posturing in the face of the al-Assad attack on Syrian civilians that left an estimated 1300 dead, including more than 400 children. The US military is reported to be hesitant to agree with President Barack Obama's plan to launch a missile strike on Syria as a warning that the world means to enforce the non-use of chemical weapons as set out in the international treaty. Current and former officers have said in interviews that they are uneasy about a potential Syrian missile strike because it could have unintended consequences, such as turning attention away from their exit from Afghanistan, the Washington Post has reported. Some military officials worry about retaliation from the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, which supports Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while others fear ripple effects that could include Iran following through on its threat to attack Israel, retaliation from radical groups, or the US being charged with war crimes." The application of force rarely produces and, in fact, maybe never produces the outcome we seek," General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in an interview with ABC News in August. Active-duty military leaders have said they feel strongly that a strike in Syria would serve no purpose for the US. "What is the political end state we’re trying to achieve?" one retired senior officer involved in Middle East operational planning asked. "I don’t know what it is. We say it’s not regime change. If it’s punishment, there are other ways to punish." An Army lieutenant colonel told the Washington Post : "When a president draws a red line, for better or worse, it’s policy,...It cannot appear to be scared or tepid. Remember, with respect to policy choices concerning Syria, we are discussing degrees of bad and worse." But General Dempsey has assured President Obama that the US military is ready to follow orders and has ships, missiles and an aircraft carrier in the eastern Mediterranean on daily alert. ~~~~~ Dear readers, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee is now holding hearings to question Secretary of State John Kerry and General Dempsey. The hearings will continue tomorrow in a closed session to discuss classified information. While it is not yet clear how the Senate or the House will vote, the concerns are clear and almost universally.held. First, no one wants to become embroiled in another Middle East ground war. Second, there is general agreement that al-Assad has used chemical weapons. Third, members of Congress have heard from their constituents that they do not trust the information being provided by the President and do not understand why America should have to carry this burden instead of regional nations. Fourth, the unintended consequences of a missile attack could be grave, including a nuclear attack on Israel by Iran and increased Russian support for al-Assad. Fifth, Russia and China should be exposed to the full weight of worldwide disgust for their positions in support of al-Assad which mean that they do not care about, or even agree with, the use of chemical weapons. ~~~~~ Thomas Jefferson said that the legislature (Congress) must have the power to declare war because the executive branch (the President) will always go to war more readily than the legislative branch. That idea was enshrined in the Constitution but the Congress later gave the President the power to engage in actions that do not constitute full-blown war. That division of the power to declare war or take lesser war-like action is at the constitutional heart of what we are now watching. Congress had ceded some of its power to the President and the current President, Barack Obama, seems to be in the process of trying to give that power back to Congress. Stay tuned.