House Progressives to Introduce Diplomacy-Only Measure for Syria This Week

[bigtree]

Greg Sargent ?@ThePlumLineGS 34m
Liberals will introduce their own diplomacy-only measure this week: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/09/09/the-morning-plum-a-liberal-alternative-to-war-in-syria/ … Could be left-right rallying point

As early as tomorrow, I’m told, House liberals will introduce their own resolution on Syria that would call on the United States to exhaust all diplomatic efforts to reach a negotiated political solution to the Syrian conflict, and all means for using international law to hold Assad accountable, rather than opting for military intervention . . .

A draft of the measure, which will be introduced by Dem Rep. Barbara Lee, a staunch opponent of intervention, is currently being circulated among House Dems, aides tell me. It urges the U.S. to require Syria to grant unfettered access to humanitarian organizations to help civilians; step up diplomacy via the international community to advance a negotiated settlement; strengthen sanctions targeting Assad’s assets; prosecute the use of chemical weapons via the International Criminal Court; establish an international Syrian war crimes tribunal; and develop any further responses with member states of the Chemical Weapons Convention.


read: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/09/09/the-morning-plum-a-liberal-alternative-to-war-in-syria/

related:

Rep. Barbara Lee Leads Effort to Slow Rush to War
http://www.socialjusticesolutions.org/2013/09/03/rep-barbara-lee-leads-effort-slow-rush-war/

Joined by 53 of Rep. Lee's colleagues in the House of Representatives, they sent a letter to the President asking him to give Congress an opportunity to debate the specifics and vote on authorization for military action.
http://lee.house.gov/sites/lee.house.gov/files/Lee%20Letter%20to%20President%20Obama_Syria.pdf

[JaneyVee]

1. There we go. Common sense.

[ProSense]

2. Yes, it's an excellent resolution.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee on Congressional Vote on Syria

Washington, D.C.— Congresswoman Barbara Lee released the following statement today regarding the situation in Syria:

“I applaud the President for coming to Congress for a debate and ultimately, a vote. This is exactly the kind of presidential leadership that over 60 of my colleagues and I knew he would exhibit when we sent him a letter last week.

“The United States has compelling evidence that the Assad regime did use chemical weapons against his own people, and we must respond to this heinous act. However, I reject the idea that a military response is the only action we can take.

“There is no military solution to this complex civil war, and while we all agree that a negotiated settlement is necessary, I do not believe military action will further that goal. The dangers of a military strike and its unintended consequences are dire: the further loss of life, so called, “collateral damage,” the possibility of retaliation, escalation, further US involvement in the war, or even sparking a broader regional war.

“These grave consequences demand that we work with the international community and pursue all of the alternatives. That is why I will be voting “no” on any authorization for the use of force and precisely why I am working to advance non-military alternatives. We must hold the Assad regime accountable for these heinous acts while also working to further a negotiated political settlement to the crisis in Syria.”

http://lee.house.gov/press-release/congresswoman-barbara-lee-congressional-vote-syria

[JaneyVee]

3. I believe something must be done about Syria, enough is enough.

I would be disgusted if we sat back and did nothing.

[geek tragedy]

6. "We must hold Assad accountable"

That kind of thinking leads directly to bombing.

[ProSense]

8. It's contingent on Assad doing the right thing. n/t

[bigtree]

12. interesting

. . . so is the military option.

[ProSense]

18. Yes, the ultimatum is built in. Two Senators proposed a similar ultimatum

Two senators mulling alternative Syria resolution

By Ed O'Keefe

A draft resolution being circulated by two moderate Democratic senators would give the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad 45 days to sign an international chemical weapons ban or face the threat of “all elements” of U.S. military power.

Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) are working on the alternative proposal, which would delay the immediate use of military force and compel the Obama administration to build more international and American political support for striking the Assad government, according to Senate aides familiar with the talks.

<...>

Aides cautioned that the final wording of a resolution is still in the works, but provided this proposed language:

“The failure by the government of Bashar al-Assad to sign and comply with the [Chemical Weapons] Convention clearly demonstrates a disregard of international norms on the use of chemical weapons. If the Government of Syria does not sign the Convention within 45 after the date of the enactment of this resolution, all elements of national power will be considered by the United States government.”

“Not later than 45 days after the date of the enactment of this resolution, the President shall submit to Congress a long term strategy for Syria, while concurrently using all appropriate diplomatic tools to develop and secure commitments from the international community with the shared strategic interest of preventing the proliferation and use of Syria’s chemical weapons.”

“This is a draft proposal Senator Heitkamp is working on to approach the very complex situation in Syria. It is one idea that is still a work in progress,” said her spokeswoman, Abigail McDonough.

- more -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/05/two-senators-mulling-alternative-syria-resolution/

Senators Heitkamp and Manchin float diplomatic alternative to military strikes on Syria
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/06/1236747/-Senators-Heitkamp-and-Manchin-float-diplomatic-alternative-to-Syrian-military-strikes

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023611153

The bottom line is that Assad has to do the right thing.

[bigtree]

19. yeah, that got a lot of press attention

. . . it was an early effort. I don't know how much support that has in Congress, either, but I concur that there's quite a bit of this underlying positions of many legislators who have signaled their objections to military strikes. There are more than a few who are wary of completely ruling out military action at some point or the other.

