Friday’s military strike in Syria, which Defense Secretary Jim Mattis described as right now being “a one-time shot,” won’t bring serious demands on Capitol Hill for a full-blown debate on reauthorizing the president to use military force abroad.
Those who control the floor schedules in the House and Senate and the committee agendas in the panels overseeing the matter said this week they have little interest in a vote — months out from an election — on a new bill authorizing the president to use military force.
Instead, they say President Trump had the authority to respond militarily to the chemical gassing of civilians in Syria by leader Bashar Assad.
His authority comes under the last Authorization for the Use of Military Force, or AUMF, which was passed into law more than 15 years ago, or under other authorities afforded to the president when it comes to using the nation’s armed forces against another country, many lawmakers said.
“In this particular case, I think the authority would be preventing a humanitarian crisis,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., who would oversee a new AUMF, said this week. “I think for a surgical strike, they easily have the authority to do it.”
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., praised Trump’s decision to strike Syria “and for signaling his resolve to do so again if these heinous attacks continue.”
President Trump on Friday night announced the U.S. military, in conjunction with France and the United Kingdom, hit Syrian storage and military targets. The strike came in response to a chemical weapons attack that killed 40 people and injured hundreds more that U.S. officials believe was orchestrated by the Assad’s regime.
The targeted attack against Syria by the U.S. is what most top GOP lawmakers were anticipating. Few said it warranted a new debate in Congress.
Both House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said they had no plans to take up a new AUMF in response to Trump’s intention to bomb Syria.
‘With respect to the authorities, the existing AUMF gives him the authority he needs to do what he may or may not do,” Ryan said this week.
The strikes, though, could increase calls to have a full-fledged debate.
A bipartisan group of 88 House lawmakers, most of them Democrats, issued a statement Friday calling on Trump to seek authorization from Congress before acting in Syria.
The last authorization for the use of military force passed in 2001, followed by a 2002 vote endorsing the war in Iraq.
Former President Barack Obama sent an AUMF to Congress, but it was never considered because it was doomed to fail.
A smaller group of Republicans is demanding an AUMF debate, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.
“We shouldn’t attack Syria without an authorization for war,” Paul told the Washington Examiner.
Friday’s attack will likely generate a demand for Trump to share with Congress a broad strategy for Syria and the years-long effort to combat the Islamic State in the region.
Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said he’s OK with Trump striking Syria now, but added, “I would like to reopen the debate.”
Senators in both parties have long demanded the executive branch outline a specific strategy addressing how the U.S. will respond to conflict in the region.
McCain renewed the plea on Friday.
“To succeed in the long run, we need a comprehensive strategy for Syria and the entire region,” McCain said. “The President needs to lay out our goals, not just with regard to ISIS, but also the ongoing conflict in Syria and malign Russian and Iranian influence in the region. Airstrikes disconnected from a broader strategy may be necessary, but they alone will not achieve U.S. objectives in the Middle East.”
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said last week he is planning to move a new AUMF in his panel, but said “it has nothing to do with Syria.”
Instead, Corker said, it would address how the U.S. uses military force against ISIS.
Corker’s Democratic counterpart on Foreign Relations, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., the ranking member, is not questioning targeted and limited strikes.
Trump, Menendez said, “has asserted authority under Article II of the Constitution for these strikes, but any sustained military action in Syria would require Congressional authorization.”
Menendez is asking for a congressional briefing on the strikes from the Trump administration, which is typically provided after such attacks.
Democrats in general want to limit Trump’s military action under the 2001 authorization because they don’t trust him. But they don’t control the floor schedule, which makes it unlikely they can do anything legislatively.
