This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/us/politics/democrats-syria-russia.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Unified Against Trump on Syria, Democrats Struggle to Define Alternate Strategy Unified Against Trump on Syria, Democrats Struggle to Define Alternate Strategy
(3 days later)
WASHINGTON — For nearly two decades, Republicans have dominated national security debates, portraying themselves as tough on terrorists after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and tough on a recalcitrant, disruptive Russia. On Tuesday night, Democrats sensed an opportunity to retake that ground, attacking President Trump’s impulsive action in Syria as a gift to the Islamic State and to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.WASHINGTON — For nearly two decades, Republicans have dominated national security debates, portraying themselves as tough on terrorists after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and tough on a recalcitrant, disruptive Russia. On Tuesday night, Democrats sensed an opportunity to retake that ground, attacking President Trump’s impulsive action in Syria as a gift to the Islamic State and to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
But it was not an easy path. Debating American foreign policy among themselves in a sustained way for the first time in the campaign, the 12 candidates on the debate stage in Ohio found themselves caught between their party’s intensifying instinct to extract the United States from war and their desire to cast Mr. Trump’s rapid retreat from Syria as dangerous and incompetent.But it was not an easy path. Debating American foreign policy among themselves in a sustained way for the first time in the campaign, the 12 candidates on the debate stage in Ohio found themselves caught between their party’s intensifying instinct to extract the United States from war and their desire to cast Mr. Trump’s rapid retreat from Syria as dangerous and incompetent.
In heated exchanges, the candidates were largely unified in their critique of Mr. Trump’s willingness to abandon the Kurds in northern Syria; “betrayal” was the most commonly used word. They drew a clear distinction between the president’s impulsiveness and their own promises to maintain alliances and bring American forces home in a deliberate, orderly way.In heated exchanges, the candidates were largely unified in their critique of Mr. Trump’s willingness to abandon the Kurds in northern Syria; “betrayal” was the most commonly used word. They drew a clear distinction between the president’s impulsiveness and their own promises to maintain alliances and bring American forces home in a deliberate, orderly way.
At moments, they sounded like Mr. Trump’s many Republican critics in Congress, who have been equally critical of his handling of the crisis in Syria. Yet the Democrats struggled to articulate what strategy they would pursue if they inherited the carnage and disarray stemming from Mr. Trump’s decision to give Turkey’s leader, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, what amounted to a green light to invade his neighbor.At moments, they sounded like Mr. Trump’s many Republican critics in Congress, who have been equally critical of his handling of the crisis in Syria. Yet the Democrats struggled to articulate what strategy they would pursue if they inherited the carnage and disarray stemming from Mr. Trump’s decision to give Turkey’s leader, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, what amounted to a green light to invade his neighbor.
Mr. Trump’s decision to pull American troops without a backup plan put the dozen Democrats in an unusual position: It ceded to them strong-on-counterterrorism ground once largely dominated by Republicans. One by one the Democrats warned that Mr. Trump was allowing thousands of Islamic State terrorists, now breaking free from camps where they were contained by Kurdish forces in Syria, to again pose an imminent threat to the region, and ultimately to the United States.Mr. Trump’s decision to pull American troops without a backup plan put the dozen Democrats in an unusual position: It ceded to them strong-on-counterterrorism ground once largely dominated by Republicans. One by one the Democrats warned that Mr. Trump was allowing thousands of Islamic State terrorists, now breaking free from camps where they were contained by Kurdish forces in Syria, to again pose an imminent threat to the region, and ultimately to the United States.
They were clearly suggesting that if a terrorist strike emanated from the region, they would blame Mr. Trump’s failure to anticipate the consequences of his actions.They were clearly suggesting that if a terrorist strike emanated from the region, they would blame Mr. Trump’s failure to anticipate the consequences of his actions.
“He has helped ISIS get another foothold, a new lease on life,” Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said during what amounted to the first extensive discussion of national security in the Democratic debates so far.“He has helped ISIS get another foothold, a new lease on life,” Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said during what amounted to the first extensive discussion of national security in the Democratic debates so far.
