On June 14, 2017

Congress needs to reassert itself on use of force

By Lee H. Hamilton

The Trump administration, like its predecessors, has shown an apparent appetite for the use of force overseas. The “mother of all bombs” dropped on Syrian troops, saber-rattling toward North Korea, proposed deployments of U.S. forces in 10 or more countries — all of this suggests a growing comfort with the idea of putting our troops in dangerous places.

But the decision to send troops overseas requires clear eyes, hard questions and specific answers. If we are sending our military abroad, our objectives and exit strategies need to be nailed down. Are we engaging in nation- or empire-building? Do we risk being locked into protracted, unending conflicts? Are we inflating the dangers to our national security, as when we falsely asserted that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction?

And when we do intervene, are we avoiding or increasing the suffering of the local people whom we’re trying to help? No use of force should go forward without reciprocity — that is to say, capable, committed local leaders who fight corruption and try to provide good governance and protect the values we cherish and promote.

The use of force ultimately comes down to the president — or the president and his top advisors — making the decision. Too often this happens without sufficient dialogue, consultation, or robust debate beyond the White House. In particular, the people who have to do the fighting and bear the costs need to have a major voice in the use of force, and the best way to ensure that is with the involvement of the Congress, along with the media, courts, civil society, and even the international community.

There are obviously cases where the president needs flexibility. But if we’re to put our troops in harm’s way, he also needs independent advice and to answer tough questions. I don’t see any alternative but the strict, robust and sustained involvement of the Congress.

Deciding on the use of force is the most grave and consequential decision government makes. It is of such import that it should not be made by the president alone, but should be shared with the Congress. Presidents should not get broad authority to use force without limit on geography, objectives, or types of forces. The Founding Fathers had it right: the president is commander in chief, Congress has the authority to declare war. Power over the use of force needs to be shared.

Do you want to submit feedback to the editor?

Send Us An Email!

Related Posts

Audit needed in Killington?

May 28, 2025
Dear Editor, Someone should advocate for a town auditor given the constant rumors of ethical lapses and financial irregularities. Vito Rasenas, Killington

School spending

May 28, 2025
Dear Editor, All of this school spending, better referred to as overspending, is now coming home to roost. Had there been corresponding results in outcomes, there may have been different mindsets to be under discussion. Remember now, the voters went to the polls and spoke loudly and clearly on the education money issues that are…

Education reform: Trust Vermont values

May 28, 2025
By David F. Kelley Editor’s Note: David Kelley is a Vermont attorney. He lives in Greensboro and is a former chair of the Hazen Union School Board. He was part of the legal team that represented more than two dozen rural elementary school districts that appealed forced mergers under Act 46. The road to education…

Raising the bar for ethics in Killington

May 23, 2025
Dear Editor, As a candidate for the Killington Select Board, I’m running on a commitment to transparency, accountability, and steady leadership. I believe that trust in local government begins with clear standards and clear enforcement. Killington’s current conflict of interest policy, adopted in 2019, provides a useful foundation. However, it lacks the tools to ensure…