Congressional Politics & Global Conflict

Image courtesy of ForgottenInvasion.com

Recently I’ve had a few excellent and rather fiery discussions with friends on the subject of the current conflict in Libya and the role being played by the United States in that conflict.  It’s fairly difficult for me to stand behind uses of military force, but like some of my peers it’s hard to see what would have been the better option for the US in Libya.  While I suspect David and I differ in regard to our government’s stance on the conflicts in Yemen and Bahrain, we agree that those conflicts are not a reason to let things in Libya grow worse.

Specifically, a colleague asked my opinion on the President’s recent decision to pursue military action in Libya without the consent of Congress.  Amid the current din of contrasting claims of Obama’s Presidential weakness, and the image of him as a socialist authoritarian overstepping the boundaries of Presidential power, the question certainly seemed worth addressing.  This isn’t the first time the role of the executive in conflict has come to a head in American history, and I suspect it will not be the last.

Our nation hasn’t exactly made a habit of formally declaring war on other countries, and in contrast with some of our past conflicts it’s hard to see our efforts in Libya as deserving of any such declaration.  Historically Congress has declared war as outlined in the Constitution only five times, during the 20^th century only WWI and WWII find their way onto that hallowed list.  As early as the late 18^th century our Presidents engaged the nation in military conflicts without going through the standard channels, and I don’t think that’s entirely the wrong approach.  The deliberative nature of our legislative branch is, as intended, very good at preventing our government from leaping too boldly into policy changes. However, deliberation, while a strength in politics, is often a liability in strategy.

Given my concerns about hypocrisy I’m certainly not comfortable with some of the players involved this time around. Vice President Biden, for example, was adamantly against military action being taken without Congressional approval just a few years ago.  During the our conflicts in the Middle East over the last decade, many left leaning thinkers have been thoroughly outraged over military action taking place without the express consent of Congress .  There were a host of reasons I was less than fond of our former President, but this was never one of them.

While I recognize the dangers of war-making in the hands of an executive power, I tend to be more convinced by my lack of faith in legislators to  address time-sensitive concerns.  To put it simply, there are a great number of subjects I think our legislators could dedicate their time to fixing before political grandstanding over international conflicts. In an ideal world I would prefer that legislators -and through them, the populace- had more influence on the making of war and international peace, but legislative politics in the US are anything but ideal.