Sen. Lindsey Graham shifts support of Obama over national security


McClatchy Washington Bureau

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s recent harsh criticism of President Barack Obama over national security is a marked change from the South Carolina Republican’s previous repeated praise of Obama’s performance.

Graham denied Friday that he’s been inconsistent, and he said his new linkage of the Boston Marathon bombings with the Sept. 11, 2012, assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, is not tied to his re-election campaign next year, when he may face a formidable Republican primary challenger in his hard-red state.

“It has nothing to do with my election,” Graham told McClatchy. “I just see the whole Middle East going into turmoil. I don’t need these countries to fall apart to get me re-elected. I want to see this part of the world move forward, not backward.”

Graham is one of the leading voices on national security in Congress. A military lawyer who served active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, he helped craft major legislation on the detention, interrogation and trial of terror suspects in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The biggest threats to U.S. national security are Iran’s development of nuclear arms and the possible presence of chemical weapons in war-torn Syria, he said Friday.

“Not leaving any troops behind in Iraq certainly sent the wrong message to Iran,” Graham said. “We see the deterioration in Iraq. The Afghan surge was necessary because we needed troops, but I’m very worried we will withdraw. The Libyan revolution was the first example of us leading from behind, and it’s caught up to us. We had a very tepid response in Egypt. I just see the Middle East turning sour here.”

Graham also said his criticism isn’t a result of three high-level national security confidants of his – former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Pentagon chief Robert Gates and former CIA Director David Petraeus – all having left the Obama administration, giving him less access to its inner circles.

“He had a hard job,” Graham said of Obama. “I don’t want to minimize how tough it is to deal with all these issues. It’s fair to say that (former President George W.) Bush went in maybe too quick and didn’t think things through, but I think we’re being too timid now.”

And Graham said he supports the movement within the Obama administration toward arming Syrian rebels trying to overthrow President Bashar Assad.

“It’s more of a problem today than six months ago, because there are about 6,000 radical jihadists fighting in Syria now, so providing the right weapons to the right people is more problematical, but I think it’s the responsible course to take,” Graham said. “My main goal now is to get a commitment from the Syrian opposition to allow the international community to come in and secure the chemical weapons. If we don’t bring this thing to an end, we’re going to have chemical weapons falling into the wrong hands.”

In neighboring Libya, though, Graham had warned in March 2011 against sending arms to rebels, saying they might fall into the wrong hands. Later that year he accused Obama of “leading from behind” in Libya and urged more direct U.S. intervention.

Graham acknowledged Friday that his position changed on Libya after he visited that country in late September 2011, five weeks after dictator Moammar Gadhafi was overthrown by a popular uprising and went into hiding. Gadhafi was captured and killed the following month.

“I had never been over there to see who the opposition was,” he said. “At that time, I really didn’t know.”

For much of Obama’s first term, Graham described Clinton, Gates and Petraeus as a great national security team, praised U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, backed the military surge in Afghanistan and shared a gleeful midnight call with Vice President Joe Biden – Graham is a friend from Biden’s Senate days – over the May 2, 2011, killing of Osama bin Laden by a Navy SEAL team.

Graham, though, did a sharp pivot after the Benghazi assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, accusing Obama and his aides of giving false accounts of the attack and covering up details.

Despite his respect for Clinton, Graham said Friday that the State Department under her turned down four requests for beefed-up security at the Benghazi consulate.

“There was a bias not to have a large American footprint,” he said. “It was kind of wanting to be the anti-Bush.”

Graham has intensified his criticism of Obama in recent days, linking the Boston Marathon bombings last month with the Benghazi assault and saying U.S. national security has deteriorated on the president’s watch.

The senator’s jab sparked a dismissive response from Obama just Tuesday.

“Mr. Graham is not right on this issue, although I’m sure it generated some headlines,” Obama told reporters at a White House news conference.

Even while jousting with Obama over national security, Graham has cooperated with him on other fronts.

At Obama’s request, Graham organized a March 6 dinner the president hosted at the White House with 12 Republican senators, among them Graham, Obama’s 2008 White House election foe Sen. John McCain of Arizona, Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina and Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia.

And Graham is among the eight senators who last month introduced sweeping legislation to overhaul the nation’s patchwork immigration system, an initiative that many Republican activists oppose because it would create a path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States even as it stiffens border controls.

When it comes to Obama, Graham has switched gears before.

In 2008, the second-term senator campaigned tirelessly with McCain around the country during the Arizonan’s unsuccessful run against Obama.

Yet, after having criticized Obama for months from a position as a McCain surrogate or at his side, Graham advised Obama on foreign policy when the former senator from Illinois became president-elect.

Email:; Twitter: @jamesmartinrose

Read more Politics Wires stories from the Miami Herald

FILE - This Aug. 2, 2014 file photo shows demonstrators protesting at Freedom Plaza in Washington asking President Barack Obama to modify his deportations policies. The White House is crafting a blame-it-on-Congress legal justification to back up President Barack Obama's impending executive actions on immigration. Facing an expect onslaught of opposition, the administration plans to argue that by failing to provide enough resources to fully enforce U.S. laws, lawmakers have ceded wide latitude to White House to prioritize deportations, administration officials and legal experts said. But Republicans, too, are exploring their legal options for stopping Obama from what they’ve deemed an egregious presidential overstep.

    White House preps legal case for immigration steps

    With impeachment threats and potential lawsuits looming, President Barack Obama knows whatever executive actions he takes on immigration will face intense opposition. So as a self-imposed, end-of-summer deadline to act approaches, Obama's lawyers are carefully crafting a legal rationale they believe will withstand scrutiny and survive any court challenges, administration officials say.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest briefs reporters during the daily press briefing at the White House in Washington, Wednesday, Aug. 27, 2014. Earnest started his briefing with a question on Syria.

    On Syria, Obama faces questions on Congress' role

    President Barack Obama faces a familiar question as he contemplates airstrikes in Syria: Should Congress have a say in his decision?

  • US checking report of 2nd American killed in Syria

    The U.S. is trying to determine if a second American fighting with the Islamic State group has been killed in Syria.

Miami Herald

Join the

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category