The White House pushed back Thursday on skepticism about potential U.S. military action in Syria, saying the evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against civilians is "very convincing" - and that the use of chemical weapons is a violation of a "critically important international norm" that must carry with it serious consequences.
Still, White House spokesman Josh Earnest emphasized that President Obama is "not contemplating an open-ended military action," describing the responses under consideration as "very discrete and limited" in their scope.
"We want to make sure that a response sends an unambiguous signal to [Syrian President Bashar Assad's] regime and to dictators around the world that living up to these international norms is the firm expectation of the international community, and that failure to do so has serious consequences," Earnest explained.
The spokesman emphasized, as President Obama did during an interview on Wednesday with PBS, that the administration has reached no final conclusion on the question of military action in Syria.
Obama: "I have not made a decision" on Syria military strike
Military strike options against Syria
"I have not made a decision" on Syria, the president explained on Wednesday, but he said his administration has "concluded" that the Assad regime was responsible for the chemical weapons attack.
Earnest also rejected comparisons between the debate over intervention in Syria and an earlier debate about intervention in Iraq, which was attended by claims of chemical weapons possession on the part of the Iraqi regime that were proven untrue only after the U.S. had dissolved the rule of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "We're not talking about regime change here," he said. "We're talking about enforcing a critically important international norm."
"There is not a military solution to the broader conflict that is taking place in Syria," Earnest said.
Pressed on reports that suggest some level of uncertainty about who deployed the chemical weapons, Earnest brandished on-the-record statements from the president, Secretary of State John Kerry, and members of the Senate Intelligence Committee that betrayed no doubt that the regime is culpable for the August 21 use of chemical weapons that left thousands of civilians dead.
"We already know from a previous intelligence assessment that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons against civilians in Syria. We know that the Assad regime maintains stockpiles of chemical weapons in Syria," he said. "We also know that it is the regime alone that has the capability to use the chemical weapons that were used...in the attacks that we saw on August 21st. We also know that the Assad regime was engaged in a military campaign targeting the specific regions where this chemical attack occurred."
The sum total of that evidence, Earnest said, presents a "very convincing" case that the Assad regime is responsible for the atrocities.
To further bolster that point, he cited intelligence reports from U.S. allies like Britain, France, and the Arab League who have "reached an assessment that dovetails with the assessment that we've conveyed to you."
The administration has promised to release an unclassified intelligence report further detailing the evidence inculpating the Assad regime in the use of chemical weapons. Earnest said the report would be released this week, and he did not rule out the possibility that it could surface as early as Thursday afternoon.
Critics have warned that, despite the horrific images emerging from Syria and the flagrant violation of international norms evinced by the use of chemical weapons, the United States has no pressing national interest in the Syrian civil war.
Earnest, however, reinforced the administration's conclusion that America has "significant" interests in the region, including but not limited to the safety of our allies, the safety of our facilities overseas, and the preservation of international norms prohibiting the use of weapons of mass destruction.
Sen. Menendez on Syria: Need to send message that chemical weapons can't be used
Some members of Congress have pushed for expeditious action in Syria, but others have counseled President Obama to seek the consent of Congress before deploying U.S. military assets in Syria, warning that failure to do so would violate the War Powers Act, which reserves for Congress the right to declare war.
Rep. Scott Rigell, R-Va., sent a letter to the president on Wednesday, signed by 116 members of Congress from both parties, urging the president to "to consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria."
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., joined by 53 other House Democrats, sent a similar letter to the president on Thursday, condemning the use of chemical weapons in Syria and urging the president to seek congressional approval before "committing any U.S. military engagement to this complex crisis."
House Speaker John Boehner also sent a letter to the president on Wednesday, urging him to explain the legal justification behind any decision to launch an attack, and demanding a "clear, unambiguous explanation of how military action...will secure U.S. objectives and how it fits into your overall policy."
Earnest promised that the administration would engage in "robust consultation" with the legislative branch as it seeks a way forward in Syria. The president spoke with Boehner on Thursday to detail the status of the deliberations on Syria, and later Thursday, the administration will hold a conference call for members of Congress to lay out the unclassified intelligence report about chemical weapons use in Syria.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar