U.S. lawmakers of both political parties are supportive of President Barack Obama’s decision to delay possible military action against Syria while diplomatic efforts evolve. But, members of Congress differ sharply on the feasibility of eliminating all of Syria’s chemical weapon stockpiles, despite Damascus’ stated willingness to do so.

美国国会两党议员都支持奥巴马总统做出的在展开外交努力之际暂缓对叙利亚采取军事行动的决定。不过，在彻底销毁叙利亚化学武器是否可能的问题上，尽管大马士革表示愿意销毁，但国会议员们却存在严重分歧。

One day after President Obama told the nation that he will give diplomacy a chance to neutralize the threat posed by Syria’s chemical weapons, Democratic Congressman Jim McGovern said he is relieved.

奥巴马总统一天前告知全国，他决定先尝试通过外交途径来消除叙利亚化学武器的威胁。国会民主党众议员吉姆·麦戈文说，他松了一口气。

“I am happy. It seems we are not going to war," he said. "I think that is a good thing. And I hope that this proposal by the Russians is going to be taken seriously.”

麦戈文众议员说：“我很高兴。看起来我们不会打仗了。我认为这是件好事。我希望俄罗斯提出的提议会得到认真对待。”

On the other side of the Capitol, Republican Senator John Barrasso said Obama had little choice but to ask Congress to delay votes authorizing military strikes against Syria.

在国会参议院，共和党参议员约翰·巴拉索说，奥巴马除了要求国会推迟有关授权军事打击叙利亚的投票之外，他别无选择。

“The president pushed the pause button. And I agree with that, because if the vote were held in the House, he would be lucky to get 100 votes [out of 435]. And the vote would not, I believe, pass the Senate,” he said.

巴拉索参议员说：“奥巴马总统按下了暂停键。我赞同他的做法，因为如果众议院就此投票，他要是能获得435票中的100票就算幸运。而且我认为这项投票也无法在参议院获得通过。”

On the Senate floor, Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid stressed that U.S. military action has not been ruled out.

参议院民主党领袖哈里·里德强调，还没有排除美国采取军事行动的可能性。

“It is in Syria’s power to avoid these strikes. But that will require swift and decisive action on the part of the Assad regime to relinquish these weapons. We need a diplomatic solution to succeed, but just saying we want one does not mean it will happen,” said Reid.

里德参议员说：“叙利亚可以免遭军事打击，但这需要阿萨德政权迅速果断地采取行动，放弃这些武器。我们需要通过外交途径解决问题，不过，我们希望如此并不意味着就能够如此。”

Senator Barrasso is skeptical diplomacy will work.

参议员巴拉索对外交努力是否成功表示怀疑。

“I still do not trust the Russians. We cannot even verify that they are destroying their own chemical weapons, let alone [that they] would have control over Syria’s,” he said.

巴拉索说：“我还是不信任俄国人。我们甚至无法证实他们是否在销毁他们自己的化学武器，更不用说他们是否能控制叙利亚的化学武器了。”

Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown is cautious but hopeful.

民主党参议员布朗表示审慎乐观。

“It is a trust-but-verify situation, of course. But there is hope that this can be done in a more comprehensive way where we get rid of the chemical weapons, [rather] than a military strike, which has all kinds of unforeseen consequences,” he said.

他说：“当然，这需要信任但需要核查。不过，我们还有希望以更为全面的方式销毁化学武器，而不是采取军事打击，因为动武会带来各种不可预料的后果。”

Many lawmakers note that their constituents overwhelmingly oppose military intervention in Syria. Republican Senator Dan Coats says, however the Syria crisis plays out, America should not become embroiled in another faraway conflict.

很多国会议员说，他们选区的民众大多数反对军事干预叙利亚。共和党参议员丹·考斯说，无论叙利亚危机怎样发展，美国都不应当再卷入另一场遥远的冲突之中。

“I think our interests are not in resolving these wars. We have proven that - we are zero-for-three [no record of success] in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan," said Coats. "The risk of going zero-for-four lies out there with Syria. We have to keep our focus on the jihadists, on those who do not want to control a Middle Eastern country but want to take us here in America.”

考斯说：“我认为我们的利益不在于解决这些战争。我们已经证实了这一点，我们输掉了在利比亚、伊拉克和阿富汗的三场战争。而在叙利亚，那里存在输掉第四场战争的风险。我们必须集中目标对付圣战者，他们不想控制哪个中东国家，而是一心想袭击美国。”

In the meantime, Coats described America’s current posture towards Syria as “in limbo-land,” and says he worries about the signals Washington is sending to America’s adversaries.

考斯把美国目前对叙利亚的立场称为是“处于混沌状态”。他说，他担心华盛顿向美国的对手发出的信号。