In London, war debate roars; Washington's whispers
csmonitor.com
<<...So, why do American lawmakers seem to be fiddling while Brits fume?
Analysts point to several explanations. One is that Sept. 11 profoundly shifted the terms of foreign-policy debate in the United States. "Before 9/11, a vote against going to war might have courted unpopularity, but it didn't carry with it a suggestion of lack of patriotism or concern about the national security of America," says Mr. Baker of Rutgers.
The last time Congress debated the nation's policy on the use of force in Iraq Oct. was 11, 2002, just before Bush made his case to the United Nations - and few lawmakers are eager to take it up again.
Democrats worry that a new debate and vote on the war would give President Bush and Republicans cover in the next election if the war goes badly. Instead, Democrats are delivering a spate of nuanced position papers on the war
"You won't see a debate officially on the floor of the Senate or House, but unofficially and publicly in speeches, there is quite a bit of debate about it," says Sen. Ben Nelson (D) of Nebraska, just back from trip to South Korea with Secretary of State Colin Powell. He credits such behind-the-scenes pressure with convincing the Bush administration that it needed more international support before going to war.
The trouble is, he adds, these behind-the-scenes discussions don't "serve the American people" as well as a debate on the floor of the Senate...>> |
