The United States Senate has advanced a War Powers Resolution that could prevent President Donald Trump from using military force against Iran without congressional authorisation amid widening fallout from the conflict.

The vote on a procedural measure to advance the resolution was passed on Tuesday by a margin of 50 to 47, with a handful of Republicans joining Democratic colleagues to pass the measure in a rare rebuke of the president.

The vote showed that a small but growing number of Republicans are increasingly uneasy with a war that shows no signs of ending, amid a fragile ceasefire, and are willing to challenge the president.

“This president is like a toddler playing with a loaded gun,” Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said before the vote.

“If there was ever a time to support our war powers resolution to withdraw troops from hostilities with Iran, it’s now,” he said.

The result was also a victory for lawmakers who have been arguing that Congress, ⁠not the president, should have the power to send troops to war, as spelled out in the US Constitution.

However, it was only a procedural vote, and the resolution faces steep hurdles if it is ever to go into effect. Three Republicans were absent during the vote on Tuesday, and their votes would be enough to defeat the measure if they maintain their stance in favour of the war.

But even if the resolution is eventually passed by a vote of the 100-member Senate, it must also pass the Republican-led House of Representatives and garner two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate to survive an expected Trump veto.

Trump’s Republicans have blocked seven previous attempts to advance similar resolutions in the Senate this year. They have also stopped three war powers resolutions by narrow votes in the House this year.

Yet, the vote on Tuesday underscores growing pressure on the president, as the war on Iran, launched by the US and Israel in late February, continues to wreak havoc on the global energy market and the cost of living at home.

Democrats and a few Republicans ‌have called on Trump to come before Congress and seek authorisation for his war, with some expressing concerns that the president may have entered the US into a long conflict without setting out a ‌clear ‌exit strategy.

The Trump administration say the president’s actions are legal and within his rights as commander in chief, as well as his responsibility to protect the US by ordering limited military operations.

Under a 1973 US war powers law passed in response to the Vietnam War, a US president can wage military action ⁠for only 60 days before they must end it, ask Congress for authorisation, or seek a 30-day ⁠extension, due to the “unavoidable military necessity regarding the safety of United States Armed Forces” while withdrawing forces.

Trump declared on May 1 that a ceasefire with Tehran had “terminated” hostilities, meaning he had not waged more than 60 days of war on Iran.

Despite the president’s assertion that the conflict has ceased, US troops continue to blockade Iranian ports and attack Iranian shipping, while Tehran’s forces are blocking access to the Strait of Hormuz and have attacked US vessels.

Opinion polls suggest that US voters are opposed to the war, which legal experts widely consider to be a violation of international law. (Al Jazeera)

The post US Senate advances resolution to curb Trump’s power to wage war on Iran appeared first on Newswire.

The United States Senate has failed to pass a resolution seeking to rein in US President Donald Trump’s war with Iran.

The latest war powers resolution failed 47 to 52 in a procedural vote, marking another major setback for proponents of curtailing Trump’s military pursuits abroad and underscoring Republicans’ embrace of the president’s campaign.

A separate resolution is set to be voted on in the US House of Representatives on Thursday, but it too faces stiff odds.

Lawmakers in the Senate had spent the day arguing for and against asserting Congress’s powers to authorise or end Trump’s military actions against Iran.

Supporters of the resolution say Trump exceeded his constitutional authority by launching a war alongside Israel. Under Article II of the US Constitution, presidents can only launch such attacks in self-defence in response to an immediate threat. Otherwise, Congress has the sole power to declare war.

Speaking on the Senate floor, Senator Tim Kaine argued that, “even in a classified setting”, the Trump administration “could produce no evidence, none that the US was under an imminent threat of attack from Iran”.

“You can’t stand up and say: This is a pinprick that doesn’t lead to the level that would be characterised as war,” Kaine said. “You can’t stand up and say: This is one and done, and no troops are engaged in hostilities against Iran.”

Republicans rally behind Trump

Since launching its military offensive on February 28, the Trump administration has offered a carousel of rationales for why a war was needed now.

Trump has suggested that Iran was seeking to rebuild its nuclear programme, which he has said was “obliterated” in strikes last year. He also said that Iran was seeking to develop a long-range missile to attack the US.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, meanwhile, told reporters that Israel was planning to attack Iran, which would likely have led to retribution against US assets in the region. Trump later contradicted the claim, saying Iran was the one planning an imminent attack on Israel.

