Congress should answer Kaine's call for authorization against ISIS
In light of the deadly terrorist attacks last week in Paris, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine has reiterated his justified and bipartisan call for Congress to approve an Authorization for Use of Military Force against the Islamic State.
Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, joined once again by Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake, says Congress is mired in shamefully passive posturing by failing to put its official support behind the military action in which the United States has been engaged with ISIS for the past 15 months.
In June the two senators spelled out their call for authorization. By then, Kaine and Flake pointed out, the Islamic State group had already established itself as brutal successor to Al–Qaida, having “committed despicable acts of violence and mass executions against Muslims,” as well as the barbaric beheading of Western captives. The senators said ISIS has “targeted innocent women and girls with horrific acts of violence, including abduction, enslavement, torture [and] rape.”
And this past Friday in Paris, ISIS loyalists opened fire on innocents enjoying an evening of meals and music, leaving 129 dead and 350 wounded, many of them in critical condition.
In response to this “act of war,” France has unleashed a torrent of bombs in multiple airstrikes against ISIS targets in Syria, while authorities in France and Belgium have carried out scores of raids on sites used by known ISIS operatives and sympathizers.
French President Francois Hollande will travel to the Washington and Moscow in coming days to urge the foes to present a united front against the terrorist organization. Given that ISIS claims to have downed the Russian jetliner, a unified front against a common enemy would appear in order.
But first, the United States needs to show unity—and purpose—within itself by approving the authorization of military force. Since February, President Obama’s proposal for the authorization against ISIS has languished in Congress and the president himself has been chided for the ambiguity of U.S. policy. Members of Congress are reluctant because they fear a new round of U.S. ground troops being deployed in the region. They haven’t forgotten the authorization they granted against Iraq in 2002, based on U.S. intelligence claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and was harboring Al–Qaida operatives, neither of which were substantiated.
Members also use the excuse that the two previous authorizations, in 2001 after the 9/11 attacks and the one from 2002, are sufficient for U.S. action against ISIS.
Kaine and Flake argue, however, that ISIS is a different enemy at a different time, and that a new authorization is warranted. Kaine has pointed to the irony of a Congress that abhors the president’s use of unilateral executive orders, but in this case fails to exert the power it has at its fingertips.
Kaine has said it’s immoral to ask U.S. service members to risk their lives in a war zone and make sacrifices while Congress won’t even find time to legally authorize their presence there. All indications are the number of American forces on the ground in the Middle East will grow in the wake of the attacks in Paris.
In actions and threats, ISIS has made clear its intention to wage repeated jihadist attacks against nations that have taken action against it. Too often, in retrospect, these attacks were seen brewing but not enough was done to prevent them.
After last week’s atrocities, France has had enough. Will the U.S. Congress reach that point before the homeland is again left in mourning?