Less than two hours after President Trump announced on social media that he had ordered military strikes on Iran, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the ultraprogressive Democrat from New York, denounced the move as “disastrous,” a “grave” violation of the Constitution and grounds for his impeachment and removal.
The Democratic leaders in Congress, Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Hakeem Jeffries, both of New York, were more muted in their statements. They castigated the president for not consulting Congress and warned that his action had “dramatically increased” the chances of a broader war in the region, but they didn’t condemn it outright.
The contrast reflected deep divisions among Democrats over how to respond to Mr. Trump’s decision, the latest dispute inside the party about the best way to counter a president who holds a lock on Congress and is eager to push the boundaries of his power.
The debate has resurfaced longstanding fault lines in the party over the use of military force and the role of Congress in exercising it, with antiwar liberals urging restraint and more hawkish centrists backing more aggressive action. But this time it is also fueled by a newer and more bitter political rift in Democratic ranks over support for Israel, which has become one of the most polarizing issues for the party.
Progressives like Ms. Ocasio-Cortez who have been outspoken about criticizing Israel and American support for the nation were among the first and most vocal in condemning Mr. Trump’s decision to back Israel’s war against Iran by striking its nuclear facilities. But party leaders and many pro-Israel Democrats in the rank and file, even as they were fiercely critical of Mr. Trump, worded their statements carefully, wary of saying or doing anything that could be construed as hostile to Israel.
The divide in Congress was unfolding as a parallel one was on display in New York City, where Zohran Mamdani, a progressive young assemblyman with a record of anti-Israel activism who was endorsed by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, was all but certain to upset the establishment favorite, former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, in the Democratic mayoral primary.
It could come to a head on Capitol Hill this week with a possible Senate vote on legislation that would bar further military action against Iran without congressional authorization. Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, introduced a resolution before the strikes were carried out, seeking to bar Mr. Trump from taking further military action in Iran without congressional approval. He has since modified the measure to clarify that it applies only to offensive action, not to any defensive move the United States might take in support of Israel.
Democratic leaders hope to unite their members behind the idea of reining in presidential war powers and insisting on Congress’s role in authorizing the use of force, and to prevent the vote from being seen as a proxy for deeper ideological divisions over support for Israel.
A clash between Democratic hawks and doves has long animated debates over war and peace. Congressional Democrats openly battled with President George H.W. Bush, a Republican, over U.S. involvement in the Persian Gulf crisis. The party split, with the majority of Democrats in Congress voting against the use of force. More than a decade later, Democrats again split over whether to authorize President George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq, with many wary of challenging the president or risking being seen as weak on national security.
But unlike in those conflicts, the issue of U.S. support for Israel hangs more heavily over the current debate.
Daniel Shapiro, a U.S. ambassador to Israel under President Barack Obama, said the rift reflects differing levels of concern among Democrats about Iran’s nuclear program and the urgency of restraining it.
“Many of these members have been dealing with, for a decade or longer and are deeply steeped in the history, intelligence and trajectory of the Iranian nuclear program,” Mr. Shapiro, now a fellow at the Atlantic Council, a think tank, said in an interview on Wednesday. “Many of them are strong supporters of Israel’s security and wanting to ensure that threat does not materialize.”
Those lawmakers see military action as “necessary or appropriate or even inevitable given Iran’s behavior,” Mr. Shapiro said, even if they oppose Mr. Trump on nearly every other front. “Others don’t agree, either on the merits or because of their feelings about the president.”
The result has been discordant messages on Iran coming from different Democratic factions, and the overall sense of a fractured party struggling to respond cohesively at a high-stakes moment.
When Israel first launched strikes against Iran, on June 13, many Democrats rushed to express unwavering support and solidarity.
“The United States’ commitment to Israel’s security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran’s response,” Mr. Schumer said shortly after the strikes began. Mr. Jeffries said, “there is no circumstance where Iran can be permitted to become a nuclear power.” Dozens of Democrats followed in a flood of emails and social media posts.
A social media account run by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, noted the statements, thanking lawmakers by the dozens for their public words of support almost instantly after they were released. For many hours, the feed became a visual reminder that the powerful pro-Israel group was keeping tabs on which members of Congress spoke out and when.
The messages from Democrats became more muddled after Mr. Trump launched the U.S. strikes. While Republican lawmakers spoke in near-unanimous support after the confirmed hits on three of Iran’s main nuclear sites, rank-and-file Democrats delivered a patchwork of sometimes divergent statements.
Senator Peter Welch, a progressive Democrat from Vermont, condemned Mr. Trump, calling the strike an “act of war” that had “irreparably harmed” any hope of diplomacy. Representative Steny Hoyer, a moderate Democrat from Maryland, defended the move, calling the decision “essential to preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.”
Representative Nancy Pelosi, the former House speaker, exemplified the tightrope that many lawmakers in her party are trying to navigate.
Ms. Pelosi, a California Democrat, told reporters on Tuesday that she believed lawmakers agreed on two basic ideas. “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” she said. “And B: Our friendship with Israel is a true, real one based on values and the rest, and our own national security.”
While Ms. Pelosi said it was crucial for Congress to vote on military action and that Mr. Trump should have respected that principle, she quickly dismissed the idea of impeaching him over his failure to do so.
“Yes, it’s probably wrong for the president not to come to Congress,” she said before walking onto the House floor to vote down an impeachment resolution led by Representative Al Green, Democrat of Texas. “But let’s just change that. Because again, we can’t ignore what’s at stake, which is our national security or to make sure Iran does not have a nuclear weapon and our friendship with Israel.”
Michael Gold contributed reporting.
The post U.S. Strikes on Iran Are Another Wedge for Divided Democrats appeared first on New York Times.
