Loading...
BYH, there are a lot of people having anxiety attacks as more and more are awakening to the possibility that we have a...

Will Congress remain a bystander regarding war?

George Will

George Will

Loading…

Sunday, December 10, 2017

The first use of nuclear weapons occurred Aug. 6, 1945. The second occurred three days later. That there has not been a third is testimony to the skill and sobriety of 12 presidents and many other people, here and abroad. Today, however, North Korea's nuclear bellicosity coincides with the incontinent tweeting and rhetorical taunts of the 13th president of the nuclear era. His almost daily descents from the previous day's unprecedentedly bad behavior are prompting urgent thinking about the constitutional allocation of war responsibilities, and especially about authority to use U.S. nuclear weapons.

Last month, for the first time in 41 years, a congressional hearing examined the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 that gives presidents sole authority. There was serious discussion of whether a particular presidential order for their use might not be "legal." But even if, in a crisis, time permits consulting lawyers, compliant ones will be found: President Obama's argued that the thousands of air strikes that killed thousands and demolished Libya's regime did not constitute "hostilities."

The exigencies of crisis management in an age of ICBMs require speed of consultations, if any, and of decisions. And the credibility of deterrence requires that adversaries know that presidents can act in minutes. Furthermore, the authority to employ nuclear weapons is, as was said at the congressional hearing, "intertwined" with the authority "to take the country to war." So, as a practical matter, President Trump can unleash on North Korea "fire and fury" without seeking the consent of, or even consulting, Congress.

This, even if North Korea has neither attacked nor seems about to attack America. A long train of precedents tends to legitimate practices, and this nation has engaged in many wars since it last declared war on June 5, 1942 (when, to satisfy wartime legalities, it did so against Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania). Over many decades, Congress has become — has largely made itself — a bystander regarding war.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., says, "If we have to go to war to stop this, we will." By "this" does he means North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons, which it has had for 11 years? Or ICBMs, which it is rapidly developing? If so, Graham must think war is coming, because there is no reason to think that North Korea's regime will relinquish weapons it deems essential to its single priority: survival. As Vladimir Putin says, North Korea would rather "eat grass."

North Korea, says Trump, is a "situation we will handle" — "we will take care of it." Does "we" denote deliberative and collaborative action by the legislative and executive branches? Or is "we" the royal plural from the man whose general approach to governance is, "I alone can fix it"? Trump's foreign policy thinking is short on nuance but of Metternichian subtlety compared to his thoughts on nuclear matters: "I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me."

A U.S. war of choice against North Korea would not be a pre-emptive war launched to forestall an imminent attack. Rather, it would be a preventive war supposedly justified by the fact that, given sophisticated weapons and delivery systems, imminence might be impossible to detect. The long war on the primitivism of terrorists has encouraged such thinking.

A leaked 2011 memo from the Obama administration's Justice Department argued that using force to prevent an "imminent" threat "does not require ... clear evidence that a specific attack ... will take place in the immediate future." So, regarding al-Qaida, the memo said that because the government might not know of all plots and thus "cannot be confident that none is about to occur," any leader of al-Qaida or "associated forces" can be lawfully targeted at any time, without specific knowledge of planned attacks.

It would be interesting to hear the president distinguish a preventive war against North Korea from a war of aggression. The first two counts in the indictments at the 1946 Nuremberg trials concerned waging "aggressive war."

George Will is a columnist for the Washington Post.

Loading…

Humans of Greenville

@HumansofGville

Local photographer Joe Pellegrino explores Greenville to create a photographic census of its people.

Op Ed

July 22, 2018

When Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin met in Helsinki this week, it might have been useful if they had had a written contract to reference their previous understandings. No such written contract exists, but if it did, it might read like this imaginary July 2016 letter from Putin to Trump:

In…

DGMartin.jpg

July 22, 2018

If President Trump wants to shut down the critics of his performance this week in Helsinki and strengthen U.S. national security, he can do so with one bold move: Announce he is moving out most U.S. forces currently stationed in Germany and sending them to Poland.

The Polish government recently…

MarcThiessen

July 21, 2018

The morning after my first congressional re-election campaign, I was driving around Pensacola, Florida, collecting signs from supporters' yards. It was an opportunity to spend time with my dad, who I had always suspected favored my brother over me. But I was confident that the previous night's…

JoeScarborough

July 21, 2018

As a young boy I would sometimes walk out of my Greenville home and smell rotten eggs. My mother explained this smell came from the paper mill in Plymouth, some 40 air miles away.

The same could be said about smells near Canton, Roanoke Rapids or around the pulp mill in New Bern. Other smells like…

Tom Campbell.jpg

July 20, 2018

In a long-awaited decision, the European Commission on Wednesday fined Alphabet Inc.'s Google a record $5 billion for unfair business practices. The commission won some praise for standing up to big tech. But theatrics aside, this decision is misguided, harmful to consumers, and almost entirely…

July 20, 2018

With friends like these, it's wise to look around for some new ones.

Donald Trump has called the EU a "foe" and advised British Prime Minister Theresa May to sue the rest of the bloc over Brexit. The U.S. president has already levied tariffs on European steel, and is threatening to do the same on…

Ferdinando Giugliano

July 20, 2018

President Trump is succeeding wildly in one clear, if unannounced, objective: to Make Russia Great Again.

Trump's summit in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin went a long way toward achieving Putin's most cherished goal, which is to return his vast and complicated nation to the exalted…

Eugene Robinson

July 19, 2018

The State Department's Asia team has been without a permanent leader for 18 months, but Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is working to fix that now. After rejecting Rex Tillerson's preferred candidate, he is now considering a retired Air Force general whom associates describe as a China hawk.

Dave…

Josh Rogin

July 19, 2018

Bloomberg Opinion

Arizona Sen. John McCain's verdict on President Donald Trump's performance at the summit in Helsinki was brutal, but just: "No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant."

Standing alongside Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday, Trump failed to…

July 19, 2018

Was Russia's effort to interfere in the 2016 election the most important issue on the table at President Trump's Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin? No. But it's not an unimportant issue, either, so he knew it would play a big role in the Trump-Putin post-summit news conference.

There are all…

Byron York.jpg
291 stories in Op Ed. Viewing 1 through 10.
«First Page   «Previous Page        
Page 1 of 30
        Next Page»   Last Page»