President Barack Obama is hitting the airwaves to try to convince war-weary Americans that limited strikes against Syria are needed for the United States’ long-term safety, while his national security team is attempting to reassure skeptical lawmakers that the United States is not heading toward another Iraq or Afghanistan.
Obama on Monday planned to make his case for punishing Syrian President Bashar Assad for what the United States says was his decision to turn chemical weapons against his own people — a charge Assad denies in a new interview. Top administration officials are heading to Capitol Hill for more classified briefings. And White House national security adviser Susan Rice is scheduled for a speech at a Washington think tank timed to the public relations blitz.
In an interview Sunday in Damascus, Assad told American journalist Charlie Rose there is no conclusive evidence about who is to blame for the chemical weapons attacks and again suggested the rebels were responsible. Rose said Assad also warned him previous U.S. military efforts in the region have proved disastrous.
Kerry, appearing at a news conference Monday with his British counterpart, William Hague, vehemently denied Assad’s assertions.
“We know that his regime gave orders to prepare for a chemical attack. We know they deployed forces,” Kerry said. He added that the United States knows “where the rockets came from and where they landed … and it was no accident that they all came from regime -controlled territory and all landed” in opposition-held territory.
“So the evidence is powerful and the question for all of us is what are we going to do about it. Turn our backs? Have a moment of silence?” Kerry said.
He said that if Assad wanted to defuse the crisis, “he could turn every single bit of his chemical weapons over to the international community” within a week. But he said that Assad “isn’t about to do it.”
Pressed further on Assad’s denials, Kerry said, “I just answered that. I just gave you real evidence. Evidence that as a former prosecutor in the United States I could take into a courtroom and get admitted.”
Obama will meet with Senate Democrats Tuesday to seek support for U.S. military action against the government of Syria, according to two Senate Democratic aides. The meeting at the Capitol would come just hours before Obama addresses the nation in a prime-time speech on Syria from the White House.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is scheduled to speak Monday at a White House event on wildlife trafficking, planned to reiterate her support of Obama’s efforts to pass the Syria resolution, according to a Clinton aide who spoke on condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak publicly.
With Congress set to have its first votes authorizing limited strikes into Syria as soon as Wednesday, Obama and his allies were arguing that the United States needs to remind hostile nations such as Iran and North Korea of American military might while working to reassure the nation that the lessons of the last decade were fresh in their minds.
“It is not Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya,” White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said Sunday during one of his five network television interviews. “This is a very concerned, concentrated, limited effort that we can carry out and that can underscore and secure our interests.”
But McDonough conceded the administration lacks “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence” that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking.
“It’s an uphill slog,” said Rep. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, who supports strikes on Assad.
“I think it’s very clear he’s lost support in the last week,” Rogers added, speaking of the president.
A survey by The Associated Press shows that House members who are staking out positions are either opposed to or leaning against Obama’s plan for a military strike by more than a 6-1 margin.
“Lobbing a few Tomahawk missiles will not restore our credibility overseas,” said Rep. Mike McCaul, the Texas Republican who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee.
Added Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif.: “For the president to say that this is just a very quick thing and we’re out of there, that’s how long wars start.”
Despite public backing from leaders of both parties to strike, almost half of the 433 current members in the House and a third of the 100-member Senate remain undecided, the AP survey found. They will be the subject of intense lobbying from the administration — as well as outside groups that have formed coalitions that defy the traditional left-right divide.
Public opinion surveys show intense American skepticism about military intervention in Syria, even among those who believe Syria’s government used chemical weapons on its people.
The United States, citing intelligence reports, says the lethal nerve agent sarin was used in an Aug. 21 attack outside Damascus, and that 1,429 people died, including 426 children.
Excerpts of Rose’s interview are to be released Monday on the CBS morning program that he hosts. The full interview is set to air on Rose’s prime-time program on PBS.
Even before the interview was released, the White House criticized it.
“It doesn’t surprise us that someone who would kill thousands of his own people, including hundreds of children with poison gas, would also lie about it,” spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said.
Top administration officials, including Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, planned to brief lawmakers ahead of the Wednesday vote on a resolution that would authorize the “limited and specified use” of U.S. armed forces against Syria for no more than 90 days.
The measure bars American ground troops from combat. A final vote is expected at week’s end and the House is expected to take up the issue the following week.
(AP)
4 Responses
Wannabe Ayatollah Obummer, when are you going to get it in your head that there is no clear evidence as to which side actually used the chemical weapons. You are listening to the same agencies who advised President Bush and look where that got America.
Both sides are terrorists, both sides are capable of using the chemical weapons, and both sides have absolutely no problem using the chemical weapons on their own people to get what they want. Terrorists think that the ends justifies the means.
You are running, and taking America with you, straight into a terrorist trap that can only cause another war which would include innocent countries.
According to this article 1,429 people died from the use of the chemical weapons. Your plan will cause tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people to die.You are totally insistent on starting WWIII just so you can have the legacy of being the person who wanted to give Syria freedom. I have a flash for you. Syria will never be a free nation while there is internal fighting going on between the different groups. After this one is done there will indeed be another. Look at Egypt.
So a word to the wise, turn our ships around, send them home, stop all your ranting, resign, go write a comic book titled “Obummer’s Stupidity”, and go see a shrink.
Woooo, stevie–sounds like u got a lot of steam to blow off after 3 day yuntif.
CircleSteve…The Times ran an article over Yom Tov thast identified a number of otherwise conservative midwestern and southern voters who are opposed toi a strike in Syria simply because it’s Obama’s policy. I suspect you are of such policy depth…so why don’t you just pretend tat old fudge the intelligence Geotge Dubya is behind it.
To jew yorker and YonasonW,
Sorry, but I am not just blowing off steam or playing conservative.
I was born during WWII and have seen lots of American made wars since that time. Not one of them was claimed as a victory for America and another one will most likely destroy America.
When will the time come where people will realize that this type of action will actually bankrupt the American government. Where do you think the funds are going to come from? Better the funds that America doesn’t have be used to fix the problems on American soil. Better the funds help the poor. Better the funds help the homeless. Better the funds repair the American infrastructure. Better some of the funds be used to pay the American national debt down. America cannot win this type of war.
I am an Israeli/American citizen and live in Israel. Do you or anyone else really think that Obummer gives a flying hoop about Israel or it’s people? If you do you need to open your eyes, wake up, and understand that Obummer hates Jews except for their money.
Any war that Obummer is the creator of will hurt Israel and many other middle eastern nations.
Also, if it’s the NEW YORK TIMES you are talking about with the article I suggest you stop reading trash and media selling stories.