The US Congress early on Friday gave President George Bush authority to go to war against Iraq, citing a ”continuing threat” posed by Baghdad’s alleged weapons buildup.
The Democrat-dominated Senate voted shortly after midnight on Thursday in favor of a resolution granting Bush authority to use force, only hours after the Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed the measure.
Shortly after the vote, Bush issued a statement commending ”the strong bipartisan vote.”
”The Congress has spoken clearly to the international community and the United Nations Security Council. (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein and his outlaw regime pose a grave threat to the region, the world, and the United States.
”Inaction is not an option, disarmament is a must,” Bush said in his statement.
The resolution passed by a vote of 77 to 23 in the Senate and by 296 to 133 in the House of Representatives and capped almost three days of debate.
It authorises Bush to use force ”in a manner necessary and appropriate to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.”
The vote among the Senate’s 50 Democratic members was split 28 in favor, 22 against the measure, while the 49 Republicans lined up one short of unanimity behind the measure. The only independent member of the Senate voted in favor of the measure.
Congress’ strong approval of the measure gives Bush added weight in his effort to sway reluctant members of the UN Security Council including France, Russia and China to issue a new warning against Iraq.
It is this multilateral approach the Bush administration has agreed to strive for that won over many Democratic lawmakers who initially were uneasy about the outcome of a unilateral military intervention in Iraq.
Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington state voted for the measure, but in the debate voiced some reserves. ”If we should use military force it should be the last resort,” she said, adding, ”I hope our multinational efforts will be successful.”
Dissenting Democrat Barbara Mikluski of Maryland warned that ”voting for unilateral action will take the international community off the hook … it will weaken the negotiations of the president at the UN … I am concerned about America going alone.”
Republican Senator Robert Smith for New Hampshire said authorising Bush to use force unilaterally was the only way to respond to what he termed as the growing threat of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction.
The task at hand, Smith said, is ”too big. We cannot rely on the UN and its inspectors to take care of it.”
Bush wants a single new UN resolution outlining a new tougher regime for inspection suspected weapons sites in Iraq including presidential palaces and mosques that would be coupled with the threat of military reprisals if Baghdad blocks inspectors.
Baghdad denies having such weapons of mass destruction and on Thursday invited the US administration to send in inspectors to Iraq but the White House flatly rejected the offer.
Concerned that failing to respond to the drums of war might hamper their chances in the upcoming November 5 mid-term elections, some lawmakers sought to make it clear they were behind the president in protecting national security.
Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona, a Vietnam war veteran and one time presidential hopeful who supports the military option, said, ”There is no such thing as a Democratic or Republican war.”
Military men and women ”will go to war as Americans,” he said before the vote. ”They will do their duty. Ours lies before us.” Despite the vote authorising Bush to attack Iraq, it is still uncertain where the balance of power between Democrats and Republicans in both chambers will fall in the upcoming vote.
A new survey by the Pew Research Center shows that while 60% of Americans are following the Iraq debate — up from 48% in September ? 55% said the economy, and not Iraq, was really the most important issue for the upcoming congressional election. – Sapa-AP