I think this approach faces the same questions as other threats of military action, such as, will it be effective and what will be the risks and consequences?

[geek tragedy]

4. This is well-intentioned but counter-productive.

This resolution buys into the main argument the pro-bombing contingent pushes--that we need to do something, that Assad can't be allowed to get away with it.

It compounds the matter by advocating measures most charitably described as wastes of time.

Putin isn't interested in sacrificing his pawn. Assad is not going to surrender power. Until he is forced out of power, prosecutions are a day dream.

[bigtree]

7. all of that seems to presume that the military option has unassailable merit

. . . something which the congresswoman certainly does not agree with.

All solutions being equally impeded by the principals and their own inherent efficacy or consequence, I'm firmly set against the option which guarantees that the U.S., in directing military strikes into Syria, will make its own tragic contribution to the knowing loss of Syrian lives.

[geek tragedy]

9. No, the military option has very little merit. The problem is that it's the only option

that Assad fears. So, if you talk about holding Assad accountable, that's where it goes.

It's massively against our interests to do so, but that means we have to be ready to let Assad get away with it.

[bigtree]

11. it's confusing

Reports have the administration looking to direct the strikes in a 'limited' targeted manner, so as to avoid completely toppling the Assad regime, out of fear that less than acceptable to the U.S. elements of the Syrian resistance might take advantage of a military and political vacuum.

How is a limited, small-scale military strike going to 'hold Assad accountable' under those self-imposed restraints and conditions?

[geek tragedy]

13. If you lose one kidney, you can live just fine to 95 years old.

But you really don't want to lose that first kidney.

[lumberjack_jeff]

14. Does Assad have foreign assets that can be frozen/seized? n/t

[bigtree]

15. the administration addressed that

. . . by claiming that partner states like Iran and Russia would simply make up the shortfall in Assad's account.

[lumberjack_jeff]

16. And draining Iran's bank accounts would be.... bad? n/t

[bigtree]

17. it's a specious argument

. . . which concluded that diplomatic means have been 'exhausted' by the administration.

I say, hell yeah, seize them/freeze them (at least as far as the U.S. interests are concerned). To be effective they'd need cooperation from other nations who might hold or deal in Syrian assets.

[geek tragedy]

21. At this point? Only if he's an idiot. nt

[malaise]

5. Good

No more fugging bombing

[Le Taz Hot]

10. Thank the gods!

A voice of sanity. Not that it will go anywhere but at least she and 53 Congresscritters (so far) are on the record for common sense.

[Adrahil]

20. It hasn't worked for the last year, but it's sure to work THIS time, right?

Ya wanna oppose intervention, fine. But this kind of cock-eyed optimism is kind of laughable. I mean, surely if we just say pretty please, Assad will stop gassing his people, or next time we'll send a strongly worded letter! That'll show him!

[bigtree]

22. well, it's not as if the administration is going to knock out Assad with a small-scale strike

. . . not going to knock out his capability to launch chemical attacks; not going to hit his stockpile.

Moreover, the administration has made clear that they are limiting the scale of the military action proposed in order to leave Assad's regime in place and in military control; so as to not create a political or military vacuum in which unwanted elements of the Syrian resistance could exploit into power.

Folks like to point to the stalemated diplomacy as if our own conditions for such negotiations are set in stone. Conversely, proponents of military action regard that option as some sort of panacea which they're being denied.

With all of the dubious assumptions about the effect on Assad's thinking or actions; all of the risks of escalating the conflict or exacerbating the harm and displacement of Syrians in the way of the U.S. directed militarism; with all of the unknown retaliatory responses from Syria and the region; the military option is not only wildly 'optimistic', it's a dangerous, reckless, and irresponsible counter.

[frylock]

25. so what the fuck is bombing the living shit out of damascus going to accomplish?

let's hear your brilliant strategy.

[L0oniX]

23. Sanity ....I like it. War crack is bad mojo. n/t

[NorthCarolina]

24. This is sure to get lots of media coverage!

Not.

[zipplewrath]

26. What Kerry should have written

This seems like the kind of document that Kerry should have written over at State, instead of running around suggesting the DoD should work this problem instead.

[Iliyah]

27. I will listen to Pres O tomorrow

and you guys should know by now that house gopers don't know how to work with others.

[grahamhgreen]

30. We should?? We've been telling him that since he compromised our health care.

[brooklynite]

28. Can someone define "exhaust"?

Efforts to negotiate a settlement of the conflict have been occurring since it started. How long do you allow them to continue?

[merrily]

29. Whatever evidence they have, the evidence that Assad was responsible for use of

chemicals is not indisputable.

[heaven05]

31. hope it helps.

yet all I have to do is read Howard Zinn's article 'the end of empire/empire or humanity', TomDispatch.com to begin a new perspective, for me, on america's 'concern' about Assad.

[pampango]

32. Wonderful move. Great ideas that differentiate progressive and tea party opposition to strikes.

Using international law, the International Criminal Court, the Chemical Weapons Convention and increased access and funding for humanitarian organizations are ideas that will appeal more to progressives than to tea party isolationists who are not real big on diplomacy, foreign aide and international law.

[bigtree]

33. kick