Just Foreign Policy Calls for Robust Public Debate on Provisions of Any Iraq, Syria AUMF

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/node/1562

Just Foreign Policy Calls for Robust Public Debate on Provisions of Any Iraq, Syria AUMF

For Immediate Release:  September 26, 2014

Contact: Robert Naiman, Just Foreign Policy,

(202) 448-2898 x1, naiman@justforeignpolicy.org

Washington, DC — September 26, 2014

In response to President Obama’s remarks to the United Nations General Assembly calling on the international community to confront ISIL, Just Foreign Policy released the following statement by Policy Director Robert Naiman:

“By his statements and actions since June in the United States and abroad, President Obama has made clear the broad outlines of his plans to confront ISIL in Iraq and Syria. But with the noteworthy exception of voting to authorize, with transparency and accountability provisions made possible by demands from Republican and Democratic Members for an independent vote, the President’s plans for arming and training Syrian insurgents to confront ISIL in Syria, Congress has so far avoided exercising its Constitutional responsibility to weigh in on the President’s plans by debating and voting on authorizations of force for Iraq or Syria.”

“It now appears likely that when Congress returns from recess after the November election – three months after the U.S. began bombing Iraq in August - Congress will debate and vote on authorizations of force for Iraq and Syria. The no votes on an Iraq or Syria AUMF will be important benchmarks for future opposition to endless war. But equally important will be whether any AUMFs that pass Congress contain provisions that address longstanding democracy and rule of law issues with the 2001 AUMF. Important provisions that have been proposed include giving any AUMF an expiration date, so that it would have to be renewed in order for war to continue; sunsetting the 2001 AUMF, to compel Congress to revise it; repealing the 2002 AUMF for Iraq; prohibiting the use of ground combat troops; requiring regular, public reporting on civilian casualties from U.S. airstrikes in Iraq and Syria; requiring a consistent standard for compensation of harm to civilians from U.S. airstrikes in Iraq and Syria; and monitoring the success of U.S. efforts to press its Gulf Arab allies to crack down on terrorism finance and terrorism ideology finance, as the President referenced in his UNGA speech.”

“Three Democrats have introduced authorizations of force. Each of these proposals has a sunset provision. Senator Kaine’s sunset is the shortest at 1 year. Representative Schiff’s sunset is 18 months. Senator Nelson’s sunset is 3 years. Among Democrats, the principle that any new authorization of force should have a sunset provision is now well established.”

“Senator Kaine’s proposed one year sunset has been criticized on the grounds that the Pentagon says the war against ISIL will require more than 1 year. This relationship is not a demerit of Senator Kaine’s proposal, but a virtue. It is widely acknowledged that the U.S. – led international campaign against Al Qaeda and its associated forces has transformed significantly and repeatedly since the Al Qaeda attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, and will continue to change in the future. To ensure effective Congressional, media, and public oversight, it is essential for Congress to publicly and predictably revisit the broad outlines of U.S. policy in this campaign. Discussion of the classified details of prospective military operations is properly confined to the Congressional intelligence committees. But a periodic, prominent debate on the broad outlines of policy properly belongs on the floor of the House and the floor of the Senate where the American people and national media can see it.”

“The Framers of the War Powers Resolution understood, based on Congress’ experience during the Vietnam War, that it was essential to guarantee that Members of Congress could compel floor debates and votes on wars that had already begun in response to mission creep and new information that Congress may not have had when force was originally authorized. A logical extension of this principle is to insist that any future AUMF have an expiration date, as many other grants of authority from Congress to the Executive do, to ensure that the decision to grant such authority will be periodically revisited in light of experience and new information.”

“Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus have introduced a resolution - H. Con. Res. 114 - that established a set of four principles for consideration of an Iraq or Syria AUMF. The resolution says that Congress:

- should debate and vote on whether the U.S. should be involved in sustained combat in Iraq or Syria;

- does not support the deployment of ground combat troops in Iraq or Syria;

- should ensure that any grant of authority for force is narrowly tailored and limited; and

- should ensure that any grant of authority for force includes robust reporting requirements.”

“Seven thousand Americans have already stated their support for the CPC principles in a petition at MoveOn. Polls show that the public wants full Congressional debate. Members of Congress should show their support for the public will by creating and endorsing initiatives like H. Con. Res. 114.”

###

===

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman@justforeignpolicy.org

(202) 448-2898 x1