The Virginia-Pilot - Warner Weighing His Response on Syria

News Article

By Bill Bartel

Sen. Mark Warner said Thursday he is wrestling with whether to support an American military attack on Syria, with his deliberations centering on the implications to the United States' national security and how to respond to another country's use of chemical weapons to kill innocent people.

Warner and others in Congress are expected to vote on a resolution that would give President Barack Obama authority to launch a strike on Syrian installations. Virginia's other senator, Tim Kaine, voted Wednesday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in support of a limited attack.

Warner won't vote on the issue until it is considered by the full Senate, possibly next week. Based on public and classified information, he said he's convinced the Syrian government killed 1,400 of its people with chemical weapons.

"I think the proof is overwhelming that it was the Assad regime," Warner said in an interview after touring the Yorktown Victory Center, adding that his vote will hinge on questions about U.S. national security and the moral argument of how to respond.

"How are America's national security interests affected if we act or if we don't act?" he said, indicating that Iran, which the United States believes is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, might be emboldened if it perceives the U.S. as weak, and a failure to act could spark effects with other nations that could be harmful to America.

"The question that I'm wrestling is, 'What would our failure to act do in terms of a sign to Iran, the stabilization of the Jordanian government... our ability to continue to convince the Gulf states to support the moderate Syrian rebels?' " he said.

But "clearly there are down sides," he said of an American attack.

Opponents to a military assault have argued that no one can predict how Syria might respond or what other countries might do in response.

Warner was critical of the Obama administration for not doing enough to lay out the national security implications.

"I think the administration is building its case for the moral implications. What I don't think the administration has done a very good job of is... explaining to the American people both the risk of acting but also the risk of not acting."

Warner said he's not heard much public support for military action.

"Virginians are seven-to-one, eight-to-one against," he said. "And it's across the political spectrum."

He noted that as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he has access to sensitive information that every citizen cannot review.

"It's important for me to listen to Virginians," he said. "But I believe our government is a republican form of government - that you hired me. I make the best judgment and then people have a chance to fire me or not."

Source