Obama tamps down prospect of strikes in Syria

August 29, 2014 03:06 am | Updated November 22, 2021 06:54 pm IST - WASHINGTON

President Barack Obama gestures in the James Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House in Washington on Thursday.

President Barack Obama gestures in the James Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House in Washington on Thursday.

President Barack Obama played down the prospect of imminent U.S. military action in Syria on Thursday, saying “we don’t have a strategy yet” for degrading the violent militant group seeking to establish a caliphate in the Middle East.

Mr. Obama spoke shortly before convening a meeting of his national security advisers on a range of Pentagon options for confronting the Islamic State group. However, he said his strategy would require more than military action and called for a regional strategy that includes political support from other countries in the region.

In blunt terms, the President said it was time for Middle Eastern nations to “stop being ambivalent” about the aims of extremist groups like the Islamic State.

“They have no ideology beyond violence and chaos and the slaughter of innocent people,” Mr. Obama said, alluding to the group’s announcement last week that it had killed American journalist James Foley. The militants also have threatened to kill other U.S. hostages.

The U.S. already is striking Islamic State targets in Iraq, and officials have said the president is considering similar action in neighbouring Syria in the wake of Foley’s death. The militants have moved with ease between the two countries, effectively blurring the border.

“The suggestion has been that we’ll start moving forward imminently and somehow Congress, still out of town, will be left in the dark,” Mr. Obama said. “That’s not what’s going to happen.”

The surprise move threw his policy into chaos. Congress balked at Mr. Obama’s request for a vote, contributing to his decision to ultimately scrap the strikes. The White House said it also abandoned plans to take military action after Syria agreed to give up its chemical weapons stockpiles.

This time, with the midterm elections just over two months away, lawmakers may be even less inclined to take a politically risky vote on military action.

“I see no reason to come to Congress because, if he does, it’ll just become a circus,” Rep. Steve Cohen said this week.

There are some notable exceptions in both parties. Republican Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, a frequent critic of the administration’s foreign policy, has said Congress should “certainly” authorize any military action in Syria. Sen. Tim Kaine, a White House ally, has also called for a vote on the president’s broader strategy for going after the Islamic State.

“I am calling for the mission and objectives for this current significant military action against ISIL to be made clear to Congress, the American people, and our men and women in uniform,” said Kaine, using one of the acronyms for the militant group. “Congress should vote up or down on it.”

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.