New '08 Iran Rift: Obama Refuses To Sign Dem Letter To White House

Thirty senators sent a letter to the White House on Thursday warning President Bush not to take offensive military action against Iran without the consent of Congress. Noticeably absent from the list of signatories is presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-IL.

According to its authors, the letter was designed to clarify the ambiguity of the recent Kyl-Lieberman amendment designating Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Obama has been critical of that amendment as well as the Bush administration's aggressive rhetoric towards Tehran. Yet the senator from Illinois turned down a request to sign on to the White House letter.

"I was surprised and disappointed," John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World and one of the catalysts behind the letter, told the Huffington Post. "I contacted virtually every office and to me it was a no-brainer that Obama and [Sen.] Biden [whose name was also not on the list] would both sign on. Neither did."

The letter, which was spearheaded by Sen. Jim Webb, D-VA, was signed by presidential candidates Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, who voted for the Kyl-Lieberman provision, and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-CT, who opposed it. It reads:

"We are writing to express serious concerns with the provocative statements and actions stemming from your administration with respect to possible U.S. military action in Iran. These comments are counterproductive and undermine efforts to resolve tensions with Iran through diplomacy."

Sources knowledgeable with the crafting of the letter said there were two general arguments offered by those who did not sign on in support: that Congress already has the power to declare war, and that the text was too vague about defensive and/or covert action against Iran. Notably, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) also declined to attach his name.

UPDATE: Responses from Obama and Biden campaigns:

"Senator Obama admires Senator Webb and his sincere and tireless efforts on this issue. But it will take more than a letter to prevent this administration from using the language contained within the Kyl-Lieberman resolution to justify military action in Iran. This requires a legislative answer and Senator Obama intends to propose one."

+++

"Sen. Biden voted against the amendment urging the designation of the Iranian Rev. Guard as a terrorist group. He strongly opposed it because he believed it could be used by this President to justify military action against Iran. He has also made clear many times his view that the President lacks the authority to use force against Iran absent authorization from Congress. He didn't need to clarify that position - he's been clear from the start," said Biden spokesperson Elizabeth Alexander.

A list of the signatories is below.

Dear President Bush:

We are writing to express serious concerns with the provocative statements and actions stemming from your administration with respect to possible U.S. military action in Iran. These comments are counterproductive and undermine efforts to resolve tensions with Iran through diplomacy.

We wish to emphasize that no congressional authority exists for unilateral military action against Iran. This includes the Senate vote on September 26, 2007 on an amendment to the FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. This amendment, expressing the sense of the Senate on Iran, and the recent designation of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, should in no way be interpreted as a predicate for the use of military force in Iran.

We stand ready to work with your administration to address the challenges presented by Iran in a manner that safeguards our security interests and promotes a regional diplomatic solution, but we wish to emphasize that offensive military action should not be taken against Iran without the express consent of Congress.

Sincerely,

Story continues below

advertisement

1. Webb

2. Akaka

3. Baucus

4. Boxer

5. Brown

6. Byrd

7. Cantwell

8. Carper

9. Casey

10. Clinton

11. Dodd

12. Dorgan

13. Durbin

14. Feinstein

15. Harkin

16. Johnson

17. Kerry

18. Klobuchar

19. Kohl

20. Leahy

21. McCaskill

22. Mikulski

23. Murray

24. Reed

25. Rockefeller

26. Sanders

27. Stabenow

28. Tester

29. Whitehouse

30. Wyden

Comments

[TTigerX2]

Good for Obama. The amendment a red herring by weak-kneed Demos to show they are going to be tough on Iran, while not really being on-side with Bush and Israel. It's a waste of paper and Obama saw through this circus-like self-deception to gain votes. Come on, we're smarter than that.

[Chumleysmom]

I agree with those who say this is a CYA for those who bought into Kyl/Lieberman (can you say "Hillary"?) ... and I wouldn't be surprised if she isn't holding out a carrot to Webb (umm ... add his name to her list of VP candidates perhaps?) so that he would her front man on this brainchild.

[forpeace]

*

I never trusted Obama, he is another Warmonger, he just doesn't say it!

*

[lindamart60]

Incredible.

Two separate votes were taken in the Senate, but the Senators voting yes need to "clarify" their yes votes.

