Obama Says GOP Playing 'Political Games' on Benghazi Attacks

President Obama on Monday accused Republicans in Congress of playing “political games” with their efforts to discredit his administration’s handling of the response to last September’s assault on the U.S. diplomatic station in Benghazi, Libya.

There is growing support in the GOP-dominated House of Representatives for establishing a select committee with subpoena power to investigate accusations that the administration was derelict in its reaction to the Sept. 11 attacks on the diplomatic outpost, which resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stephens and three other State Department workers.

Republicans accuse the Obama administration of not sending in military backup when it was requested by U.S. diplomats in Libya. The Defense Department has responded that Benghazi was too far away for any U.S. special forces teams to have arrived in time to have changed the outcome.

At a joint White House press conference with visiting British Prime Minister David Cameron, Obama acknowledged that “clearly, [the U.S. State Department personnel in Benghazi] were not in a position where they were adequately protected.”

Obama, however, pushed back strongly against Republican accusations that the State Department altered CIA-prepared talking points in order to minimize the terrorist nature of the assaults.  "The whole issue of this -- of talking points, frankly, throughout this process has been a sideshow."

“We don't have time to be playing these kinds of political games here in Washington,” the president said.

Obama said he and Cameron agreed in one-on-one talks earlier in the day to “continue to work to establish the facts around the use of chemical weapons in Syria and those facts will guide our next steps.”

The United States and the United Kingdom in recent weeks have said they are reasonably certain that the Bashar Assad regime has used sarin nerve agent against opposition forces on one or more occasions. Obama last year said chemical attacks in the Syrian civil war would cross a “red line” that would merit a strong but unspecified U.S. response.

The continuing absence of decisive action from Washigton on the purported chemical attacks has led pundits and foreign relations experts to heap criticism on Obama for weakening U.S. credibility. The president, though, has defended his tempered response on the grounds that there is not yet concrete evidence pointing to the deliberate use of chemical weapons and that it is not yet clear exactly who in Syria might have been behind any such attacks.

The Obama administration and partner governments are pushing for a technical U.N. investigation into the reported chemical attacks. That has been stymied for weeks by Damascus' refusal to permit the investigators to enter the country if they do not first agree to limit their probe to just regime allegations of chemical weapons use by opposition forces on the village of Khan al-Assal.

Cameron in an interview with NPR earlier on Monday said the evidence of chemical attacks by Damascus "is growing; the lack of room for doubt is shrinking," according to a Reuters report.

London is using the purported chemical attacks to build a case for amending the European Union arms embargo to Syria to allow the sale of weapons to rebels.

“Britain is pushing for more flexibility in the EU arms embargo,” Cameron told journalists at the White House, adding that his government intends to “double nonlethal support to the Syrian opposition in the coming year. Armored vehicles, body armor and power generators are ripe to be shipped.”

Should the European embargo be amended, Cameron hinted at but did not specifically say his government would provide the Syrian opposition with arms. “I do believe that there's more we can do -- alongside technical advice, assistance, help.”

If moderate Syrian rebels are not provided outside help then there is a strong likelihood that extremist militias in the country will only grow more powerful, the prime minister said. “If we don't work with that part of the opposition, then we shouldn't be surprised if the extremist elements grow.”

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.