{ "id": "R43201", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R43201", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 424293, "date": "2013-09-12", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T23:16:42.961931", "title": "Possible U.S. Intervention in Syria: Issues for Congress", "summary": "Reports of a mass casualty chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus are reshaping the long-running and contentious debate over possible U.S. intervention in Syria\u2019s bloody civil war. Obama Administration officials and some foreign governments report that on August 21, 2013, forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al Asad attacked opposition-controlled areas in the suburbs of the capital with chemical weapons, killing hundreds of civilians, including women and children. The Syrian government has denied the accusations categorically and blames the opposition for the attack. United Nations inspectors who were in Syria to investigate other alleged chemical weapons attacks collected and are analyzing information related to the incident. Varying accounts suggest that several hundred to more than 1,000 people were killed from exposure to a poisonous gas, with symptoms consistent with exposure to the nerve agent sarin. \nPossible punitive U.S. military action against the Asad regime is now the subject of intense debate, amid the broader ongoing discussion of U.S. policy toward the Syrian civil war and its regional consequences. The August 21 incident is the latest in a string of reported instances where Syrian forces appear to have used chemical weapons despite President Obama\u2019s prior statement that the transfer or use of chemical weapons is \u201ca red line\u201d that would \u201cchange his calculus.\u201d The President and senior members of his Administration have argued that the United States has a national security interest in ensuring that \u201cwhen countries break international norms on chemical weapons they are held accountable.\u201d At the same time, President Obama still maintains that extensive, sustained U.S. military intervention to shape the outcome of Syria\u2019s civil conflict is undesirable. Prior to the August 21 incident, U.S. military leaders had outlined options to accomplish a range of U.S. objectives, while warning that U.S. military involvement \u201ccannot resolve the underlying and historic ethnic, religious and tribal issues that are fueling this conflict.\u201d\nAlternatives to military action also are under intense consideration. On September 10, Syrian officials responded to a Russian disarmament proposal by signaling their willingness \u201cto disclose the locations of chemical weapons, to stop producing them, and to reveal these locations to representatives of Russia, other states, and the United Nations\u201d with the goal of \u201cending our possession of all chemical weapons.\u201d Members of the United Nations Security Council began discussing proposals to implement an international framework for such a disarmament initiative.\nMembers of Congress have expressed a broad range of views on the question of an immediate U.S. military response and the proposed disarmament initiative. Some express support for military action and others express opposition or question how a military response would advance broader U.S. policy goals. Similarly, some Members seek to explore the potential of disarmament proposals and others warn that it may delay a forceful U.S. response or undermine U.S. policy with regard to Syria\u2019s civil war. For more than two years, many Members of Congress have debated the potential rewards and unintended consequences of deeper U.S. involvement in Syria. Some Members express concern that the Administration\u2019s policy of providing support to the fractured Syrian opposition could empower anti-American extremist groups, while others warn that failure to back moderate forces could prolong fighting and strengthen extremists. \nAs Members of Congress consider the merits of possible military intervention in Syria, they also are reengaging in long-standing discussions about the proper role for Congress in authorizing and funding U.S. military action abroad and the use of force in shaping global events or deterring dictatorships from committing atrocities. This report attempts to provide answers to a number of policy questions for lawmakers grappling with these short- and long-term issues.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43201", "sha1": "e85cbeaf775ebe5b6e22707502efb7a149a3642d", "filename": "files/20130912_R43201_e85cbeaf775ebe5b6e22707502efb7a149a3642d.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43201", "sha1": "ce848d4e9c2626aaa53796afbb3cdde433e2170e", "filename": "files/20130912_R43201_ce848d4e9c2626aaa53796afbb3cdde433e2170e.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc227917/", "id": "R43201_2013Sep03", "date": "2013-09-03", "retrieved": "2013-11-05T18:07:05", "title": "Possible U.S. Intervention in Syria: Issues for Congress", "summary": "This report discusses the reports of a mass casualty chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus and the possible punitive U.S. military action against the Asad regime.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130903_R43201_2ce11b99c3fb04c641bdc89cc618714451f48aaa.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130903_R43201_2ce11b99c3fb04c641bdc89cc618714451f48aaa.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Foreign policy", "name": "Foreign policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Foreign relations -- U.S. -- Syria", "name": "Foreign relations -- U.S. -- Syria" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Foreign relations -- Syria -- U.S.", "name": "Foreign relations -- Syria -- U.S." }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Mass destruction weapons", "name": "Mass destruction weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Military intervention", "name": "Military intervention" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Asian Affairs", "European Affairs", "Foreign Affairs", "Intelligence and National Security", "Middle Eastern Affairs", "National Defense", "Russian, Central Asian, and Eurasian Affairs" ] }