I've been telling all of you that the first Lieberman amendment dealing with Iran, passed unanimously in July 2007 was the first step to war with Iran.

Most of you liberals responded to that with juvenile rantings, usual for liberals here on Arianna Huffington's website.

Sooner or later, you need to begin to pay attention to the votes of those you elect.

[hu.man]

Isn't funny how Iraq has disappeared from the news and Iran has taken the center stage? We are still fighting a war there but where is the coverage?

[YouThinkAndTalk]

So the Senators said: oops, we goofed, and signed a letter. And that happened AFTER people told them that the Liebarman resolution was a bad idea.

Didn't they realized that before voting for the Liebarman resolution? Haven't they learned yet that anything Liebarman does is questionable?

After reading the polls for so long, haven't they yet got smart enough and ANTICIPATE what people would say? Isn't that called leadership?

Please read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership

[Bleedingroseca]

Funny...Ob­ama proposed legislation that sounds exactly like the Webb amendment.

If he is not just playing politics why did he not just sign onto the existing bill?

[bethinCary]

Mr Stein, reading a little further down on Huffpo-Obama has introduced a resolution to Congress about Iran- ONE WITH TEETH-something letters don't have.

[poplicola]

Clinton might be flip flopping and all, but she has the support of 48% of NJ voters.. that is way more than Biden and Obama..

I guess that voicing her opinion on whatever the issue is IS helping her!

Look at the Poll!

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/iraqlooms/

[texastrixie]

I think Obama is either a political hack, or a political coward because he criticizes others for their votes on the Iraq War yet did not make sure his "no" vote was recorded for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. He wants to make sure that if he is not elected in 2008,there isn't any war vote record to use against him next time. I don't know why anybody thinks this guy is such a hero. He doesn't seem to do anything except criticize other people while stating few of his own specifics.

[dithered]

Perhaps the letter is toothless. I don't doubht this administration would send it straight to the shredder.

However ....

It means something to me. Thirty Senators signed a letter to the President that conveys my sentiments. Seventy did not, including Sen. Barack Obama who, instead of signing the letter and then backing it up with legislation, poo-pooed the letter and presented legislation as an alternative. The letter is signed and sent. The legislation may or may not succeed. If it doesn't, the effect will be to weaken the Senators' stance.

By not signing the letter, Obama has created a rift between himself and other candidates that will be the topic of this weekend's news cycle. I think it is cynical to be contrarian just to have an issue to argue in an attempt to differentiate yourself from other candidates.

I haven't chosen a candidate yet. They aren't discussing the things that worry me about them. I judge this particular issue neutral to Clinton, negative to Obama.

[PeteChrisman]

Those of you who suggest that this is a CYA are completely correct--however, NOTHING will cover their asses if they stand by with their rethoric while the neocons start WWIII--our dollar will collapse--there will be martial law--America as a Republic, will be finished--these Dem traitors are blackmailed and controlled and too chickenshit to impeach--what's worse, the corporate scum and AIPAC who control them want more war and we the people mean nothing to them--that is where we stand

[msopine]

I agree with everyone's assessment of the worth of the letter sent. My problem with Obama is that he didn't show up to take a stand against the Kyle/Lieberman non-binding resolution, so we only have his word that he would have voted against it. Just like we only have his word that he would have voted against the resolution giving Bush the power to send troops to Iraq. Don't forget that there were many Senators who spoke out against sending troops to Iraq and then turned around and voted for the resolution. What's troubling for me is that Obama has a history of deliberately missing votes that may have unpleasant consequences such as the Terry Schiavo vote. If you look at his record, there is not one instance I can find where he took a principled stand and voted against his colleagues. If anything, his record shows he is risk-averse.

[chonus]

I noticed Feingold's name wasn't on there either and he's been right on just about every issue he's come across.

If Feingold didn't sign, It doesn't bother me that Obama didn't sign. Those two have good judgement.

On a different note, Hillary just goes back and forth, from position to position. She's like a fish outta water.

[speakingtruth2power]

This letter is just a CYA for those who voted for Kyl/Lie, like DiFi and Hillary.

I appreciate Webb's sincerity but far more needs to be done to stop BushCo.