Shortly after the tragic event of the 9/11 bombings, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force on September 14, 2001. This passage authorized the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.” The text of the AUMF is rather short, amounting to a sixty word sentence, but is subjectively responsible for starting the War on Terror.
The AUMF is very reminiscent of the previous Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which essentially gave President Johnson a "blank check" to do whatever he believed was "necessary to retaliate and to promote the maintenance of international peace and security in southeast Asia." However, despite the sheer amount of power Johnson received, the Resolution still had a sunset clause, and only applied to the Johnson Administration. On the other hand, AUMF gave unprecedented power to essentially all presidents to do whatever was necessary to fight against terror. The AUMF was not intended to be a "blank check" like the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, but it has been used as such by all following administrations after the passage. It has been used by the three consecutive administrations to conduct a multitude of military operations abroad, and has justified "military action more than 37 times in 14 countries" since the passage of the bill.
The bill was largely used by Bush to push forces into Afghanistan, but was also the main source of presidential power to open Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, which detained enemy combatants, and was largely controversial for accounts of torture. Trump has also cited AUMF to keep the controversial Guantanamo Bay open.
However, the impact of AUMF is not only in the past, as the potential that this bill brings is immense. The decisions for preemptive strikes and waging nuclear war are put into the hands of the President, future and past, with this bill, and could this have profound implications including strained alliances, civilian deaths, etc. Thus, it is important to examine the repercussions that can come with such individual authority over the military, and uphold the roles of the Constitution, allowing the legislative branch to make such judgements, and letting Congress do its job in declaring war.
Sources:
http://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/363182-heres-why-authorization-to-use-military-force-is-so-important
https://www.lawfareblog.com/authorization-use-military-force-2001
https://www.britannica.com/event/Gulf-of-Tonkin-Resolution
Great Post. I really thought that you gave a great overview of the authorization and gave a clear understanding of what the AUMF was. I really liked how you connected the AUMF to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. I certainly agree that the AUMF needs to be looked at as a resolution that should be reformed. The bill, in my mind, gives far too much power to the executive branch when it comes to military action. However, we do live a far more interconnected and global world and that it might be best for the President to have some leeway when it comes to military matters. For example, without the AUMF, would President Obama have been able to go in and take out Osama Bin Laden? We will never know but it is certainly a conversation that our nation and our leaders must have.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/senate-to-take-up-aumf-debate-as-trump-defends-reaction-to-niger-attack/2017/10/20/59ef63ea-b5a1-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.38dfe6b3aed7