Gates spent most of his time during the hearing being grilled by Republican and Democrats alike about the administration's decision not to seek collaborative cooperation from Congress before the air strikes began, instead spending most of his time trying to secure international support for instituting a no-fly zone.
Last night in a classified briefing with lawmakers on Libya, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Obama and the administration would not necessarily abide by any resolutions Congress might pass constraining the President's ability to take military action or continue it in Libya. She said only that the administration would keep Congress informed through reports and consultations.
The statements enraged some administration critics who believe the White House has violated basic tenets of the 1973 War Powers Act, which require Congressional approval to engage U.S. military forces overseas combat. The last time Congress declared war was during WWII, and a long line of presidents have essentially ignored the act, arguing that it places unconstitutional shackles on the President's role as commander-in-chief.
Congress "has been left out in the cold on this one," said Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), a longtime opponent of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. "There has been no consultation at all."
"We read about it in the newspapers and then we ask questions about it," said Rep. Betty Sutton (D-OH). "I think that's concerning to the Congress and I think it's concerning to the American people, and I believe rightly so."
Several times during the hearing Gates repeated a one-line defense of Obama's actions.
"The President's compliance with the War Powers Act has been consistent with the actions taken by all of his predecessors -- both Democrats and Republicans" since the law was passed in 1973, Gates said.
A resolution of support for the military action in Libya would be welcome, he noted.
That riled several Republicans who quickly predicted that such a resolution would likely fail in the House.
But Gates faced the opposite line of attack in the Senate later in the day as he was berated by lawmakers for handing the operation over to NATO. The attack was led by -- you guessed it --
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked why the U.S. couldn't simply bomb Qaddafi like President Reagan tried to do in 1986 when he sent cruise missiles into the Libyan leader's palace, killing one of his daughters, and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said rebel setbacks over the last two days have been "unsettling."
"Hope is not a strategy," McCain said, repeating one of his favorite phrases, adding that the U.S. should not have drawn back its leadership role in the military mission until our policy goal of removing Qaddafi from power was met.
"I know the U.S. military has a heavy load on its back right now ... but we must not fail in Libya, and I say this as someone who is familiar with the consequence of a lost conflict," he said.
I love it. House Republicans are withholding their permission like kids, and Senate Republicans are bitching about why we haven't won yet and warning that it's Vietnam all over again. Robert Gates may not be my favorite Republican in Washington, but the guy at least insists there will be no US ground war as long as he's Defense Secretary, and that's the first piece of good news on US policy in Libya that I've heard since this started.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment