Killers in the White
House
Biden carries on the
latter-day custom of executive war-making
—what he once called “tyranny.” Is the Constitution at
fault for
trusting one man with combined executive and military
power?
A WALL commentary
George
Washington presided as delegates to the Federal
Convention in Philadelphia drew up the United States
Constitution in some four months of 1787. Signers
numbered 39, of 55 who attended, representing 12
states (Rhode Island absent).
History taught them “the executive is the branch of
power most interested in war, and most prone to it”
(James Madison). Monarchs often made war “for purposes
and objects merely personal, such as a thirst for
military glory, revenge for personal affronts,
ambition ...” (John Jay). To discourage war, delegates
allowed only Congress “to declare [i.e. initiate] war”
(Article I, Section 8, Clause 11).
But they
made two errors, one of commission, the other
omission:
-
They gave one man all
executive power, including command of the
military. In 1789 the first Congress had 59
representatives and 22 senators; it assigned
the Supreme Court 6 justices. Members now
number 435, 100, and 9 respectively. Yet the
executive has always been one man. While not
king, he has become a ruler with more war
power than George III had.
-
They failed to
foresee abuse of the president’s military
function and explicitly guard congressional
war power from his encroachment. The
impeachment process is available, but it has
never been invoked for the high crime of
illegal war. Anyway, what good would it do
after a nuclear catastrophe?
Some
delegates opposed a one-man executive. Governor Edmund
Randolph of Virginia called it “the foetus of
monarchy.” He and Virginian George Mason favored
giving three men joint executive power. Others,
notably James Madison and Benjamin Franklin, wanted at
least a council to assist the executive.
Pennsylvanian James Wilson’s insistence on a solitary
executive won out. He called it “the best safeguard
against tyranny.” Perhaps Wilson et al. assumed that
Washington would become president, setting high
standards. Seven states assented, not Delaware,
Maryland, and New York.
The delegates made the president the army and navy’s
“commander-in-chief,” a historic, strictly military
position. Convention records don’t explain why they
thought everyone elected president qualified—or why
they trusted him not to misuse the power and initiate
war.
Washington and other early presidents respected
Congress’s constitutional war power. Some presidents,
from Polk to Franklin Roosevelt, undermined it by
provocation or circumvention. Outright defiance began
with Truman. Every subsequent president has emulated
him in some way. Yet all presidents take the oath to
“preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”
required by Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 8.
The delegates did their best. Theirs was a noble
experiment. The experiment failed.
(The next two sections concern the war power and
Biden. Lastly, “Presidential Hit Parade” shows the
violence of his 14 predecessors overpowering
Congress’s authority “to declare war.”)
Biden Upholds the Constitution
Three decades ago, President George Herbert Walker
Bush massed troops in Saudi Arabia, preparing to wage
war on Iraq, He railed against its invasion of Kuwait,
ignoring his own invasion of Panama a year earlier.
Bush claimed the authority to start a war as military
commander-in-chief.
On constitutional grounds, 54 members of Congress, led
by Rep. Ron Dellums (D-California), sued to prevent
the conflict. Federal Judge Harold H. Greene found the
plaintiffs justified (12/13/90): The Constitution’s
framers “felt it unwise to entrust the momentous power
to involve the nation in a war to the president
alone.” Hence “the clause granting to the Congress,
and to it alone, the authority to decide war.”
Greene refused to issue an injunction however: Until a
majority of Congress acted and war was certain, the
case was not “ripe.” At least, like early U.S. judges,
he tackled the constitutional issue. Modern courts
usually duck such cases, saying plaintiffs lack
standing to sue, raise a “political question,” et
cetera.
Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Delaware), chairman of
the Senate Judiciary Committee, called a hearing on
constitutional war power (1/8/91) and said, “In
England the king alone could decide to take a nation
to war.” Here “the war power rests in the Congress....
The Constitution’s founders all understood this to be
a key principle of our republic.”
Biden quoted Alexander Hamilton: “commander-in-chief”
amounts to just “supreme command and direction of the
military and naval forces as first general and
admiral....” The president lacks the British king’s
powers to declare war and raise and regulate fleets
and armies—powers our Constitution gives the
legislature (The Federalist, 69).
Biden went on: “Americans once lived under a system
where one man had unfettered choice to decide by
himself whether we go to war ... and we launched a
revolution to free ourselves from the tyranny of such
a system.”
Bush relented and allowed a congressional vote. It
went his way, helped by testimony falsely alleging
atrocities by Iraqi soldiers. Biden voted no.
Biden Ignores the Constitution
Biden’s 2007 memoir says he pressed President Clinton
to bomb Serbia. Clinton did so in 1999, ignoring
Congress. Biden urged him to keep it up.
In 2002 as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, Biden supported a resolution (originating
in the White House) to let President George W. Bush
decide whether to fight Iraq. The measure, adopted,
violated the Constitution. As Biden had insisted 11
years earlier, such a decision was for Congress to
make.
In the 2020 debates, then Vice-President Biden made
known he would send forces into combat “very, very
reluctantly” and only when the “overwhelming, vital
interests of the United States are at stake.” He did
not mention Congress.
Last February 25, 36 days after inauguration,
President Biden bombed Syria, reportedly killing 22
people, believed to be “Iran-backed militants.”
(Victims of our “precision-guided munitions” are
seldom children, women, or peaceable men.)
Spokesmen gave various imaginative explanations for
the aggression. It was “defensive” and “retaliation”
for an attack on U.S. forces in Iraq (though not an
attack by Syria). It aimed to “deescalate” the
regional situation and “to send a message to Iran.”
What did that message say? Forget my pre-election
promise of peace? An e-mail would have been clearer
and saved a bundle. Nobody explained what
overwhelming, vital interests of the U.S. were served
by taking the 22 lives.
Based on Biden’s 1991 rhetoric, that act of war was
also an act of “tyranny.” Such tyranny has arguably
spanned some four score years, irrespective of the
president’s political affiliation.
In Congress, reactions crossed party lines. The raid
drew both praise for avenging attacks and condemnation
for violating constitutional war power. Prior
congressional approval would not have sanctified the
attack, though giving it constitutional legitimacy.
Several U.S. treaties prohibit aggression.
Moreover, what about the long-suffering people of
Syria, whose homeland foreign leaders have
appropriated as a battleground? Ex-Representative Ron
Paul (R-Texas) expressed sympathy, writing that Biden,
Trump, and Obama all deserved impeachment for
attacking Syria.
Throughout their terms, both Trump and Obama conducted
unauthorized military actions in Asia and Africa.
Biden’s election platform promised to end “forever
wars.” Syria aside, how is he doing?
Two days after inauguration, U.S. forces conducted an
“emergency response” exercise in Somalia. Five days
later, came a U.S.-led air attack in Iraq, killing 11
“ISIS” people. The Afghanistan war still rages; Biden
promises troop withdrawal by September, however
“counterterrorism” will continue. He supposedly halted
support for the ravaging of Yemen; yet, without
congressional authority, he promises to defend the
Saudi monarchy, which perpetrates it. He assures
Israel he will strengthen military cooperation. He
deploys bombers to Norway. Warships approach China and
Russia, as Biden insults and threatens America’s top
nuclear rival. (Putin, a “killer,” will “pay a
price.”)
When Bush Senior invaded Panama , the late R. W. Apple
Jr., chief New York Times Washington correspondent,
postulated “a presidential initiation rite” since
World War II for presidents “to demonstrate their
willingness to shed blood ...” (12/21/89). All
believed “the American political culture required them
to show the world promptly that they carried big
sticks.” Bush—accused of timidity—showed by attacking
he was “capable of bold action.”
Was that Biden’s “message”?
However administrations change, executive war-making
persists. Imagine the reaction of the Constitution’s
framers if they could see the power now at the
president’s fingertips—capable of destroying life on
earth.
Presidential Hit Parade
Summarized
below (in reverse chronological order) are highlights
of the records of the last 14 presidents, emphasizing
war and violence. Reasons for the bloodshed are
largely forgotten. These vignettes illustrate the
executive’s affinity to war.
*
* * * *
Donald
Trump ran for president favoring both peace and
the killing of “terrorists” and their families. In
office, he escalated existing hostilities and loosened
rules of engagement, causing soaring civilian
casualties. MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast) was used
for the first time, in Afghanistan—at 10 tons, the
largest U.S. non-nuclear bomb ever exploded in battle
(casualties unannounced). Trump picked fights in Asia
and Africa, renounced arms treaties, threatened North
Korea with “fire and fury,” and supported Saudi
assaults on Yemen, vetoing a congressional resolution
to quit. He assassinated Iran’s top general, then
ordered Iran bombed but changed his mind.
Barack
Obama entered office opposing “dumb wars” but
conducted them for his entire eight years, the first
presidency to permit no peace. He escalated the Afghan
war. His Libyan “no fly zone” became a war for regime
change. He helped Saudis bomb Yemen. He plotted
periodic drone assassinations in various countries and
took pride in ordering Osama bin Laden shot, without
trial, in Pakistan.
George W.
