The Gore Doctrine on Iraq
By Jan Weaver with Mike Hersh, Oct 16, 2002
Today, October 16, 2002, Bush signed a "resolution" of little substance and dubious constitutional validity. Now, as before, Bush lacks legal authority to declare war on Iraq or any other nation. Article I of the US Constitution reserves that authority exclusively for the Congress, which cannot delegate that power to any other elected or unelected official. The US Supreme Court rejected the "line item veto" -- a much less momentous authority -- as an Unconstitutional transfer of power.
If Bush attacks Iraq, and thereby violates his promise to rely on the United Nations and other diplomatic means to neutralize the real but highly exaggerated threat from Saddam Hussein, Bush should be impeached for violating Article One of the Constitution. This Iraq resolution cannot change that; therefore, this Iraq resolution determines nothing.
Clearly then, this is not the end to the debate on Iraq. Rather it is just a pause to allow voters to save their lives, freedom and the republic itself from Bush's unending arrogation of authority. When the debate resumes, as Jan Weaver writes, Congress should adopt the Gore Doctrine on Iraq as outlined in Gore's speech of 23 September 2002 at the Commonwealth Club instead of the Bush Doctrine:
The U.S. must focus on neutralizing Osama bin Laden's terrorist network first which it has not yet done. The War on Terrorism must be our first priority. An attack on Iraq will damage America's ability to keep its allies which are needed to fight the Al Qaeda network.
The Bush administration's insistence on a war resolution now leads many to question if this war is being used for political reasons. The first Gulf War debate purposely took place after the mid-term elections.
We ought to be rebuilding Afghanistan which we have already abandoned. Taliban and Al Qaeda forces are already moving back into the country while we turn our attention to Iraq. We are allowing Afghanistan to return to the same conditions that allowed the Taliban to rule there after the Soviets withdrew in the 1980s. Why are we turning away from pursuing the terrorists who killed 3000 Americans? Could it be because we don't know where they are, and we do know where Saddam Hussein is?
President Bush has squandered all the good will and sympathy which the U.S. was given by the world after the September 11 terrorist attacks by shifting to calls for an attack on Iraq. The anger directed against Al Qaeda by the world is now directed toward the U.S.
The Bush administration claims to have the right to make a pre-emptive strike on Iraq even though there is no evidence of an imminent threat from Iraq. This policy is wrong. Under this new policy there is no law but the "discretion of the President of the U.S. This doctrine "destroys the goal of a world in which states consider themselves subject to law, particularly in the matter of standards for the use of violence against each other.
America must adhere to its mission in the world and follow moral laws codified in the form of international law. We helped found the United Nations for collective security and defense after World War II and must continue to support it.
Another problem with Bush's policy of pre-emptive strikes against Iraq is that the administration may not stop with Iraq but may strike Syria, Libya, North Korea, Iran, etc. If Congress approves Bush's Iraq resolution, it is "simultaneously creating the precedent for pre-emptive action anywhere anytime this or any future president so decides.
Mr. Gore concluded, "It is important to note the consequences of an emerging national strategy that not only celebrates American strengths but appears to be glorifying the notion of dominance. If what America represents to the world is leadership in a commonwealth of equals, then our friends are legion; if what we represent to the world is empire, then it is our enemies who will be legion." We must maintain our dedication to the rule of law. We must not abandon what America stands for at its best. (Emphasis added.)
The Bush Doctrine makes no sense and will not work. Let's come together and prove there is a better way. Mr. Gore's position on Iraq is a reasonable one which will achieve all our objectives without undermining our war on terror. Most Americans agree Al Queda represents the real and present danger. Urge your Representative and Senators to adhere to this policy. Feel free to use part or all of this summary when contacting them.
Congress should adopt Al Gore's Doctrine on Iraq instead of Bush's policy. (see Transcript of Mr. Gore's speech: http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/09.25A.gore.sf.p.htm.) To ensure that happens, let's get out there and elect a better Congress -- a Democratic House and a more strongly Democratic Senate -- as a check and balance on Bush's recklessness, lack of legitimacy and incompetence.
While we're at it, let's tell the man the American people elected in 2000 that we appreciate his courage. Al Gore's Leadership '02 Committee (http://www.leadership02.com) set up a line to help you let Al Gore know how you feel about his courageous speech that refuting G.W. Bush's reckless and unreasonable foreign policy. Call 703-875-0667 and leave a message or send e-mail to: connectandelect@leadership02.comto let them know how you feel. Use the links below to contact Congress and the White House.
We rely on your support. Send whatever you can to keep us going.
Use these links to voice your views.
© Copyright 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 by MikeHersh.com and identified authors. MikeHersh.com invites you to broadcast any material at this site, provided you identify the source as MikeHersh.com. All print, Internet, email and other summaries, excerpts or other written reproductions must include this blurb and a link to http://www.MikeHersh.com.