Senate Democrats indicated Thursday that they’re increasingly frustrated with President Obama’s policy in Syria, and faulted the administration for failing to come up with a plan to end the violence.
“We need bold U.S. action to protect civilian lives,” Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said at a committee hearing Thursday. “We need that now and I look forward to reviewing with you the options that are being considered.”
Much of the conversation at the hearing focused on whether the United States has leverage in the country, where Syrian President Bashar Assad, with the support of Russia and Iran, is killing civilians and humanitarian aid workers while trying to overwhelm U.S.-backed rebels.
A tentative cease-fire collapsed this week, leaving the U.S. with little recourse other than to urge Russia and Syria to live up to its terms.
Republicans offered their customary critique of Obama letting Assad cross a “red line” by using chemical weapons without consequences. But several Democrats joined the chorus, protesting that Obama’s diplomacy with Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Iranians had failed.
“I’m not going to beat the Plan B horse because I appreciate that you have not been able to share with us what might be being considered, and maybe you’re not able to talk about what options are being discussed that we might still have in Syria,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., told Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
“But it seems to me that we need to look at all of those options because the current effort is not working. And I appreciate the arguments you’re making. I just don’t think they’re working.”
Cardin suggested that Obama has avoided punishing Iran for helping Assad out of fear of disrupting the Iran nuclear agreement brokered last year, something Blinken denied.
“I am not aware that we have increased those sanctions or have looked at ways in which we can apply more pressure against Iran,” Cardin said. “It’s my understanding that we’ve been pretty guarded in these activities.”
“Iran has showed no slowing down of their activities in Syria, so I would hope that we would see some aggressive U.S. leadership to make it clear that that conduct doesn’t get a free pass because of the [nuclear deal],” he added.
Democrats also criticized the outcome of U.S. negotiations with Russia. “Whether we like it or not, they’re the major player here,” Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., lamented.
Blinken laid out a series of negative outcomes for Russia that would result from Putin’s continued support for Assad. He emphasized that the Russians are likely to take casualties as outside nations send more weapons to the rebels, and he suggested that Sunni Muslims who live in Russia might be angered by Putin’s Syria policy.
That explanation failed to convince lawmakers, however. “That hasn’t changed their calculation at all,” Menendez said. He then suggested that Russia manipulated Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent attempts to negotiate a cease-fire.
“Russia seems to agree only for the purposes of giving Assad time to re-arm and regroup,” he said. “What leverage do we really have? What are we doing here to Russia to change its calculation?”
Blinken replied by defending the attempt to negotiate a cease-fire and reiterating that Russia would suffer for its involvement even without direct U.S.
“The leverage is again the consequences for Russia of being stuck in a quagmire that is going to have a number of profoundly negative effects,” he said.
Menendez concluded that Obama doesn’t have a strategy to force Russia to stop enabling Assad’s attacks on civilians. “I would have asked what Plan B is, too — I don’t get a sense that there is one and that worries me,” he said. “I don’t think we should wait for the next president to start devising things that move in that direction.”