Bush started the Afghan war—now in its 20th
year—though Congress never authorized war on
Afghanistan. He then instigated America’s second war
on Iraq, lying that President Saddam Hussein, had
“weapons of mass destruction” and ties to terrorists.
Estimates of resulting fatalities reach a
million-plus. Bush approved torturing prisoners.
Bill
Clinton intervened in eight countries during
eight years in office. Clinton bombed Yugoslavia for
11 weeks, aided by NATO (supposedly dedicated to
peace). He ignored Congress, even after it voted
against upholding his war. Other victims of his:
Afghanistan, Bosnia, Colombia, Haiti, Iraq, Somalia,
and Sudan.
George H.
W. Bush, George W.’s father, attacked Panama,
without congressional authorization. He then planned
war on Iraq. Congress narrowly approved forcing Iraqi
troops to leave Kuwait. As Iraqis departed, U.S.
forces fired on them. Civilians in Baghdad and other
cities succumbed to U.S. bombs. Bush as vice-president
was heavily involved in Reagan interventions.
Ronald
Reagan entered unauthorized hostilities in
Lebanon, Grenada, and Central America. As though
making up for a recent loss of 240 marines in a
Lebanon bomb blast, he invaded Grenada, an island
nation with one 2000th the U.S. population. About 80
were killed, including 20 Americans. With active CIA
participation, Reagan sponsored the Nicaraguan
Contras, whom he called “freedom fighters” but critics
considered “terrorists.” Scandal erupted when he sold
Iran arms to finance the Contras. Reagan supported the
Salvadoran regime despite its massacres of citizens,
sending it military aid and armed “advisors.”
Jimmy
Carter ran for office pledging to involve the
American people in forming foreign policy. The only
U.S. president since Hoover to wage no overt warfare,
Carter covertly armed anti-Soviet fighters in
Afghanistan, forerunners of al-Qaeda. He threatened
force to defend U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf.
Trying to rescue hostages in Iran, Carter lost eight
servicemen in an air accident.
Gerald
Ford, during his short, unelected term,
sacrificed 41 marines in a needless military assault
on a Cambodian island. It aimed at freeing the
Mayaguez, a merchant ship seized by Cambodia, which
was preparing to free her anyway.
Richard
M. Nixon and Lyndon B. Johnson before
him led the U.S. Indochina war, 1964–1973. The Wall,
Washington, DC, commemorates
58,279 U.S. servicemen who fell in that presidential
conflict—not Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian
victims, as many as 3.6 million. Nixon also intervened
covertly in Chile and Johnson sent troops to the
Dominican Republic
John F.
Kennedy approved the CIA’s Bay-of-Pigs invasion
and sabotage program in Cuba. To look tough, he risked
war with Russia in demanding withdrawal of missiles it
had installed in Cuba, though he had put missiles in
Turkey and ordered plans to nuke Russia. He sent
weapons and thousands of “advisors” to South Vietnam
and covertly eliminated its peace-seeking president.
Dwight
D. Eisenhower, commander of Allied European
forces in World War II, inherited the Korean war,
reaching an armistice in six months in 1953. He
threatened to use nuclear weapons if war recurred,
then made nuclear “massive retaliation” his general
“defense” policy. Using the CIA, he overthrew
governments in Iran and Guatemala and OK’d the
invasion of Cuba. He sent military aid to Vietnam
before and after the French left.
Harry
S. Truman is infamous as the first to use atomic
bombs, in annihilating Hiroshima and then Nagasaki. He
also launched the practice of outright presidential
war-making when in 1950 he ordered combat in Korea
without congressional permission, claiming authority
from the UN. His war killed nearly five million, the
majority civilians. Truman armed rightist regimes and
French forces fighting in Indochina.
Franklin
D. Roosevelt was the last president to obtain a
constitutional declaration of war (excluding Bush
Senior’s reluctant OK of an Iraq war vote). However,
FDR’s policies, provoking Japan economically and
militarily while concentrating warships in Hawaii,
apparently invited the “date which will live in
infamy” (12/7/41). Promising 1940 voters peace, FDR
executively armed Britain, engaged U-boats, and sent
troops abroad. In 1939 he protested aggressors’
bombing of civilians as “inhuman barbarism.” After war
was official, he ordered massive bombings of cities,
killing innumerable civilians
*
* * *
*
Do we elect a chief
executive—or a chief executioner? No president is
likely to maliciously shoot someone to death
point-blank. That’s murder. But no president seems to
mind ordering many people shot or bombed in a distant
land. That’s war.
__________________________________
By Paul W. Lovinger, April 26, 2021
|