|
Truthout...
Congress Must Debate
the Libya War
Monday 21 March 2011
by Robert Naiman
The US is now at war in a third Muslim country, according to the
“official tally” (that is, counting Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, but
not Pakistan or Yemen, for example.) But Congress has never authorized
or debated the US military intervention in Libya. (A sharply disputed
claim holds that the Pakistan and Yemen actions are covered by the 2001
authorization of military force, but no one has dared to argue that the
2001 authorization to use military force covers Libya.)
Some will no doubt claim that the president is acting in Libya within
his authority as commander in chief. But this is an extremely dangerous
claim.
To put it crudely: as a matter of logic, if President Obama can bomb
Libya without Congressional authorization, then President Palin can
bomb Iran without Congressional authorization. If, God forbid, we ever
get to that fork in the road, you can bet your bottom dollar that the
advocates of bombing Iran will invoke Congressional silence now as
justification for their claims of unilateral presidential authority to
bomb anywhere, anytime.
Some members of Congress have strongly objected to President Obama’s
bombing of Libya without Congressional approval.
On the Democratic side, John Larson, chair of the Democratic Caucus in
the House, called for President Obama to seek Congressional approval.
Reps. Jerrold Nadler, Donna Edwards, Mike Capuano, Dennis Kucinich,
Maxine Waters, Rob Andrews, Sheila Jackson Lee, Barbara Lee and Eleanor
Holmes Norton “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality
of the president’s actions” during a Saturday call organized by Larson,
Politico reports.
“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations.
They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat[ic]
lawmaker said of the White House. “They’re creating wreckage, and they
can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground.... There
aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.”
“Almost everybody who spoke was opposed to any unilateral actions or
decisions being made by the president, and most of us expressed our
constitutional concerns. There should be a resolution and there should
be a debate so members of Congress can decide whether or not we enter
in whatever this action is being called,” added another House Democrat
opposed to the Libyan operation.
“Whose side are we on? This appears to be more of a civil war than some
kind of a revolution. Who are protecting? Are we with the people that
are supposedly opposed to [Qaddafi]? You think they have a lot of
people with him? If he is deposed, who will we be dealing with? There
are a lot of questions here from members.”
On the Republican side, Sen. Richard Lugar, ranking member on Senate
Foreign Relations, told CBS’ “Face the Nation” yesterday that, if we’re
going to war with Libya, we ought to have a declaration of war by the
Congress:
A memo distributed to Republican aides in the Senate Armed Services and
Foreign Relations Committee made the case that Congressional
authorization is necessary and used Barack Obama’s own words to make
the case, ABC reported.
The memo quotes Obama when he was in the Senate and there were concerns
that then-President George W. Bush would take strike Iran.
“The president does not have power under the Constitution to
unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not
involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” the memo
quotes then-Senator Obama saying on Dec. 20, 2007.
Read the rest of the article at Truthout
|
|
|
|
