A rare point of agreement has emerged among both progressives and hardline conservatives: President Joe Biden’s decision to strike the Houthis in Yemen, who are backed by Iran, is reviving the long-simmering congressional dispute over war powers.
Military hawks and many conservatives on Capitol Hill lauded the strikes, with many claiming they were long overdue. However, a large portion of the political spectrum, on both sides of the aisle, swiftly criticised the Biden administration for not requesting a clear approval from Congress. They said it was necessary because of the War Powers Act. For the better part of two decades, those groups have worked together to limit the global reach of militaries and their massive war machines.
“Their argument is that the attack on the ships were an attack on the United States,” stated Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), spokesperson for the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “There ought to have been time to visit Congress if there is time to establish an international coalition.”
Additionally, she mentioned in her brief interview that while she “understands the challenge of a Congress that is so divided,” she believes that the necessity of obtaining authorization cannot be ignored.
Legislators may attempt to halt additional military action by passing a bill, but what happens next is uncertain, particularly because party leaders on both sides supported Biden’s decision to fight the Houthis following months of attacks on Red Sea shipping. Given the current intraparty strife around Biden’s backing for Israel, Democratic disapproval of the bombings in Yemen is even worse news for Biden as he approaches an election year.
According to the United Nations Charter, “the inherent right of individual and collective self-defense” was used by the coalition of nations that launched the strikes. Since the Houthis constitute an urgent threat, experts agree that he was within his rights to act without a formal proclamation from Congress.
Representative Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) expressed his concern that the strikes have heightened progressive anxieties of a potential expansion of the Middle East conflict beyond the current situation involving Israel and Hamas.
[Biden] must still receive our blessing, though. “So that hasn’t happened yet, so that’s the problem,” he explained during an interview. “It is uncertain whether the United States will take further measures in relation to the Houthis, but we certainly wish to convey a message.”
But Pocan refrained from suggesting that Congress should attempt to halt the president from taking any additional action.
“Using words like rebuke at this age is just inappropriate,” Pocan stated. “I believe our action was to issue a strongly cautionary statement, warning against delving too deeply into this course of action.”
While the House had already decided to end funding for the war in Yemen, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in an interview that “we’ll see if it materialises” in light of the recent strikes.
At this moment, it appears improbable. Most members of Biden’s party and the GOP leadership have not yet voiced any opposition. In reaction to the strikes by the Houthis, Democrats on Capitol Hill who prioritise national security were fast to defend Biden’s choice.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Ben Cardin (D-Md.) praised Biden’s “precise action against these increasingly dangerous provocations” and expressed his support for the president’s efforts to prevent the conflict from spreading in the region. He also expressed his expectation of ongoing consultations with the administration regarding the decision, as is required by law.
The attacks were characterised as “necessary and proportional” by Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.), who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Legislators have been trying to rescind the war powers that Congress gave the president in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and the fight over these authorizations has heated up in recent years. Notably, Biden has supported attempts to rewrite broad war powers; but, lawmakers have differed on specifics, such as the circumstances in which the president should retain the power to initiate strikes.
Although they never became law, in 2021 the House voted on bipartisan lines to rescind authorizations that were twenty years old. Last year, the Senate passed a repeal of the authorizations for military action in Iraq passed by Congress in 2002 and 1991, respectively, however the House has not yet taken any action on the matter.
Recent attempts to modify existing war powers have been spearheaded by Mike McCaul (R-Texas), who chairs the House’s foreign affairs committee. He declared his intention to propose a resolution authorising Biden to attack Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies in the Middle East following Hamas’ assault on Israel.
On Friday, McCaul reiterated claims that the Houthis are working in tandem with Iran and further asserted that Biden possesses the constitutional power to take further action, like attacking Iranian ships in self-defense.
Regarding the administration’s decision to respond, McCaul expressed his admiration on Fox News. “The moment has come. Within that region, there is a singular understanding. Power and force are what it is.
Even if there’s some agreement that war powers should be reduced, a bigger bipartisan group has been hesitant to make any changes. Republican Andy Biggs of Arizona and Democrat Ro Khanna of California co-founded the War Powers Caucus; Biggs has stated that the group faces “an uphill battle” in its fight against moderates and hawks.
“You’ve got extremists on the other side of the aisle… in addition to a large number of intermediaries who are completely disinterested, Biggs said in an interview.