House Democrats who released a letter criticizing the new authorization against military force contained in the National Defense Authorization Act earlier this week are planning on introducing an amendment after the recess that they say would prevent Republicans from authorizing an open ended global "war on terror."
“From the perspective of congressional prerogative to declare war and peace, this would just further undermine Congress' decisions about going to war by affirming that we're at war with entities without describing who those entities are,” said a Democratic House aide. Republicans have argued that a new AUMF would simply put the administration on firmer legal footing for operations it is already engaged in against groups like al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which did not exist at the time of the 9/11 attacks but still pose a security threat.
Pentagon Counsel Jeh Johnson however, told the House Armed Services Committee two months ago that the administration believes existing authority is sufficient. And in addition to a new AUMF, the House bill would make it impossible to try terrorists captured abroad in federal courts and make it more difficult for Gitmo detainees to be transferred to third countries.
Ken Gude, Managing Director of the National Security and International Policy Program at the Center for American Progress, said he did not believe the new AUMF language would represent "an expansion of existing authority." However, he emphasized that " I support a narrower scope and do not believe it is necessary--nor good strategy--for the United States to have legal authority to use military force against terrorist groups that do not have the capability to attack us."
Still, says Karen Greenberg, Executive Director of the New York University Center on Law and Security, Congress needs to assess the significance of Osama bin Laden's death before preparing to authorize a wider legal basis for the use of military force against terrorist suspects. Congress, to borrow a phrase, first has to tell the American people how this ends.
“What does it mean for the war to be over? How do you define the cessation of hostilites? Peace on Earth, goodwill towards men?” Greenberg says. "There are always going to be violent groups around the world...We've killed bin Laden. We need to see, and assess, what that actually means."
The House aide said that Democrats were concerned that the language of the AUMF, citing the threat from "Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces," was so broad it could be used against groups that aren't yet targeting the United States. "We're getting away from the tight nexus of the 9/11 attacks and who we're at war with," the aide said. "We're going down this path where there's no reference to any time frame, no particular places, we're just at war any where any time.”
