By Gene Healy - washingtonexaminer.com
Today I authorized the Armed Forces of the United States to begin a limited military action in Libya in support of an international effort to protect Libyan civilians. Thats how President Obama opened
Saturdays briefing announcing his decision to launch a war in North Africa.
In a famous literary spat Mary McCarthy said of Lillian Hellman every word she writes is a lie including and and the. In the sentence above Obama does somewhat better: and doesnt appear and the presidents on firm footing with his use of the definite article. But lets just say that several key phrases here are er ... debatable:
An international effort: We did not lead this Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters Saturday. But we are leading it. There are 11 U.S. warships in the region just one each from the French and the Brits.
The entire operation is under U.S. command and weve launched 110 Tomahawk missiles so far at more than $500000 a pop. As usual Uncle Sucker is doing the heavy lifting and the glory -- or more likely the blame -- will be ours.
Limited military action: Remember Gen. Colin Powells prudent guidelines for use of force which he outlined in 1991 during his stint as President George H.W. Bushs national security adviser?
Per Powell before risking American blood and treasure responsible leaders should identify at a minimum a vital national security interest a clear and achievable military mission and a sound exit strategy.
That was so 90s. Today we seem determined to keep proving Powells 2003 Pottery Barn rule: You break it you bought it.
Obama is adamant that we will not deploy any U.S. troops on the ground. Yet in a Senate hearing last week the Air Force chief of staff told Sen. John McCain R-Ariz. that A no-fly zone sir would not be sufficient to turn the tide. Indeed the result could be a bloodier more protracted civil war.
What then? How will that promote the presidents announced goal of protecting Libyan civilians? Has anyone thought this through?
I authorized: Most objectionable of course is Obamas decider-like insistence that he alone has the power to commit the nation to a nondefensive war. Under our Constitution this isnt one mans call -- and Obama a former constitutional law professor knows it.
On the campaign trail in late 2007 he told reporter Charlie Savage that the president lacks the constitutional power to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
Then-candidate Hillary Clinton said much the same: The Constitution requires Congress to authorize war.
It is a great principle in free government James Madison wrote in 1793 that those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things be proper or safe judges of whether a war ought to be commenced. The Constitution leaves that question to Congress.
Not that Congress is much interested. House Speaker John Boehner R-Ohio announced his support for the airstrikes but groused that Obama must do a better job of briefing members of Congress about the wars he starts.
Weve heard a lot of chatter recently about whether the president looked weak by hesitating to jump into the Libyan civil war. Do we have to consider him strong now that hes caved in to the hawks and gotten us entangled?
In fact it takes real strength of character for a president to exercise restraint -- to uphold his constitutional oath of office and refrain from waging war when war isnt necessary. By that standard Obama has just demonstrated that hes as weak as they come.
Gene Healy is a vice president at the Cato Institute and the author of The Cult of the Presidency.
