In Iraq bills, a Vietnam echo
Legislating an end is a thorny quest
By Charlie Savage
Boston Globe Staff
WASHINGTON -- In December 1970, Congress passed historic legislation revoking the 1964 Tonkin Gulf resolution, which had authorized military force in Vietnam, and banning the deployment of ground troops in Cambodia. War opponents hoped Congress was on the verge of forcing a quick end to the bloody quagmire in Indochina.
"The president, in our judgment, now lacks legitimate authority to keep on prosecuting the war," said Senator Frank Church , Democrat of Idaho, in a 1971 speech. "Under these circumstances, a great opportunity is presented to Congress -- the chance to fill this constitutional vacuum with a disengagement policy that could help unite the country again."
War opponents' hopes were dashed. Despite signing the bills, President Nixon said he had independent authority as commander in chief to keep combat in Vietnam going. For the next two years, Congress failed to agree on further restrictions, and nearly 3,000 more American soldiers died. Nixon finally ended the war on his own terms with a cease - fire agreement in January 1973.
In the coming months, some 34 years after the Vietnam War shuddered to a halt, Congress will again attempt to do something unprecedented: stopping a war before a president is ready. Scholars agree that Congress has the power to force a shift in the conduct of the Iraq war, but the path will be difficult in the face of uncompromising opposition from President Bush.
Julian Zelizer , a Princeton history professor, said that there has always been a gap between what Congress can theoretically do to end a war and what is politically achievable. The ugly consequences of withdrawals, coupled with procedural rules that allow a group of 40 senators to block votes, have proved to be steep obstacles to winning enough votes to stop combat.
"Once you are in a war, it's hard to get out of it," said Zelizer. "When the messiness of war is combined with the messiness of Congress, the result is that it is very hard to get congressional opposition under way."
(Continued here.)
By Charlie Savage
Boston Globe Staff
WASHINGTON -- In December 1970, Congress passed historic legislation revoking the 1964 Tonkin Gulf resolution, which had authorized military force in Vietnam, and banning the deployment of ground troops in Cambodia. War opponents hoped Congress was on the verge of forcing a quick end to the bloody quagmire in Indochina.
"The president, in our judgment, now lacks legitimate authority to keep on prosecuting the war," said Senator Frank Church , Democrat of Idaho, in a 1971 speech. "Under these circumstances, a great opportunity is presented to Congress -- the chance to fill this constitutional vacuum with a disengagement policy that could help unite the country again."
War opponents' hopes were dashed. Despite signing the bills, President Nixon said he had independent authority as commander in chief to keep combat in Vietnam going. For the next two years, Congress failed to agree on further restrictions, and nearly 3,000 more American soldiers died. Nixon finally ended the war on his own terms with a cease - fire agreement in January 1973.
In the coming months, some 34 years after the Vietnam War shuddered to a halt, Congress will again attempt to do something unprecedented: stopping a war before a president is ready. Scholars agree that Congress has the power to force a shift in the conduct of the Iraq war, but the path will be difficult in the face of uncompromising opposition from President Bush.
Julian Zelizer , a Princeton history professor, said that there has always been a gap between what Congress can theoretically do to end a war and what is politically achievable. The ugly consequences of withdrawals, coupled with procedural rules that allow a group of 40 senators to block votes, have proved to be steep obstacles to winning enough votes to stop combat.
"Once you are in a war, it's hard to get out of it," said Zelizer. "When the messiness of war is combined with the messiness of Congress, the result is that it is very hard to get congressional opposition under way."
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home