“We have ISIS that is going to come here," said her chief rival in the polls, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.“We have ISIS that is going to come here," said her chief rival in the polls, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
But both candidates exhibited the complex straddle that Democrats are performing these days, as they try to sound tougher and more competent than Mr. Trump while also playing to their party’s aversion to keeping American troops indefinitely in war zones.But both candidates exhibited the complex straddle that Democrats are performing these days, as they try to sound tougher and more competent than Mr. Trump while also playing to their party’s aversion to keeping American troops indefinitely in war zones.
“I think that we ought to get out of the Middle East,” Ms. Warren said. She then dwelled on a description of how she would pull back differently, and more skillfully, than Mr. Trump’s rapid and chaotic retreat in the past week.“I think that we ought to get out of the Middle East,” Ms. Warren said. She then dwelled on a description of how she would pull back differently, and more skillfully, than Mr. Trump’s rapid and chaotic retreat in the past week.
Mr. Biden, the only one of the candidates with a long record in foreign issues, declined — twice — to answer a question about whether he would reinsert the American troops that have been withdrawn from northern Syria. Instead, he talked about protecting the forces still in the country, saying he would give them air cover and “make it clear they’re not going anywhere.”Mr. Biden, the only one of the candidates with a long record in foreign issues, declined — twice — to answer a question about whether he would reinsert the American troops that have been withdrawn from northern Syria. Instead, he talked about protecting the forces still in the country, saying he would give them air cover and “make it clear they’re not going anywhere.”
He then turned to Mr. Trump’s abandonment of the Kurds, America’s longtime ally in fighting ISIS, shouting: “This is shameful! Shameful what this man has done.”He then turned to Mr. Trump’s abandonment of the Kurds, America’s longtime ally in fighting ISIS, shouting: “This is shameful! Shameful what this man has done.”
Only Mayor Pete Buttigieg of Indiana, who served in Afghanistan, made the distinction between ending large combat operations and keeping “a small number of specialized, special operations forces and intelligence capabilities” on the ground, especially in Syria.Only Mayor Pete Buttigieg of Indiana, who served in Afghanistan, made the distinction between ending large combat operations and keeping “a small number of specialized, special operations forces and intelligence capabilities” on the ground, especially in Syria.
Those forces, he argued, “were the only thing that stood between that part of Syria” and “the beginning of a genocide and the resurgence of ISIS.” It is a distinction Mr. Trump, and many of those seeking to run against him on the Democratic ticket, have passed by.Those forces, he argued, “were the only thing that stood between that part of Syria” and “the beginning of a genocide and the resurgence of ISIS.” It is a distinction Mr. Trump, and many of those seeking to run against him on the Democratic ticket, have passed by.
The exchanges on Syria, followed by a parallel discussion of how to contain Russia’s increasing aggressiveness, underscored one of the oddities of the 2020 election season: Faced with a Republican president who has envisioned a far more isolationist approach to American power, the Democrats are sounding like interventionist Republicans of just a few years ago.The exchanges on Syria, followed by a parallel discussion of how to contain Russia’s increasing aggressiveness, underscored one of the oddities of the 2020 election season: Faced with a Republican president who has envisioned a far more isolationist approach to American power, the Democrats are sounding like interventionist Republicans of just a few years ago.
When Mitt Romney ran against President Barack Obama in 2012, he called Russia the “No. 1 geopolitical foe” facing the United States and argued that containing Mr. Putin would be his top priority. That led Mr. Obama, with a laugh, to respond: “The 1980s, they’re now calling to ask for their foreign policy back,” an effort to paint Mr. Romney as a cold warrior who did not realize that era had passed.When Mitt Romney ran against President Barack Obama in 2012, he called Russia the “No. 1 geopolitical foe” facing the United States and argued that containing Mr. Putin would be his top priority. That led Mr. Obama, with a laugh, to respond: “The 1980s, they’re now calling to ask for their foreign policy back,” an effort to paint Mr. Romney as a cold warrior who did not realize that era had passed.
