US President Barack Obama has formally asked Congress to authorise military action against Syria over alleged chemical weapons attacks.
He said any operation would be limited, ruling out a ground invasion. Congress is to reconvene on 9 September.
This comes after Washington claimed it had evidence that 1,429 people were killed in chemical attacks by the Syrian army on 21 August.
The Syrian government gave no immediate reaction to Mr Obama's announcement.
Damascus had earlier condemned the US allegations and blamed the rebels for the attacks.
Continue reading the main story
Analysis
image of Kevin Connolly
Kevin Connolly
BBC News, Beirut
Syria was originally quick to respond to the prospect of the use of American force - with important army headquarters buildings deserted, military assets dispersed and checkpoints on roads into Lebanon crowded.
But it's been slower to respond to President Obama's decision to take his case for action to Congress.
In part that's probably because the unexpected move will take time to analyse - the calculations and compromises of democratic politics are alien to the Syrian system.
But realistically it's also because officials of the Assad government know there's nothing they can say to influence the American debate in the direction they want - away from military action.
Bashar al-Assad's best hope is that the American delay might point to some kind of weakness in Washington, but in one sense President Obama's decision doesn't change anything.
The key players in the Middle East are waiting to see what the US does next - they're just going to have to wait a little longer.
In other developments:
Foreign ministers from the Arab League are to discuss Syria at a meeting in Cairo, amid deep splits on the issue
Opposition members in France - a key US ally - have urged President Francois Hollande to seek a formal vote before joining Washington in any military operation in Syria
UN inspectors who have been investigating the attacks have arrived in the Netherlands with samples from site visits. They say the testing could take up to three weeks
'Critical debate'
In a statement at the White House on Saturday, President Obama said that he decided that the US "should take action against Syrian regime targets".
As commander-in-chief, Mr Obama has the constitutional authority to launch strikes without the backing of Congress - the Senate and the House of Representatives.
However, he said it was important to have the debate.
"I've long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
"And that's why I've made a second decision: I will seek authorisation for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress," he said.
The UN wants swift laboratory analysis of samples obtained in Damascus
Later on Saturday, Mr Obama sent a "draft legislation" to the speaker of the House of Representatives and the president of the Senate.
Senior White House officials told the BBC's Katty Kay that Mr Obama's decision to seek congressional approval was made by the president on Friday afternoon. It had not been planned until then.
The officials added that they believed they would get congressional approval, although they were aware of the risks, our correspondent adds.
Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
Taking action that is unpopular... is not a strong position to be in. But it is sensible to make sure the responsibility for unpopular action is shared with other politicians”
image of Mark Mardell
Mark Mardell
North America editor
Read more from Mark
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, said the chamber "will engage in this critical debate right away", pledging the vote on the proposal would take place no later than the week of 9 September.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who is a Republican, also welcomed the move, saying the president's role as commander-in-chief was "always strengthened when he enjoys the expressed support of the Congress".
But Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who have been pushing for US intervention in Syria, warned against limited strikes which would not change the balance of the conflict, calling the prospect "an inadequate response".
In the House of Representatives, Republican Speaker John Boehner and other party members praised Mr Obama's decision "in response to serious, substantive questions being raised".
Discussion of the issue is expected to kick off on Tuesday with a hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The BBC's Katy Watson in Washington says that if Mr Obama is to intervene militarily, he wants the people - and politicians - on his side.
But what is unclear is what action he would take if Congress votes against involvement, our correspondent says.
He said any operation would be limited, ruling out a ground invasion. Congress is to reconvene on 9 September.
This comes after Washington claimed it had evidence that 1,429 people were killed in chemical attacks by the Syrian army on 21 August.
The Syrian government gave no immediate reaction to Mr Obama's announcement.
Damascus had earlier condemned the US allegations and blamed the rebels for the attacks.
Continue reading the main story
Analysis
image of Kevin Connolly
Kevin Connolly
BBC News, Beirut
Syria was originally quick to respond to the prospect of the use of American force - with important army headquarters buildings deserted, military assets dispersed and checkpoints on roads into Lebanon crowded.
But it's been slower to respond to President Obama's decision to take his case for action to Congress.
In part that's probably because the unexpected move will take time to analyse - the calculations and compromises of democratic politics are alien to the Syrian system.
But realistically it's also because officials of the Assad government know there's nothing they can say to influence the American debate in the direction they want - away from military action.
Bashar al-Assad's best hope is that the American delay might point to some kind of weakness in Washington, but in one sense President Obama's decision doesn't change anything.
The key players in the Middle East are waiting to see what the US does next - they're just going to have to wait a little longer.
In other developments:
Foreign ministers from the Arab League are to discuss Syria at a meeting in Cairo, amid deep splits on the issue
Opposition members in France - a key US ally - have urged President Francois Hollande to seek a formal vote before joining Washington in any military operation in Syria
UN inspectors who have been investigating the attacks have arrived in the Netherlands with samples from site visits. They say the testing could take up to three weeks
'Critical debate'
In a statement at the White House on Saturday, President Obama said that he decided that the US "should take action against Syrian regime targets".
As commander-in-chief, Mr Obama has the constitutional authority to launch strikes without the backing of Congress - the Senate and the House of Representatives.
However, he said it was important to have the debate.
"I've long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
"And that's why I've made a second decision: I will seek authorisation for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress," he said.
The UN wants swift laboratory analysis of samples obtained in Damascus
Later on Saturday, Mr Obama sent a "draft legislation" to the speaker of the House of Representatives and the president of the Senate.
Senior White House officials told the BBC's Katty Kay that Mr Obama's decision to seek congressional approval was made by the president on Friday afternoon. It had not been planned until then.
The officials added that they believed they would get congressional approval, although they were aware of the risks, our correspondent adds.
Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
Taking action that is unpopular... is not a strong position to be in. But it is sensible to make sure the responsibility for unpopular action is shared with other politicians”
image of Mark Mardell
Mark Mardell
North America editor
Read more from Mark
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, said the chamber "will engage in this critical debate right away", pledging the vote on the proposal would take place no later than the week of 9 September.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who is a Republican, also welcomed the move, saying the president's role as commander-in-chief was "always strengthened when he enjoys the expressed support of the Congress".
But Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who have been pushing for US intervention in Syria, warned against limited strikes which would not change the balance of the conflict, calling the prospect "an inadequate response".
In the House of Representatives, Republican Speaker John Boehner and other party members praised Mr Obama's decision "in response to serious, substantive questions being raised".
Discussion of the issue is expected to kick off on Tuesday with a hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The BBC's Katy Watson in Washington says that if Mr Obama is to intervene militarily, he wants the people - and politicians - on his side.
But what is unclear is what action he would take if Congress votes against involvement, our correspondent says.
No comments:
Post a Comment