Follow us on social

Us_troops_in_syria

Gaetz effort to bring troops home from Syria fails despite bipartisan vote

Support, however, came primarily from an ‘interesting mix of mostly progressives and right-wingers.’

Reporting | Middle East

The War Powers Resolution that would have required President Joe Biden to withdraw all U.S troops from Syria within 180 days did not pass on Wednesday night, with 103 members of the House voting in favor of the resolution, and 321 against. Fifty-six Democrats and 47 Republicans supported the resolution. 

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who introduced the bill last week, indicated to Breitbart News on Tuesday that he expected “low Democrat support” on his resolution, but the Intercept’s Ryan Grim reported later on Tuesday that the Congressional Progressive Caucus would urge its members to vote “yes.”

In the end, many of the most prominent progressive members supported the resolution, including Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), as well as Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who introduced a similar amendment last year. 

But other powerful Democrats, including some who had previously supported Bowman’s 2022 legislation, like new Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and former Chair of the Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), voted against this resolution. In total, 74 more Democrats supported Bowman’s amendment than voted for today’s bill. 

Among Republicans, support increased from 25 to 47 votes since last summer. According to Just Foreign Policy, that represents the largest number of GOP House members to ever vote for a War Powers Resolution. 

Many of the Republican supporters are the same ones who have voiced skepticism over Washington’s continued funding of Ukraine. More than half of those who voted “yes” on this bill were also among the 30 signatories of Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-Ohio) January letter that called for increased transparency on financial support to Kyiv. 

As Insider’s Bryan Metzger noted on Twitter, the supporters were primarily an “[i]nteresting mix of mostly progressives and right-wingers. Though also some interesting names in-between, like [Democrat Jake] Auchincloss, [Republicans Tom] Emmer, [Nancy] Mace, and of course, [George] Santos.” 

“There is no role for the United States of America in Syria. We are not a Middle Eastern power. We have tried to build a democracy out of sand, blood, and Arab militias. Time and again, the work we do does not reduce chaos. Oftentimes, it causes chaos – the very chaos that then subsequently leads to terrorism. While today’s vote may have failed, my fight to end forever wars and bring our troops home has only just begun,” said Gaetz in a statement following the vote. 

During the debate over the Concurrent Resolution earlier in the day on Wednesday, Gaetz, and Reps. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), Cory Mills (R-Fla.), and Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) spoke in favor of the bill. “The United States is not the world’s policeman and it is incredibly unwise to promote this level of involvement in international disputes. Democrat and Republican presidents alike have abused the power granted under the ‘01 and ‘02 AUMFs, and Congress must act to reign back the executive branch’s war authorities,” said Mills. “Continuing to dump trillions of dollars into these endless wars is irresponsible, runs contrary to America’s economic and security interests, and unnecessarily places American lives in jeopardy.” 

Many of the opponents who spoke in the debate, led by House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Michael McCaul (R-Texas) and ranking member Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), agreed that it was important for Congress to discuss the AUMFs, but argued that the mission in Syria was both legally covered by the 2001 statute and important to maintaining American security. 


Members of the Coalition and Syrian partner force conduct a patrol through a local village along an established de-confliction zone in support of Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve in the Dayr Az Zawr Province, Syria, Dec. 23, 2018. Coalition Forces remain committed to supporting its partner forces to prevent an ISIS resurgence. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Arjenis Nunez/Released)
Reporting | Middle East
Nato Summit Trump
Top photo credit: NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, President Donald Trump, at the 2025 NATO Summit in The Hague (NATO/Flickr)

Did Trump just dump the Ukraine War into the Europeans' lap?

Europe

The aerial war between Israel and Iran over the past two weeks sucked most of the world’s attention away from the war in Ukraine.

The Hague NATO Summit confirms that President Donald Trump now sees paying for the war as Europe’s problem. It’s less clear that he will have the patience to keep pushing for peace.

keep readingShow less
Antonio Guterres and Ursula von der Leyen
Top image credit: Alexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com

UN Charter turns 80: Why do Europeans mock it so?

Europe

Eighty years ago, on June 26, 1945, the United Nations Charter was signed in San Francisco. But you wouldn’t know it if you listened to European governments today.

After two devastating global military conflicts, the Charter explicitly aimed to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” And it did so by famously outlawing the use of force in Article 2(4). The only exceptions were to be actions taken in self-defense against an actual or imminent attack and missions authorized by the U.N. Security Council to restore collective security.

keep readingShow less
IRGC
Top image credit: Tehran Iran - November 4, 2022, a line of Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps troops crossing the street (saeediex / Shutterstock.com)

If Iranian regime collapses or is toppled, 'what's next?'

Middle East

In a startling turn of events in the Israel-Iran war, six hours after Iran attacked the Al Udeid Air Base— the largest U.S. combat airfield outside of the U.S., and home of the CENTCOM Forward Headquarters — President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire in the 12-day war, quickly taking effect over the subsequent 18 hours. Defying predictions that the Iranian response to the U.S. attack on three nuclear facilities could start an escalatory cycle, the ceasefire appears to be holding. For now.

While the bombing may have ceased, calls for regime change have not. President Trump has backtracked on his comments, but other influential voices have not. John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, said Tuesday that regime change must still happen, “…because this is about the regime itself… Until the regime itself is gone, there is no foundation for peace and security in the Middle East.” These sentiments are echoed by many others to include, as expected, Reza Pahlavi, exiled son of the deposed shah.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.