President Barack Obamas Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) against Islamic State (IS) terrorist forces is getting the support of the Florida congressional delegation, even as some Republicans from the Sunshine State push back against the administration. In his AUMF message to Congress on Wednesday, Obama indicated he would continue to back air attacks on IS forces in Syria and Iraq.
On Wednesday, U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Affairs Committee and a potential Republican presidential contender in 2016, took to the Senate floor to offer his take on the AUMF.
"I think its good news the president has made that submission. And I think hes right when he says the country is stronger when it acts both with Congress and the president together, Rubio said. I would say there is a pretty simple authorization he could ask for, and it would read one sentence. And that is: We authorize the president to defeat and destroy IS, period. And thats, I think, what we need to do.
But Rubio said he did have some problems with Obamas AUMF.
Now, I look forward to reading through his submission, Rubio said. I understand it contains a time limitation, it does not contain geographic limitations. It contains some language that supposedly is going to make people feel more comfortable about the use of ground troops. But I want to point out that it's an authorization to use force that has limitations built into it that are really quite unprecedented. We did some research earlier today and found the Congressional Research Service informed us that there really are only two previous authorizations that have limited the president in terms of the force to be used and the duration of the conflict. One was in 1983 in Lebanon, and the other one was in 1993 in Somalia. And both of those were U.N. peacekeeping missions, and so it made sense to limit, to that peacekeeping mission, the use of force.
But it appears that never before, and certainly in modern history, has the Congress of the United States authorized the president to take on and defeat an enemy but has done so with limitations on the time or the geography or anything of this nature, Rubio added. I think thats an important point for us to understand, because under no circumstances can IS stay. What we need to be authorizing the president to do is to destroy them and to defeat them, and allow the commander in chief, both the one we have now and the one who will follow, to put in place the tactics, the military tactics necessary to destroy and defeat IS.
This group needs to be defeated, Rubio continued. I wish we had taken this group on earlier. I wish, in fact, that we had gotten involved in the conflict in Syria earlier and equipped moderate rebel elements, nonjihadist rebel elements on the ground so that they would have been the most powerful force there. The president failed to do that in a timely fashion, and as a result a vacuum was created and that vacuum was filled by this group who has attracted foreign fighters from all over the world to join their ranks. And now were dealing with this problem. But I would argue better late than never. Had we dealt with this two years ago or a year and a half ago, it wouldnt have been easy, but it would have been easier. But I think its important to deal with it decisively now.
We can debate the tactics, but ultimately it is the job of the commander in chief, in consultation with his military officials that surround him and advise him, to come up with the appropriate tactics to defeat the enemy, Rubio said in conclusion. But for our purposes, it should be very straightforward IS is the enemy. They need to be defeated. And we should authorize this president and future presidents to do what they can and what they must to defeat IS, and erase them from the equation.
From his perch as one of the senior Democrats on the U.S. Armed Services Committee, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., also agreed with Obamas AUMF.
Any group barbaric enough to behead and burn innocent people and bring about the death of a humanitarian worker deserves to be crushed, Nelson said on Wednesday. I believe Congress should vote to give the president clear and defined authority to strike and defeat IS. The presidents proposal on key points closely mirrors the one I offered last year. Both authorize force against IS; both allow the U.S. to hunt ISIS down wherever they might seek safe haven; and, both would need to be reviewed in three years. On the issue of boots on the ground, both say no to standing armies but leave open the possibility of special forces-led strikes.
Over in the House, U.S. Rep. Tom Rooney, R-Fla., said Congress needs to examine whether or not to back the AUMF, insisting Obama has put too many limitations on it.
For months, the president has insisted he does not need a new authorization to combat IS, Rooney said on Wednesday. Now, he is requesting that Congress approve the strategy he was already pursuing, only with even tighter restrictions. What has changed? While the president is finally taking the right step by consulting with Congress and seeking authorization, we should not simply rubber-stamp a strategy that he is already executing, and which is already failing.
I continue to question why we would handcuff our militarys ability to degrade and destroy IS, as President Obama demanded last fall, Rooney added. How can our military operate effectively under these undue and dangerous restrictions? Why would we give IS a short timeline for our withdrawal? We tried these limitations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and this approach clearly does not advance any coherent mission that justifies the engagement to begin with. As Congress considers the presidents request, I believe he must come to Congress and the American people, answer these questions, and explain his strategy for victory.
Obamas proposal is also generating mixed reviews from members of his own party.
As the mother of a son who served our country in two wars, I came to Congress committed to engaging in thoughtful deliberation before sending anyone elses child into harms way, said U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, D-Fla. I will make a decision on the presidents request for authorization of force against IS after the Congress has a full discussion and debate on the matter.
In the meantime, members from the delegation are starting to look at the roles of other countries in the region. The two members of the Florida congressional delegation leading the U.S. House Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee are looking to increase economic and military aid to Jordan which is in the front lines against IS terrorist forces.
U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., the chairwoman of the subcommittee, and U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, introduced the United States-Jordan Defense Cooperation Act of 2015 on Thursday. The bill would list Jordan as a trusted ally, giving Congress more flexibility to send military aid to that nation to fight IS. The legislation also allows the two nations to have joint military exercises.
U.S. Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, the chair of the U.S. State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee, and her ranking Democrat U.S. Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., are also backing the measure.
The four congressional representatives released a joint statement on Thursday explaining the rationale behind the bill.
As Jordan ramps up its attacks against IS terrorists, it is critical that the United States does everything it can to support the kingdom in our joint effort to combat radical Islamist terrorists, they said. Jordan has been a key partner in the region for years and is on the front lines of the fight against IS, sharing a border with both Syria and Iraq. In order to ensure Jordan has the capabilities to defend itself and fight to eradicate this terrorist threat, we must increase our bilateral military cooperation and expedite military sales to the kingdom.
On Wednesday, at a Homeland Security Committee hearing, U.S. Rep. Curt Clawson, R-Fla., expressed doubts about Turkeys commitment to fight IS despite being a member of NATO and a longtime American ally.
Turkey has a proud history, a secular history, Clawson said, but added it almost feels as if theres an ambivalence with regard on the border.
Clawson said Turkeys support was needed to defeat IS but Congress needed to pin down where Turkey really is when it comes to fighting the terrorists.
I dont know where they are, Clawson said about Turkish efforts against IS.
Reach Kevin Derby at kderby@sunshinestatenews.com or follow him on Twitter: @KevinDerbySSN
