President Obama will soon seek Congressional authorization for the expanding U.S. war in the Middle East. In a press conference one day after elections which will send Republican majorities to both houses of Congress, Obama said a new military authorization is one of a few areas where he will seek to work with lame-duck lawmakers before the new Congress is seated in January.
"The idea is to right-size and update whatever authorization Congress provides to suit the current fight rather than previous fights," Obama told reporters at the White House.
Obama said he would update Congressional leaders about the fight against Islamic State during meetings on Friday. He said he wants to start now to craft the new authorization but that completing it could carry over into next year when the new Congress will usher in Republican control of the Senate.
“Legally, such a vote should’ve happened long ago, with the War Powers Act allowing the president only a 60 day window to seek authorization from Congress,” writes Jason Ditz at Antiwar.com. “If it had been held before the vote, the unpopularity of the conflict might’ve scared some off of backing it.”
“With the incoming Congress far more hawkish and doubtless willing to push a far more aggressive scope of the war, the president seems hopeful he can get the formality of a Congressional vote out of the way without them.”
Indeed, there appear to be significant differences among the powers-that-be (aka “ruling class”) about the scope of Obama's undeclared “long-term” war. A remarkable editorial in last Sunday's New York Times “The New Wars Rising Cost”, [remove underline in article title] states, “As of October 16, the air campaign against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, had cost $580 million, according to the Pentagon. The military is paying for the bombing sorties using the Overseas Contingency Operations budget, a flexible fund established for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan....
“Congress has a responsibility to take a hard look at the long-term goal of the military mission and its projected cost. It has skirted that duty for too long,” conclude the Times editorial writers, who also call on the Obama administration to clarify its posture vis-a-vis the Assad government in Syria: will we overthrow him or not?
The U.S. bombing of Syria and Iraq, which began with the excuse of saving innocent Christian civilians, is already taking its toll in civilian lives. Inevitably, American lives will be lost as well, particularly given the ascendant hawks’ insistence that the U.S. have “boots on the ground.” Already several thousand U.S. troops – er, “advisers” – are on the ground in Iraq, with more to follow.
San Diego Veterans For Peace, who will host VFP's national convention at the beginning of August 2015, have been hanging a big banner from a freeway overpass, reading “Stop Endless War.” The response from drivers and passengers below is not only supportive, but very enthusiastic. As the scare tactics and humanitarian excuses wear thin, the American people do not want another war in the Middle East.
President Obama's request for Congressional authorization presents the peace movement with a significant opportunity. This is the moment to make our voices – and the voices of the American people – heard loud and clear in the halls of Congress and in the streets. It is time to work with our allies, locally and nationally, and make the most of this critical moment.
#####
This article was written by VFP Vice President Gerry Condon