In the United States, the Senate voted on Wednesday to curtail the president’s ability to use military force in Iraq. Although some Republicans oppose the move, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said he is open to legislation passing the House, saying Resolution 118H Congress could officially end a war 20 years after it began.
Highlights
- The bill, sponsored by Sens. Tim Kaine and Todd Young, passed the Senate by a vote of 66-30, and 18 Democrats along with Democrats voted to repeal the 1991 and 2002 laws that allow the president to send troops to Iraq without congressional approval. .
- The 2002 law was implemented prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq by former President George W. Bush, while the 1991 law was put in place to allow former President George H.W. Bush to deploy troops to Iraq when that country invaded Kuwait, marking the beginning of US involvement in the Gulf War .
- McCarthy, who voted against a version of the repeals in the previous session of Congress, expressed mixed support for the legislation but said it would have to go through the committee process before it was put to a vote, meaning it could be amended and sent. Return to the Senate for final approval.
- In the House, repeals are supported by moderate Republicans, including House Rules Chair Tom Cole, and members of the Whig Party, including Representatives Chip Roy and Matt Gaetz. Other members, including Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, said they’d rather replace the bill than appeal.
- Some Senate Democrats have said they support the repeal to inform the Iraqi government of the US’s commitment to its military partnership in that country, where about 2,500 US troops remain stationed training and advising Iraqi forces in their fight against the Islamic State group.
- The legislation also represents a toll for some lawmakers who lamented their 2002 vote to approve the use of military force in Iraq, which led to a long, costly and deeply unpopular war, in part because of a miscalculation that Iraq hid weapons of mass destruction.
Interesting review
Some Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, opposed the bill, as the bill cited the need for the United States to maintain a strong stance on terrorism in the Middle East: Our terrorist enemies do not end their war against us. in a statement on Tuesday.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer warned that keeping the laws in place means future administrations could “abuse them to trap us in yet another conflict in the Middle East.” “The American people don’t want this,” he said during last week’s debate. “They are tired of the endless wars in the Middle East.”
what are you expecting
Biden said he would sign the legislation if it fell to his desk. House Democrats could pass the repeals with the support of some Republicans, who hold a slim 222-213 majority in the House, though the move would challenge the precedent that the majority of the ruling party generally agrees with.
main context
Previous versions of the bill failed to pass both houses. Last year, the House of Representatives passed similar legislation with the support of all but one Democrat and 49 Republicans, but the bill died in Senate committee. While the 1991 and 2002 bills sought to empower the president in two specific military campaigns in Iraq, they have been cited by previous presidents when using military force elsewhere, including by former President Donald Trump when he ordered the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad. in 2020.
the shadow
The Senate has rejected an amendment sponsored by Senator Rand Paul that would have revoked the president’s authority to use military force against any country, person or group implicated in the September 11 terrorist attacks.
Translated article from the American magazine Forbes – Author: Sarah Dorn
<< اقرأ أيضًا: علاقات TikTok بالصين تتطلب ردًا جادًا من الولايات المتحدة >>>
