Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

Congress may vote to not intervene

Several factors against approval

  • Print

WASHINGTON -- The British Parliament on Thursday voted against the use of force in Syria, dealing Prime Minister David Cameron a significant and unexpected blow.

Across the pond, many members of Congress have pressed for a similar vote that would authorize or prevent U.S. President Barack Obama from using force following allegations the Syrian regime used chemical weapons on its people.

On Saturday, they got that opportunity. But could U.S. lawmakers actually vote against authorization -- as their counterparts in the House of Commons did?

The situation remains very fluid, but there is plenty of reason to believe that Congress might vote against a use of force resolution in Syria.

For a few reasons:

1. The public isn't clamouring for it: As the Washington Post's Scott Clement wrote, Americans oppose broad military action in Syria 50-42. And even when it comes to limited airstrikes using cruise missiles, support only rises to 50 per cent, with 44 per cent opposed.

The poll also shows just 21 per cent think getting involved is in America's national interest, and just 27 per cent think it will help improve the situation in Syria. In other words, people view military action as retaliation for Syria's alleged use of chemical weapons more than something that will actually do any good.

If you're a member of Congress looking at those numbers, you don't see much of a mandate for any use of force.

2. War fatigue: The experiences of Iraq and Afghanistan are still fresh in people's minds, and there are enough parallels between those situations and this one to make members skittish.

Already, several members have expressed doubts about the Obama administration's assertion that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons -- something that may not have happened without the weapons-of-mass-destruction controversy in Iraq.

"We are more than mindful of the Iraq experience," Secretary of State John Kerry assured Friday. "We will not repeat that moment."

Both of these wars were very unpopular in different ways -- Iraq for its case for war and Afghanistan for its length -- and they both make it much harder to sell any kind of military action today.

3. The Iraq war vote: This vote may have cost Hillary Clinton the presidency, and you've got to believe other politicians are wary because of it.

When it comes to politics, it's always easier to vote against something than to vote for it. And if the American people aren't begging you to use military force, you're putting your career on the line by voting for it.

If things don't turn out well or don't improve -- and in a volatile situation such as Syria, that's quite possible -- you own it.

4. Bipartisan opposition: Foreign policy and national security are increasingly non-partisan issues, with libertarian-leaning Republicans and Democrats teaming up against the administration on issues such as surveillance.

A similar bipartisan coalition appears to be manifesting itself in this case, with about 70 House Democrats joining about 100 House Republicans in demanding the administration authorize any use of force.

Obama can't rely on a united Democratic party and would have to pick off lots of hawkish Republicans, whose ranks are reduced in today's GOP.

This is a difficult case for the Obama administration to make -- both to the American people and to Congress. Kerry's forceful statements on Friday make it abundantly clear the administration is quite aware of this.

-- Washington Post-Bloomberg

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition September 1, 2013 A4

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes


  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.


Make text: Larger | Smaller


Full analysis: Manitoba Moose are back in Winnipeg

View more like this

Photo Store Gallery

  • A goose cools off Thursday in water at Omands Creek Park-See Bryksa 30 day goose challenge- Day 25– June 21, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)
  • A Canada goose protects her nest full of eggs Monday on campus at the University of Manitoba- Standup photo- Apr 30, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)

View More Gallery Photos


Should the August civic holiday be renamed to honour Terry Fox?

View Results

View Related Story

Ads by Google