John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will appear before the panel Tuesday. Obama's first Syria test

President Barack Obama’s political test over Syria begins Tuesday afternoon in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the deep divides within that panel reflect the broader struggle on Capitol Hill over whether the U.S. should intervene militarily in Syria.

Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will appear before the panel to make Obama’s case for “limited, narrow” strikes by U.S. forces in retaliation for Syrian President Bashar Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians. American officials say that more than 1,000 Syrians died in the those attacks, including hundreds of children.


Another classified hearing is set for Foreign Relations on Wednesday, which will be closed to the press and public.

( Also on POLITICO: McCain worries conflict in Syria will engulf region)

The panel is set to consider a revised measure authorizing military force in Syria. Obama is seeking congressional approval for possible military strikes in Syria, but there is deep skepticism in Congress, which is on a five-week recess until Sept. 9.

When the Foreign Relations Committee will actually vote on the revised Syria resolution, and its exact wording, is still unclear. Senate Democratic aides said a panel vote may come later in the week with the resolution reaching the Senate floor by early next week.

Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the chairman and ranking member of Foreign Relations, respectively, already have endorsed limited U.S. action against the Assad regime. Foreign Relations Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois, Ben Cardin of Maryland and Chris Coons of Delaware back that position, as well.

( Also on POLITICO: Kerry: Syria tests positive for sarin)

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), another panel member, has criticized Obama for not going further and using America’s military power to force Assad’s overthrow. McCain is set to meet with Obama on Monday to discuss Syria and what role the United States should play there.

Yet a number of senators on the 18-member committee — formerly chaired by both Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden — haven’t yet said how they would vote on an evolving resolution authorizing the president to use military force in Syria. They include Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Tom Udall of New Mexico and Ed Markey of Massachusetts, highlighting the challenges Obama faces in persuading Congress to go along with his plans.

Among Republicans on the panel, views range from McCain’s hawkish stance to Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’soutright opposition to any U.S. strikes. Most of the GOP senators have yet to take a formal position on the issue, but there is clearly deep distrust of Obama’s Syria strategy focused on the perceived lack of clear goals in an American military campaign to the fears of sparking a wider regional conflict.

The Democrat-controlled Senate likely offers a far easier path to passage for Obama on the Syria resolution than the GOP-run House, where dozens of members on both sides of the aisle have either come out in opposition to Obama’s call for military strikes against Syria or look like they could so.

The Senate Armed Services Committee will meet on Wednesday, and the White House has scheduled additional classified briefings for lawmakers throughout the week in order to help sell its case that the U.S. must respond militarily. Kerry, National Security Adviser Susan Rice and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper briefed House Democrats in an 11:30 a.m. Monday conference call.

Menendez aides huddled with staffers for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Sunday to revise a draft resolution on Syria sent to Congress by the White House the previous evening. Democratic leaders are trying to defuse senators’ concerns about the “open-ended” nature of the White House-drafted resolution, especially over the use of American ground forces in Syria.

Senate Democrats are already portraying Corker’s role as critical to winning any significant GOP support in the Senate over Syria.

“The White House is focused on McCain, but Corker is the key,” a Senate Democratic aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “He can play a very big role here.”

Corker told reporters following a classified Sunday briefing on Syria that he backs “surgical, proportional military strikes given the strong evidence of the Assad regime’s continued use of chemical warfare.”

But Corker also warned during an interview on CNN that getting enough votes in Congress to pass a Syria resolution will be “problematic,” and he urged Obama to use “every ounce of political capital that he has to sell this.”

“Congress’s role in U.S. military force has too often been abdicated to presidential authority, so I look forward to a vigorous debate on this important authorization,” Corker said in a statement released by his office on Monday morning. “The American people deserve to hear more from the administration about why military action in Syria is necessary, what it will achieve and how it will be sufficiently limited to keep the U.S. from being drawn further into the Syrian conflict.”

In addition to Monday’s meeting with McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Obama is scheduled to meet on Tuesday with the GOP and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate Foreign Relations, Armed Services and Intelligence committees. Obama, Biden and White House chief of staff Denis McDonough — a former Senate expert on foreign relations and national security issues — have already begun to call lawmakers to lobby them to back the Syria measure, White House officials said.

But Paul, a potential 2016 presidential candidate and Foreign Relations Committee member, is adamantly opposed to any U.S. intervention despite what both Obama and Kerry asserted is clear evidence that Assad’s forces used chemical weapons against Syrian civilians, leading to more than 1,000 deaths.

“I don’t see American interests involved on either side of this Syrian war,” Paul said during a Sunday appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“I see Assad, who has protected Christians for a number of decades, and Islamic rebels on the other side who have been attacking Christians.”

Paul’s full-throated opposition to a U.S. attack on Syria complicates the political calculus for other Republicans on the panel, especially Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, another White House hopeful.

In a noteworthy split with Paul, Rubio said earlier last week that there were “significant national interests at stake in the conflict in Syria.”

Rubio, though, then appeared to soften his stance over the weekend, leaving him room to oppose any action Obama takes in Syria, especially if conservative GOP activists gain the upper hand in the internal GOP debate over potential American intervention. With many in the conservative base already upset at Rubio over his high-profile support for immigration reform, its unlikely he will look to alienate them over Syria, as well.

“The United States should only engage militarily when it is pursuing a clear and attainable national security goal,” Rubio said on Saturday. “Military action taken simply to send a message or save face does not meet that standard.”

The four other Foreign Relations Republicans — Sens. Jim Risch of Idaho, Jeff Flake of Arizona, John Barrasso of Wyomnig and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin — haven’t said how they’ll vote.

Among Democrats, Murphy has openly questioned whether U.S. military strikes could lead to “a much broader conflict in the region.” Murphy and Udall even voted against an earlier White House plan to arm the Syrian rebels.

After attending a Sunday’s classified briefing, Markey said in a statement that the “aftermath of a U.S. strike on targets in Syria is difficult to predict with negative consequences that may be beyond our capability to control.”

“You need to look first at that committee,” said a senior Senate aide. “Murphy, Udall and Markey are all problems.”

The remaining Democratic senators on the panel — Barbara Boxer of California, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Tim Kaine of Virginia — have already come out in favor of U.S. intervention in Syria or are expected to, according to Democratic sources.