To undergird those claims, the Trump administration has also sought to frame the whole of Iran’s military and nuclear-energy programmes since the Islamic revolution in 1979 as an immediate threat to the US.

Several Republicans spoke out against the resolution, arguing that the last 47 years of sabre-rattling from Iran justified the president’s military action.

The Constitution, according to Senator James Risch, “clearly gives the president not only the right, but indeed the duty, as does his oath to protect the United States”.

Risch also pointed to Iran’s efforts to rebuild its nuclear energy assets after a US attack in June of last year, conducted as part of a 12-day war led by Israel.

“The commander-in-chief ordered this attack because of the increase in the manufacturing of long, medium-range missiles — and after [Iran tried] to restart the nuclear programme that was decimated in the 12-day war,” Risch said.

The US and Iran had been in the middle of negotiations to scale down Iran’s nuclear programme in the lead-up to this month’s war, but Risch dismissed those efforts as performative.

“All this time, they had us sitting at the table, dragging out and yakking away at negotiations that were going absolutely nowhere,” he told the Senate, calling on his fellow lawmakers to vote down Wednesday’s resolution.

The vote, which broke down largely along party lines save for one Republican and one Democrat breaking ranks, was the latest in a series of war powers resolutions to fail in Congress. Since the June 21 attack, Congress has introduced several measures to stop Trump from carrying out military campaigns in Iran and Venezuela, to no avail.

Under the 1973 War Powers Act, US presidents must seek congressional approval after committing US troops to military actions for more than 60 days.

Earlier on Wednesday, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth argued that the US operation had just begun, with more US assets being sent to the region.

The duration and scope of the conflict remain unclear, though Trump himself has projected it could last “four to five weeks”. Still, Risch expressed optimism that the conflict would be resolved quickly.

“This is going to end, and it’s going to end rapidly. This is not a forever war, indeed, not even close to it,” Risch said. “This is going to end very quickly.”

Why war powers votes still matter

Even if Wednesday’s effort had passed, the Senate’s war powers resolution would have faced an uphill battle before it could become law.

Both chambers would have needed to pass the resolution for it to go to the president’s desk for a final signature — but even then, Trump could have vetoed the measure.

Only a two-thirds majority in both chambers can override a presidential veto.

Still, advocates have long maintained that such resolutions force lawmakers to confront important questions about the limits of presidential power, even if they are long shots.

They also give constituents a reason to petition their elected officials and voice their concerns about the war.

“While the outcome did not pass, this moment underscores a core truth: Congress must continually reassert its constitutional role to check executive power and prevent endless wars,” said Hassan El-Tayyab, the legislative director for Middle East policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a Washington-based nonprofit.

“Our founders warned that unchecked authority leads to unchecked conflict. Senators and Representatives must keep forcing votes to curb US military engagement in unauthorised wars.”

Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser for the advocacy group Demand Progress, also pointed out that congressional votes can help inform the electorate about their representatives’ stances on key issues.

That, in turn, can have political consequences at the ballot box, particularly in an election year.

“The American people will remember who voted to continue an illegal, unnecessary war,” Kharrazian said.

“Every senator who voted against the war powers resolution also voted against the wishes of the American people and against the safety of the servicemembers they are sworn to protect. The stakes are clear, and there is no more time for political games.” (Al Jazeera)

The post US Senate fails to advance war powers measure to rein in Trump’s Iran war appeared first on Newswire.

US Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez has condemned the postponement of local government elections in Sri Lanka. 

In a Twitter message, Bob Menendez stated that any effort to take away the voice of the people of Sri Lanka is undeniably undemocratic and a direct violation of Sri Lankans’ rights.

He further urged the Government of Sri Lanka to hold free and fair local elections without further delays.

Menendez made the remarks by sharing a report by Bloomberg on the postponement of Local Government polls in Sri Lanka. 

The National Election Commission of Sri Lanka on 24th February officially announced that the Local Government polls cannot be held as scheduled on March 09.

The Election Commission further said that a new date for the election will be notified on March 03. 

The National Election Commission had made the announcement on the postponement citing a lack of funds to conduct the Local government polls. (NewsWire)

The post LG polls : US lawmaker condemns postponement of elections appeared first on Newswire.