The US Congress has all but given up on voting to legally authorise the war against Daesh (the self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), despite the fact that US-led military strikes against the group have been going on for nine months already and span multiple countries.
By doing so, American representatives are telling the next president, whether he or she is a Republican or Democrat: Feel free, go to war wherever you want, against whomever you want. We have no power to stop you.
Despite the fact that the US plans to conduct air strikes on Daesh in Iraq and Syria for years, the Chicago Tribune reported last Monday that key members in the House and Senate have resigned themselves to the fact that there is virtually no chance of Congress agreeing on any sort of bill to constrain or legalise the Obama administration’s bombing campaign in the Middle East.
Out of cowardice or worry they may actually have to make a consequential decision — Congress has abdicated its responsibility under Article II, Section 8 of the US Constitution, not to mention the War Powers Act, to authorise or declare war. So when ‘President’ Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio decides to unilaterally bomb Iran in 2017, remember this moment, when members of Congress willingly gave up one of the most important responsibilities they have because they were too terrified to take a stand one way or another.
Also, remember that it was a Democratic president who decided to initiate this potentially decades-long war without getting approval from the American public first. It was a Democratic president who treated congressional approval like icing on a cake and told them he would continue air strikes indefinitely whether Congress approved it or not.
At least select few members of Congress seem to be aware of this danger. “As an institution, we’re the ones who are going to suffer because future presidents are going to look back at this and say: ‘We don’t need Congress to make war’. It’s a terrible precedent”, Democratic Representative Adam Schiff said last week .
This fact, though, has been lost on many members of the media, who have filled American television sets with illuminating questions like : “Did the exit of US forces [from Iraq in 2011] fuel [Daesh]?” If only America occupied Iraq forever, there would never have been a problem. That sounds like a question from perennial war monger and professional troll Bill Kristol’s dreams. If only America occupied Iraq forever, there would never have been a problem. Everyone also seems to forget Obama did not exactly leave Iraq voluntarily, America was forced out.
While Republican candidates are at least being asked if they would have invaded Iraq, knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, few, if any, are forced to confront the fact that the invasion caused the very nightmare we are in now. Could America have avoided the threat of Daesh had it not invaded and occupied Iraq for a decade, killed hundreds of thousands of people and thrown a bunch of future Daesh leaders into squalid or torture-filled jails together?
Instead, cable news hosts turn it around and ask perhaps the dumbest question ever, which has been repeated countless times over the past decade: Would we be better off if Saddam Hussain was still in power? Meet the Press’ Chuck Todd asked Rand Paul this question last Sunday. No matter your opinion of Paul, but the question is absurd, and he is right about a larger point: “It’s also bothersome that the mainstream media continues to invite the architects of the Iraq invasion on to share their opinions on Sunday morning shows.” Doesn’t matter how wrong they have been for so long, they are invited back each and every week .
Meanwhile, there are many questions the media should be asking, but are barely ever uttered on national television. For example, is US foreign policy making America less safe, rather than increasing its security, as Micah Zenko pondered last week.
Or, why is America letting the CIA, an agency with a long history of wreaking havoc on whatever it touches, almost exclusive control over Middle East policy, as Foreign Policy detailed recently. Why has America not seen any material gains despite it dropping more than 1,500 bombs per month since the beginning of the year?
But whether you support the war against Daesh or not, it is really strange that hardly anyone seems to care that the Obama administration is relying on the Al Qaida and Iraq War resolutions for its fight against an enemy that did not exist before 9/11, that is enemies with Al Qaida and is fighting in many countries besides Iraq.
As we watch US presidential candidates fight about who will bomb the Middle East harder to solve the problems created by bombing the Middle East the first time, let us stop and think: How will we stop the next illegal war if no one cares about this one?
— Guardian News & Media Ltd
