Four Plans Compete to Authorize Military Force Against the Islamic State
WASHINGTON — Members of Congress have criticized President Obama’s response to the Islamic State — also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL, or ISIS — but have been slow to authorize the use of force against the group.
In his address Sunday, Mr. Obama again challenged Congress to give him a formal authorization to use force. So-called authorizations of the use of military force — basically declarations of war — do exist; one passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2014; one was written by the president; another was drafted by Senators Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, and Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona; and another was submitted last week by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, and backed by Republican Senators Dan Coats of Indiana, Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, and Joni Ernst of Iowa.
But there are significant differences among the various drafts.
Ground Forces
The president’s draft expressly “does not authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces in enduring offensive ground combat operations.”
The committee’s “does not authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces for the purpose of ground combat operations except as necessary” to protect and rescue United States service members and to conduct missions “not intended to result in ground combat,” including intelligence collection, targeting of airstrikes, planning military operations and advising and assisting allied forces.
The Kaine-Flake bill declares, “The purpose of this authorization is to protect the lives of United States citizens and to provide military support to regional partners in their battle to defeat ISIL. The use of significant United States ground troops in combat against ISIL, except to protect the lives of United States citizens from imminent threat, is not consistent with such purpose.”
The Graham bill authorizes “all necessary and appropriate force,” with no restrictions on ground troops.
Time Limits
The drafts by the president, the committee and Kaine-Flake limit the authorization to three years. All three repeal the 2002 authorization of force that led to the invasion of Iraq.
The Graham bill has no time limits and leaves other authorizations of force in place.
Other Demands on the President
The president’s promises reports to Congress “at least once every six months” of actions taken under the authorization.
The committee’s demands reports to Congress at least every 60 days and a “comprehensive strategy” within 30 days of enactment that lays out political and diplomatic objectives of the United States in the region as well as military objectives, including a list of organizations targeted by military operations, the geographic scope of military strikes, contributions from coalition partners, humanitarian assistance and support for displaced civilian populations, a “realistic end goal and exit strategy,” and a cost estimate.
The Kaine-Flake bill requires a report to Congress at least once every six months.
The Graham bill requires a report to Congress every 60 days.
Findings
All of the authorizations begin with a lengthy bill of particulars on the predations of the Islamic State, including its seizing of territory in Syria and Iraq, execution of American prisoners, “vicious acts of violence” against religious and ethnic minorities, and the September 2014 declaration by NATO that the Islamic State poses a serious threat and should be countered by a broad international coalition.
The president’s, the committee’s and the Kaine-Flake bill all denounce “mass executions of Muslims, regardless of sect.”
The Graham authorization omits reference to the execution of Muslims but goes into far more detail on the execution of each American prisoner, including Kayla Mueller, who “was kidnapped and repeatedly raped for almost 18 months by the leader of ISIL, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.” The Graham resolution includes detailed descriptions of the attack in Paris and its aftermath, including threats to the United States.
