Believe it or not, we already know when that will be:
A crucial yet overlooked deadline looms over the Iraq debate: Unless further action is taken, the war will become illegal on Jan. 1, 2009.
Despite protestations to the contrary, Congress clearly understood that it was authorizing the president to intervene militarily when it passed its joint resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq in October 2002. But it did not give him a blank check. It allowed for the use of force only under two conditions.
The first has long since lapsed. It permitted the president to “defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.” This threat came to an end with the destruction of Saddam Hussein’s government. It makes no sense to say that it continues today, or that our “national security” is “threatened by” the Iraqi government headed by Nouri al-Maliki.
Instead, U.S. military intervention is authorized under the second prong of the 2002 resolution. This authorizes the president to “enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.” This has allowed the Bush administration to satisfy American law by obtaining a series of resolutions authorizing the United States to serve as the head of the multinational force in Iraq.
But here’s the rub. The most recent U.N. resolution expires on Dec. 31, and the administration has announced that it will not seek one for 2009. Instead, it is now negotiating a bilateral agreement with the Iraqi government to replace the U.N. mandate.
That agreement, however, won’t have any binding legal effect in the United States because the Administration has no plans to submit it to Congress for approval — notwithstanding the fact that the Constitution clearly requires treaties to be approved by the Senate:
[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
And what is the bilateral agreement that the Bush Administration is talking about but a treaty by another name ? By not submitting it to the Senate and then attempting to use that agreement as justification for the continued presence of American troops they are, in effect, making an end run around the Constitution itself. Unfortunately an all too common occurrence over the past seven years.
April 5th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
see video: See Body of War, Hear Body of War
Help Phil Donahue promote this important movie, directed by Phil Donahue and Ellen Spiro, send this video link to others to make people aware of Tomas Young’s story. Buy Tomas Young’s double album and help the cause:
http://representativepress.googlepages.com/bodyofwar