Now, that Russia-focused policy is back for those hoping to reassemble Mr. Obama’s coalition. In sharp contrast to Mr. Trump, who has never been openly critical of Mr. Putin, several said they would expose the Russian leader’s links to corruption and freeze his bank accounts. (That was a measure briefly considered — and rejected — by Mr. Obama in late 2016, as he tried to figure out how to punish Mr. Putin as the interference in the presidential election that year became clear.)Now, that Russia-focused policy is back for those hoping to reassemble Mr. Obama’s coalition. In sharp contrast to Mr. Trump, who has never been openly critical of Mr. Putin, several said they would expose the Russian leader’s links to corruption and freeze his bank accounts. (That was a measure briefly considered — and rejected — by Mr. Obama in late 2016, as he tried to figure out how to punish Mr. Putin as the interference in the presidential election that year became clear.)
The candidates tried to outdo one another in explaining how tough they would be on Moscow.The candidates tried to outdo one another in explaining how tough they would be on Moscow.
“We have not talked about what we need to do to protect ourselves from Russia invading our election,” said Senator Amy Klobuchar of Michigan. “We have not talked about what we need to do to protect ourselves from Russia invading our election,” said Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.
She called for the entire nation to use backup paper ballots, a step that Tom Steyer, the billionaire hedge-fund manager who gained a name — and a place on the debate stage on Tuesday night — with an expensive campaign to press for Mr. Trump’s impeachment, said he “absolutely” would freeze Mr. Putin’s assets.She called for the entire nation to use backup paper ballots, a step that Tom Steyer, the billionaire hedge-fund manager who gained a name — and a place on the debate stage on Tuesday night — with an expensive campaign to press for Mr. Trump’s impeachment, said he “absolutely” would freeze Mr. Putin’s assets.
But it was Syria that gave Mr. Steyer, and most of the other candidates, the opportunity they sought to present Mr. Trump as an erratic, unthinking commander in chief, incapable at looking around corners or considering the second-order effects of his actions. “Mr. Trump’s having no plans, having no process and having no partners has proved to be a disaster in Syria,” he argued. He called the president’s “America First” approach, a slogan he adopted during the 2016 campaign, “ the worst idea I have ever heard and I would change it on day one.”But it was Syria that gave Mr. Steyer, and most of the other candidates, the opportunity they sought to present Mr. Trump as an erratic, unthinking commander in chief, incapable at looking around corners or considering the second-order effects of his actions. “Mr. Trump’s having no plans, having no process and having no partners has proved to be a disaster in Syria,” he argued. He called the president’s “America First” approach, a slogan he adopted during the 2016 campaign, “ the worst idea I have ever heard and I would change it on day one.”
But at the same time, the candidates repeatedly struggled to explain how they would handle a problem like Mr. Erdogan, an ostensible ally who has in the past few months bought Russian air defenses and sent troops to seize territory in a neighboring state.But at the same time, the candidates repeatedly struggled to explain how they would handle a problem like Mr. Erdogan, an ostensible ally who has in the past few months bought Russian air defenses and sent troops to seize territory in a neighboring state.
“Turkey is not a U.S. ally," said Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, “when they invade another country and engage in mass slaughter.” But he quickly turned the issue back to Mr. Trump, blaming him, not Mr. Erdogan, for the current crisis.“Turkey is not a U.S. ally," said Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, “when they invade another country and engage in mass slaughter.” But he quickly turned the issue back to Mr. Trump, blaming him, not Mr. Erdogan, for the current crisis.
“You tell me what country in the world will trust the word of the president of the United States,” Mr. Sanders said.“You tell me what country in the world will trust the word of the president of the United States,” Mr. Sanders said.
Mr. Biden came the closest to describing how he would approach the situation today, suggesting he would threaten to expel Turkey from North Atlantic Treaty Organization — a step that would be difficult to impossible under the alliance’s charter — and lay out a series of steps that would force Mr. Erdogan to reverse course.Mr. Biden came the closest to describing how he would approach the situation today, suggesting he would threaten to expel Turkey from North Atlantic Treaty Organization — a step that would be difficult to impossible under the alliance’s charter — and lay out a series of steps that would force Mr. Erdogan to reverse course.
But his prescription of tough talk to force a dubious ally into line sounded much like what Mr. Trump is belatedly seeking to do by sending Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the new national security adviser, Robert C. O’Brien, to Turkey this week.But his prescription of tough talk to force a dubious ally into line sounded much like what Mr. Trump is belatedly seeking to do by sending Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the new national security adviser, Robert C. O’Brien, to Turkey this week.