THURSDAY February 1, 2024 |
|
|
Senator Tim Kaine speaking to reporters on January 25 Anna Moneymaker/Getty |
INT. U.S. CAPITOL—OUTSIDE THE SENATE CHAMBER ON JANUARY 30, 2024 It’s been a few days since three U.S. service members were killed in a drone strike by an Iran-backed militia in Jordan. President JOE BIDEN has said that the U.S. "shall respond" but has not given details about what that response will be. Given the various ongoing conflicts in the Middle East—including Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, and recent U.S. airstrikes against Houthis in response to their disrupting traffic in the Red Sea—reporter GRACE SEGERS wonders whether lawmakers are concerned that the U.S. might become embroiled in yet another "forever war" in the Middle East. She questions senators across the ideological spectrum about this possibility. Enter Senator TIM KAINE, a Democrat from Virginia who has co-sponsored legislation to repeal the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force in Iraq. |
We shouldn’t be in another war in the Middle East, but particularly without a congressional debate and vote. So self-defense is one thing, but escalating regional conflict with the U.S. involved and our troops at risk is something that should not happen without a congressional debate and vote. Camera pans to the Senate basement. Grace asks Senator MIKE ROUNDS, a Republican from South Dakota, if he’s worried about the U.S. getting entangled in a larger conflict in the United States. |
Sure, everybody should be. If we continue down this policy of not dealing with the problem children in the Middle East, yes. It started with a very, very poor policy with regard to Afghanistan, and now it’s continued on … where if you don’t deal with these individuals that are causing the problem up front, then they just continue to test the waters. |
Isn’t there the threat that if you go down that route of responding, that then it could end up in a tit for tat? |
We know what happens when you’re in a tit for tat, which is what we’re in right now. Where all we do is, just kind of push them a little bit, and then they go, "Oh, that wasn’t so bad." So then they push back, and now they’re killing Americans. Bottom line is, they have to fear us, and they have to respect our military. Back outside of the Senate chamber, we turn to Senator JOSH HAWLEY, a Republican from Missouri who has been skeptical of U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts. |
We’ve got to find a way to isolate Iran, to cut off any kind of support from the international community, to return to something like we had in the previous administration, where they really were truly isolated. Their revenues were way down. I mean, that's got to be our goal while we continue our pivot toward the Pacific, where our biggest enemy is in China, where our biggest national security threats are. |
I think everyone wants to avoid another type of "forever war," but do you feel as if there are steps that could be taken where the U.S. could go in that direction again? |
I'm leery of anything that would get us more involved in the Mideast in terms of Central Command—the Central Command area of authority—in terms of more manpower, more hardware. We have finite resources, and we have threats all over the world, but we have to prioritize.… Do I want to do nothing with Iran? No, I think we need to retaliate. We certainly need to isolate them. But I think we want to be careful that we don’t find ourselves embroiled, we don’t take actions that can embroil us in a major military conflict. INT. U.S. CAPITOL—IN THE SENATE BASEMENT ON JANUARY 31, 2024 Enter Senator CHRIS COONS, Democrat from Delaware, a close ally of Biden. |
I’m wondering if you’re concerned at all— |
"Wondering if you’re concerned." Oh, my. That’s quite a way to frame it. |
How do you feel about the possibility that what’s happening in the Middle East could escalate into another type of "forever war" that the U.S. could be embroiled in? |
COONS (Laughs, shakes head) |
Well, that’s about as negative a way as you could possibly characterize it. "Are you concerned about another forever war?" I mean the answer to any formulation like that is going to be, "Of course I’m concerned." Let’s put it differently: How confident am I that President Biden is clear eyed about the risks in the Middle East and is taking measured, responsible steps to both deter aggression and defend our troops and yet avoid a regional conflagration? Highly confident. One of the great things about having a president with 50 years of experience in foreign policy is, he’s very, very aware of the difficulties, the tension, the competition in the region; the differences between the Houthis, Hezbollah, Hamas; the different militias in Syria and Iraq; and the overarching role that Iran is playing. But I’m confident that he is carefully balancing how to deter Iran, how to strike back in a way that shows a firmness and determination to protect American troops, with an eye towards avoiding broadening the conflict. Camera pans to GRACE, who looks directly into the lens as she offers the following analysis. |
It’s still unclear to what extent the U.S. will become further engaged in conflicts in the Middle East in the coming weeks. While senators agree that Iranian-backed aggression should not go unheeded, the correct path for de-escalation is uncertain. While the prospects of another "forever war"—à la Afghanistan or Vietnam—are unappealing, time will tell whether the current conflict will evolve into a full-blown sequel. |
Vibe check: Senate Republicans iffy on Mayorkas impeachment |
Each week, I provide an update on the vibes surrounding a particular policy or political development. This week: how Senate Republicans are reacting to the impending impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. The House Homeland Security Committee advanced articles of impeachment against Mayorkas early on Wednesday morning, after a brutally long and contentious hearing. (Readers will be unsurprised to learn that the articles, which have been decried by Democrats as a "political sham," passed along party lines.) With the full House expected to vote on the articles imminently, the Senate may soon undertake its third impeachment trial in five years—albeit the first trial for a Cabinet official in a century and a half. The outcome is a foregone conclusion: 67 senators would need to convict Mayorkas for him to be removed, which would never happen in the Democratic-controlled Senate. The impeachment discussion also comes as bipartisan negotiators toil over a legislative deal on border security, although it is one that House Republicans—spurred by former President Donald Trump—have insisted will be DOA in the lower chamber. For their part, Senate Republicans are feeling mixed about the House sending articles of impeachment for Mayorkas their way. When I asked Senator Mitt Romney whether he believed an impeachment trial was the best use of the Senate’s time, he bluntly replied: "No." Senator Todd Young, who previously expressed frustration with the speedy timelines of the two Trump impeachment proceedings, highlighted "the importance of some measure of due process and building a very strong factual foundation before you impeach." "Otherwise you end up … with snap impeachments. I predicted this was what would happen. It is happening," Young said. "There was a rush to impeach. There’s a rush to dispense with our consideration of the impeachment." Indeed, it’s possible that the Democratic-controlled Senate may try to avoid the issue altogether by moving to table the articles. "It’s going to be up to Senator [Chuck] Schumer how to proceed over here, I suspect," predicted Senator John Cornyn, who is "all for" the House’s impeachment effort. "I suspect [Democrats] might try to table impeachment, which will take 51 votes, because they probably don’t want additional attention to their failures." Schumer, the Democratic majority leader, did not commit to a decision on holding a trial, saying the Senate will "see what the House does first." Even those who approve of the House’s actions could be noncommittal about the prospects of a trial. Senator Tommy Tuberville appeared broadly supportive of the effort, saying he was glad the House is "doing their work." However, when asked about whether a trial would be a valuable use of time, Tuberville said, "Well, not our time, but their time." |
Want to have your pet included at the bottom of the next newsletter? Email me: [email protected]. |
This week’s featured pet is Babs, submitted by Eleanor Mueller. The 6-year-old Babs acts exactly like a dog, according to Eleanor, even coming running when you walk in the door and climbing on top of you any time she can. |
{{#if }} Get the most out of TNR’s breaking news and in-depth analysis with our new membership subscriptions, featuring exclusive benefits that help you dive deeper into today’s top stories. |
{{/if}} |
|
|
|
