A Reluctant Go-Ahead

• Share

Never had Congress faced a challenge quite like it. In the Persian Gulf, 430,000 U.S. troops prepared to launch into battle against the Iraqi invaders of neighboring Kuwait. An American President had dispatched those troops to the Middle East, and the United Nations had authorized the use of force against the Iraqis unless they withdrew by Jan. 15. Yet Congress, the only branch of government with the constitutional power to declare war, had still not spoken, and the President was threatening to move with or without the lawmakers' approval. Last week, after the failure of the Geneva talks between Secretary of State James Baker and Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz, Congress took up the question of war and peace with a rare sense of urgency. Said Speaker of the House Thomas Foley: "This is a matter of enormous moment."

Once the speeches were made and the votes were counted, a majority of the lawmakers had lined up behind the President and the battle that everyone had | hoped to avoid seemed closer than ever. The House, by a vote of 250 to 183, and the Senate, 52 to 47, adopted resolutions that, in language approved by the White House, authorized the President to use military force against Iraq after Jan. 15. Before the vote, Senate Republican leader Bob Dole summarized the paradoxical hope of the resolutions' supporters: "This is the best chance for peace."

Though the measures also required that the President first certify to Congress that sanctions were not working, supporters said the resolutions were tantamount -- but not identical -- to a declaration of war. Both houses also defeated alternative resolutions, sponsored by the Democratic leadership, calling for a delay in military action until sanctions had been given more time to work. In the Senate it lost 53 to 46 with 10 Democrats but just one Republican, Iowa's Charles Grassley, abandoning the party line. The House vote was 250-183.

At a press conference afterward, George Bush called the outcome in Congress "a clear signal that Iraq cannot scorn the Jan. 15 deadline." The votes also represented a tactical victory for Bush and a stunning turnaround of congressional sentiment. When the newly elected 102nd Congress assembled in Washington on Jan. 3, few lawmakers believed a majority could be found in either chamber favoring a quick resort to force. What seemed to be shaping up instead was a tug-of-war with the President over Congress's constitutional right to declare war. For months Bush had avoided seeking congressional approval of his gulf policies, fearing that a narrow victory -- or worse, a defeat -- would further embolden Saddam Hussein. But when it became apparent that the returning lawmakers were determined to open an early debate over his Persian Gulf policies, Bush relented. By early last week the White House was circulating a resolution seeking congressional approval for the use of military force.

The failure of the Geneva talks -- and particularly the impression of Iraqi intransigence -- made a confrontation seem all but inevitable and swept congressional fence-sitters into the President's camp. "If war is more likely, more people want to be behind the President," explained Indiana Congressman Lee Hamilton, an opponent of the Bush trot toward war.