By McClatchy-Tribune News Service
From MCT
WASHINGTON —
Members of Congress ended a months-long standoff Tuesday and agreed to financial support for President Barack Obama’s troop surge in Afghanistan, but not without a debate over withdrawing U.S. troops from neighboring Pakistan.
The release this week of leaked, classified reports about the Afghanistan war propelled efforts by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, to push to bring U.S. military personnel home from Pakistan by year’s end.
The House voted 372-38 against the resolution to curtail military operations in Pakistan, but the debate served as yet another example of growing anti-war sentiment in Congress.
This month, 162 lawmakers voted to set a withdrawal date from Afghanistan. And on Tuesday, more than 100 Democrats voted against the $58.8-billion war funding bill, which passed 308-114. Now the measure, which also provides funds for Iraq and disaster relief in Haiti and the U.S., goes to Obama for his signature.
“In light of all the questions that have been raised, it seems to me it is inappropriate for us to vote on a blank check for this administration,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. “I am deeply troubled with all that is coming out. We’re not doing hearings, we’re not doing our oversight.”
The president had urged passage of the war spending package during a bipartisan meeting Tuesday with congressional leaders. The Pentagon has said its funding would begin to run out next month.
The resolution demanding that U.S. forces withdraw from Pakistan had the distinction of being supported by Paul, one of the chamber’s most libertarian members, and Kucinich, one of the most liberal. Both were unsuccessful candidates for presidential nominations in 2008 — Paul for the GOP, Kucinich for the Democrats. Their resolution would have been largely symbolic, expressing the will of Congress.
Yet, leading Democrats said it went too far and could have undermined the U.S strategy for working to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a safe-haven for terrorists.
“Pakistan is an important partner in the fight against extremism,” said Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “Any attempt to cut the military ties of the two countries would be counter-productive.”
U.S. military involvement in Pakistan has been a delicate issue for both countries. Congress has not approved combat operations there, as would be required under the War Powers Act, and the Pakistani public is deeply opposed to American military involvement.
Approximately 230 U.S. troops are known to operate in the country, engaged in security assistance and training. Concerns were highlighted in February when three American soldiers were killed in a suicide attack outside a girls’ school rebuilt with U.S. humanitarian aid.
The White House has tried for months to secure funds for the president’s decision to order 30,000 extra troops to Afghanistan. Anti-war Democrats led an effort to include more home front aid to counter the effects of the recession.
But the additional domestic spending doomed the bill in the Senate, which rejected it last week, forcing the House to reconsider a scaled-back war bill.
