WASHINGTON-President Barack Obama's allies in Congress welcomed the news Saturday of an agreement between U.S. and Russian diplomats to eradicate Syria's chemical weapons, but some lawmakers remained skeptical the deal could be effectively enforced.
Reaction to the news from Capitol Hill was initially muted early Saturday, with many lawmakers in their home districts or at religious services as the news emerged that U.S. and Russian officials had agreed on a broad framework and timetable for Syria to destroy its arsenal of chemical weapons.
Congressional Democrats embraced the deal as evidence that President Barack Obama's recent pivots on Syria had proved a successful strategy.
"It is an enormous vindication of President Obama," Rep. Gerry Connolly (D., Va.) said in an interview Saturday, praising the president for first seeking congressional authority to take military action in Syria and later halting that when a diplomatic path appeared.
"I don't believe the Russians and Syrians would have entertained this proposal if there hadn't been the threat of a strike," said Mr. Connolly, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who had supported taking military action in Syria.
Fellow Foreign Affairs panel member Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hawaii) called reports of the deal "encouraging" and a "strong step toward a diplomatic solution" on Twitter Saturday. Ms. Gabbard, an Iraq war veteran, had opposed taking military action in Syria, saying it would have been a "serious mistake."
Under the agreement between Moscow and Washington, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must provide a complete declaration of his country's chemical weapons stockpiles to the Hague-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons by next Friday, which would strive to complete initial on-site inspections by November. Diplomats said they hoped to completely dismantle Syria's chemical weapons infrastructure by the first half of 2014.
However, some lawmakers expressed concern over how the plan would be enforced, since officials indicated the agreement would be codified in a United Nations resolution that would not include a threat of military action.
"Absent the threat of force, it's unclear to me how Syrian compliance will be possible under the terms of any agreement," said Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, the top Republican on the SenateForeign Relations Committee. "I'm still reviewing the details and believe Syria's willingness to follow through is very much an open question, but I remain supportive of a strong diplomatic solution to Syria's use of chemical weapons."
Administration officials said President Barack Obama is maintaining the right to strike Syria alone if Mr. Assad doesn't comply with the demands of the international agreement.
"The option of a potential strike from the U.S. and its allies is very much still out there. The Russians and Syrians understand that and that's what brought them to the table," Mr. Connolly said.
Democrats said they would continue to keep a close eye on Syria's next steps, even as they heralded the agreement.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Member Chris Coons (D., Del.) said he still had concerns over whether the Russians and Syrians would follow through with the terms of the deal, but said it presented "a very real prospect" of dismantling Syria's chemical weapons.
"The initial tone and initial framework are very encouraging," he said in an interview Saturday. "This is a significant accomplishment for President Obama and Secretary Kerry." Mr. Coons had voted in committee for a Senate measure authorizing the president to strike in Syria.
Many lawmakers had endorsed pursuing the diplomatic negotiations earlier in the week as a welcome alternative to a controversial resolution authorizing Mr. Obama to use military force in Syria. In the face of deep public resistance against intervening in Syria, few on Capitol Hill were hungering to vote on the polarizing measure, which appeared to have slim chances of passing the GOP-controlled House and might have failed in the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Not all lawmakers were quick to embrace Saturday's deal. A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) pointed to the doubts expressed by the top Senate Republican earlier in the week when the Russian proposal first emerged.
"Let me remind everyone that even if this is agreed to, it's still a long way off to reaching an agreement at the United Nations, to Syria gaining entry to the Chemical Weapons Convention, and to eventually securing, and destroying the stockpile," Mr. McConnell said on the Senate floor on Tuesday. "As we've seen in my own state of Kentucky, destroying chemical weapons is extremely challenging and requires a great deal of attention to detail and safety."
Reaction to the news from Capitol Hill was initially muted early Saturday, with many lawmakers in their home districts or at religious services as the news emerged that U.S. and Russian officials had agreed on a broad framework and timetable for Syria to destroy its arsenal of chemical weapons.
Congressional Democrats embraced the deal as evidence that President Barack Obama's recent pivots on Syria had proved a successful strategy.
"It is an enormous vindication of President Obama," Rep. Gerry Connolly (D., Va.) said in an interview Saturday, praising the president for first seeking congressional authority to take military action in Syria and later halting that when a diplomatic path appeared.
"I don't believe the Russians and Syrians would have entertained this proposal if there hadn't been the threat of a strike," said Mr. Connolly, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who had supported taking military action in Syria.
Fellow Foreign Affairs panel member Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hawaii) called reports of the deal "encouraging" and a "strong step toward a diplomatic solution" on Twitter Saturday. Ms. Gabbard, an Iraq war veteran, had opposed taking military action in Syria, saying it would have been a "serious mistake."
Under the agreement between Moscow and Washington, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must provide a complete declaration of his country's chemical weapons stockpiles to the Hague-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons by next Friday, which would strive to complete initial on-site inspections by November. Diplomats said they hoped to completely dismantle Syria's chemical weapons infrastructure by the first half of 2014.
However, some lawmakers expressed concern over how the plan would be enforced, since officials indicated the agreement would be codified in a United Nations resolution that would not include a threat of military action.
"Absent the threat of force, it's unclear to me how Syrian compliance will be possible under the terms of any agreement," said Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, the top Republican on the SenateForeign Relations Committee. "I'm still reviewing the details and believe Syria's willingness to follow through is very much an open question, but I remain supportive of a strong diplomatic solution to Syria's use of chemical weapons."
Administration officials said President Barack Obama is maintaining the right to strike Syria alone if Mr. Assad doesn't comply with the demands of the international agreement.
"The option of a potential strike from the U.S. and its allies is very much still out there. The Russians and Syrians understand that and that's what brought them to the table," Mr. Connolly said.
Democrats said they would continue to keep a close eye on Syria's next steps, even as they heralded the agreement.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Member Chris Coons (D., Del.) said he still had concerns over whether the Russians and Syrians would follow through with the terms of the deal, but said it presented "a very real prospect" of dismantling Syria's chemical weapons.
"The initial tone and initial framework are very encouraging," he said in an interview Saturday. "This is a significant accomplishment for President Obama and Secretary Kerry." Mr. Coons had voted in committee for a Senate measure authorizing the president to strike in Syria.
Many lawmakers had endorsed pursuing the diplomatic negotiations earlier in the week as a welcome alternative to a controversial resolution authorizing Mr. Obama to use military force in Syria. In the face of deep public resistance against intervening in Syria, few on Capitol Hill were hungering to vote on the polarizing measure, which appeared to have slim chances of passing the GOP-controlled House and might have failed in the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Not all lawmakers were quick to embrace Saturday's deal. A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) pointed to the doubts expressed by the top Senate Republican earlier in the week when the Russian proposal first emerged.
"Let me remind everyone that even if this is agreed to, it's still a long way off to reaching an agreement at the United Nations, to Syria gaining entry to the Chemical Weapons Convention, and to eventually securing, and destroying the stockpile," Mr. McConnell said on the Senate floor on Tuesday. "As we've seen in my own state of Kentucky, destroying chemical weapons is extremely challenging and requires a great deal of attention to detail and safety."