Congress should support Obama on Syria

September 4, 2013 

President Obama has asked Congress to support his use of military force against another nation. This is the most consequential vote any Congress can take. We support a well-crafted use-of-force resolution against Syria and urge the president to take decisive, effective action.

We are Army veterans. One of us served in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq; the other conducted patrols along the Iron Curtain during the Cold War. We understand the gravity of using force. We are also among the most fiscally conservative House Republicans. And as former lawyers and soldiers, we have a deep faith in our Constitution.

We have criticized this president's halting defense of U.S. interests and principles abroad. Had the president supported the Syrian people two years ago, al-Qaida might not have infested the rebel movement. Had he acted decisively against Bashar Assad's earlier use of chemical weapons, we might not face this situation.

We understand why many of our GOP colleagues are undecided about a use-of-force resolution. Indeed, we have reservations about the president's implied course of military action. Yet Congress has its own constitutional duty to defend U.S. interests, and those interests shouldn't be neglected simply because we have doubts about Obama.

Core U.S. national security interests are implicated in Syria, more so than ever by Assad's use of chemical weapons.

First, U.S. credibility is at stake: Obama drew this "red line" a year ago. Some have criticized him for a reckless remark, but the criticism is misplaced.

With or without that comment, our enemies and allies would still be watching to see whether we will tolerate rogue dictators using weapons of mass destruction on the borders of our allies. Inaction will tell Assad, Kim Jong Un and others that it's open season for the use of chemical weapons. Assad might also transfer these weapons to his terrorist ally Hezbollah, which is dedicated to Israel's destruction.

The day the United States fails to act against Assad is likely the day Iran's supreme leader spins his uranium centrifuges into overdrive. If we won't act against a use of weapons of mass destruction, Iran will surely believe that we will not act against its nuclear program. And once Iran has a nuclear breakout, its nuclear warheads could hit the United States in less than two years.

Second, our country has a strong interest in preserving the international taboo against the use of chemical weapons. U.S. troops benefit from this standard. And while some note that innocent civilians are no less dead from conventional artillery than from chemical weapons, the key difference is scale. Conventional weapons can cause only so many casualties. With chemical weapons, what kills hundreds today can kill tens of thousands tomorrow.

Third, our allies are being weakened and our enemies emboldened. Israel, our closest ally in the region, faces an existential threat from Iran and uncertainty in Egypt. The last thing Israel needs is Iran, Syria and Hezbollah on the march. Jordan, a close Arab ally and Israel's partner in peace, is being destabilized by a massive influx of Syrian refugees. Turkey, our NATO ally, faces a similar refugee crisis.

Meanwhile, our enemies act with impunity. Iran and Hezbollah are sending Assad thousands of ground troops and weaponry to fight the rebels. Their involvement has turned the tide in Assad's favor.

Our constitutional role is oversight and advocacy of effective military action. One can vote for a use-of-force resolution yet preserve the right to critique how the president employs such force. After all, we have one commander in chief at a time, and the United States is weakened if our presidency is weakened. No matter the president's party or his past failures, all Americans should want, and help, him to succeed when it comes to our national security.

 

Mike Pompeo, a Republican, represents Kansas' Fourth Congressional District and sits on the House Intelligence Committee. Tom Cotton, a Republican, represents Arkansas' Fourth Congressional District and sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. They wrote this commentary for The Washington Post.

The Fresno Bee is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service