The AUMF Crescent

Screen shot 2013-09-01 at 8.00.29 AMBoth Moon of Alabama and Jack Goldsmith have analyses of the Authorization to Use Military Force the White House proposed to Congress yesterday.

The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in connection with the use of chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in the conflict in Syria in order to –

  1. prevent or deter the use or proliferation (including the transfer to terrorist groups or other state or non-state actors), within, to or from Syria, of any weapon of mass destruction, including chemical or biological weapons or components of or materials used in such weapons; or
  2. protect the United States or its allies and partners against the threats posed by such weapons.

Moon of Alabama focuses on how the use of “as he determines to be necessary and appropriate” turns the AUMF into a very broad authorization.

It is clear from this wording that such a resolution would allow nearly everything far beyond the “punitive” few cruise missile strikes against Syrian forces the administration marketed so far. It could easily be used for an outright blockade of Iran or even a “preemptive” strike against Iran’s industries in the name of “deterrence” and “protecting” Israel.

Goldsmith focuses even more closely on the several other places where this AUMF could be used.

(1) Does the proposed AUMF authorize the President to take sides in the Syrian Civil War, or to attack Syrian rebels associated with al Qaeda, or to remove Assad from power?  Yes, as long as the President determines that any of these entities has a (mere) connection to the use of WMD in the Syrian civil war, and that the use of force against one of them would prevent or deter the use or proliferation of WMD within, or to and from, Syria, or protect the U.S. or its allies (e.g. Israel) against the (mere) threat posed by those weapons.  It is very easy to imagine the President making such determinations with regard to Assad or one or more of the rebel groups.

(2) Does the proposed AUMF authorize the President to use force against Iran or Hezbollah, in Iran or Lebanon?  Again, yes, as long as the President determines that Iran or Hezbollah has a (mere) a connection to the use of WMD in the Syrian civil war, and the use of force against Iran or Hezbollah would prevent or deter the use or proliferation of WMD within, or to and from, Syria, or protect the U.S. or its allies (e.g. Israel) against the (mere) threat posed by those weapons.  Again, very easy to imagine.

Given my continuing obsession with the still extant Iraq War AUMF, let’s consider the geography of this proposed AUMF together with the other active AUMFs, the Iraq and Afghanistan ones.

Put all three of them together, and the government would have authorization to use military force in Syria, Lebanon, Shia-governed and increasingly violent Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and parts of Pakistan (plus Yemen, with its Houthi insurgency on Saudi Arabia’s southern border). The President would have authorization to use military force in an unbroken band of land from Israel’s border east to nuclear-armed Pakistan, with both the counter-Saudi Shia block and Sunni al Qaeda related terrorists included within the AUMFs. This, to fight a war that Israel and the Gulf states have allied (if you can call it that) to fight.

President Obama claims he only wants to engage in limited strikes. He has promised there would be no boots (aside from JSOC and CIA ones, presumably) on the ground.

But he has proposed something that could be potentially far broader.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

58 Responses to The AUMF Crescent

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @ColMorrisDavis Was there any answer on the §1117 and §1119 question?
1mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Not just "wouldn't turn away from the bacchanal, but "couldn't" turn away. #CantStopNerdPromming https://t.co/eFxmKguhHt
12mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ScottGreenfield @a2hosting Mmmmm, ice cream. Okay!
15mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ggreenwald Well golly, I thought Fineman's real rationale was that it was good opportunity for friends to salute he+his wife's anniversary
16mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ScottGreenfield I went to the Church of Simple Justice, but the devil of @a2hosting denied my morning prayers. #NowImAtheist
19mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Yes @khamenei_ir is beyond hypocritical trolling. But point is not who+what they are, but us when we are in position to be trolled like that
36mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz So, where is the great US exceptionalism when @khamenei_ir is a stronger voice against abusive and militant policing than Lynch and Obama?
42mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @khamenei_ir: It's ridiculous that even though US President is black, still such crimes agnst US blacks continue to occur. #BlackLivesMa
44mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @khamenei_ir: Acquittal of US cops who committed murder is among measures taken by statesmen who ignore humanity& religion. #BlackLivesM
44mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @khamenei_ir: On false pretexts US police shoots ppl on streets. This is a type of power which doesn't ensure security but leads to inse…
44mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @khamenei_ir: Power & tyranny are different. In some countries like US, police are seemingly powerful but they kill innocents. #FreddieG
44mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @april_anita Just suggested to @p2wy that you capture his entire day and enter it into Art Prize. And it appears to just get better.
58mreplyretweetfavorite
September 2013
S M T W T F S
« Aug   Oct »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930