During the August 3, 2006 PBS news hour with Jim Leher Senator John Warner made a fundamental statement about US involvement in Iraq. There are some critical strategic and just war issues here. First, the statement:
MARGARET WARNER: Senator Warner, you said something to General Abizaid, which we did quote in our piece or show in our piece, but you said -- and let me see if I can read this -- that, basically if we see a civil war really erupt, that the administration may have to come back to Congress for a new authorization to maintain troops there. What were you -- is that what you mean? Do you think that's the case, that basically you all didn't sign up for staying on in a civil war?
SEN. JOHN WARNER: I was one of the co-authors of that resolution, and I went back here recently and re-examined it very carefully. And you go back to the Constitution. Our president has the authority as commander in chief of the Armed Forces to deploy them to the far-flung places in the world to protect our freedom here at home. That he has done.And now the question is to Congress, only the Congress can declare war. Well, factually we haven't declared any situation to be war since World War II. So what we do from time to time is pass the resolutions.
So to an extent, Congress plays a role in supporting the president's authority in the Constitution to employ our forces. Now, the resolution in my judgment was drawn up at a time when none of us, from the president on down, could ever envision the seriousness of this situation now, in terms of sectarian violence, and -- and I underline -- just the possibility of a civil war.
Now, if that were to come about, I think the American people would ask, "Well, which side are we going to fight on? Or do we fight both? And did we send our troops there to do that? We thought we sent them there to liberate the Iraqis, which we have done at a great sacrifice, 2,500-plus."
And therefore it seems to me Congress should focus on a dramatic change if our troops are to be employed in that type of combat. We would have to go back and focus on what we have done and determine whether or not we have to do anything further to support the president
Warner is well aware of the Clausewitzian trinity of the Government, Army and the People and how the ever-shifting relationships among the three influence the outcome of the war. (For my April, 1991 Army magazine article how failure to understand its import led to strategic failure in Vietnam, go here.)
The just war issue of legitimate authority (Only duly constituted public authorities may use deadly force or wage war) comes into play at this point. Warner grants that the President has the authority but suggests that as the causes for which the war is being fought shift, the President is close to loosing that authority. It will be up to Congress to restore it. If the President continues without it, the public, already opposed, will turn decisively against the war. Then we will lose, for much the same reason as we lost in Vietnam.
The loss will poison our domestic politics and encourage our terrorist enemies. It is an ugly picture.
NOTE: This post linked to Beltway Traffic Jam for 09/07/2006
Comments