USA_ SECURITY_ Senators try to secure authorization for military force against Islamic State

The Washington Post

National Security

Senators try to secure authorization for military force against Islamic State


Thus far, Congress has not voted on an Authorization for the Use of Military Force for the conflict against Islamic State, which began last summer. (Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post)


By Karen DeYoung
June 10 at 4:14 PM


As U.S. military operations against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria approach the one-year mark, a bipartisan pair of senators have launched a new attempt to force Congress to provide the administration with specific authority for the fight.

Sens. Timothy M. Kaine (D-Va.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) chastised fellow lawmakers for ducking responsibility to debate and vote on an Authorization for the Use of Military Force for a conflict that began last summer.

“Let’s face it, our allies and our adversaries and . . . the troops . . . need to know that we back the mission,” Kaine said in a briefing for reporters Wednesday.

Kaine and Flake, who introduced an AUMF bill Tuesday, said they were heartened by indications from Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) on Tuesday that the panel may consider the legislation before Congress recesses for the summer next month.

“Prior to yesterday, we had no commitment at all to discuss this in any fashion,” Flake said.

Efforts to pass an authorization have languished over the past year, as Democrats and Republicans split on how much leeway they wanted to allow President Obama to conduct operations against the Islamic State.

Democrats, noting the expansive powers that both Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush, have claimed under the 2001 AUMF authorizing force against al-Qaeda, have tried to limit presidential prerogatives in the current fight by imposing sunset provisions and strict prohibitions on allowing the use of ground troops in what so far has been largely an air war.

Republicans have insisted that those limits would tie U.S. hands in prosecuting a counterterrorism war that they, and Obama, have charged is a direct threat to U.S. national security.

When he began the airstrikes last August in Iraq, and in Syria in September, Obama said they were legally justified under the 2001 authorization because the Islamic State leadership had its roots in al-Qaeda-linked operations in Iraq nearly a decade ago. But he said that he would welcome a new authorization specific to the Islamic State.

For months, the White House and Congress went back and forth over which of them should introduce new legislation.

After extensive consultations with lawmakers, Obama in February submitted proposed wording designed to split the difference between deeply divergent partisan views. His proposal authorized military force for three years against the Islamic State and “associated forces,” while prohibiting “enduring offensive ground combat operations.”

It defined “associated forces” as those “fighting for, on behalf of, or alongside ISIL or any closely-related successor entity” against the United States or its coalition partners. ISIL is one of several acronyms for the Islamic State.

The new bill has many of the same provisions but changes the ground troops wording to say that “the use of significant United States ground troops . . . except to protect the lives of United States citizens from imminent threat, is not consistent” with the authorization.

It also expands the definition of “associated forces” to include direct threats to “forces trained by the coalition, in their fight against ISIL.” Kaine said that provision was to permit the United States to help defend moderate opposition fighters in Syria engaged in the fight against the Islamic State, should they come under attack by Syrian government forces of President Bashar al-Assad.

Karen DeYoung is associate editor and senior national security correspondent for the Washington Post.

***


Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog".
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc . 
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị . 



conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
11062015
___________
Cộng sản Việt Nam là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là ĐỒNG LÕA với TỘI ÁC