A resolution was introduced in the House on Thursday that calls for an end to US involvement in the war in Yemen. The bill was introduced by Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and co-sponsored by seven other members of the House, including three Republicans, making the legislation a bipartisan rebuke to the war, similar to a measure President Trump vetoed in 2019.
The legislation invokes the 1973 War Powers Resolution and calls for the president “to remove United States Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities in the Republic of Yemen.”
Since 2015, the US has supported Saudi Arabia and its allies in a war against Yemen’s Houthis. While US troops are not fighting on the ground against the Houthis, the support the US military gives the coalition is covered under the War Powers Resolution.
Section 8(c) of the War Powers Resolution defines the introduction of US Armed Forces to include “the assignment of members of such armed forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities.”
The bill says that the “activities that the United States has conducted in support of the Saudi-led coalition fall within” the above definition. US support for the coalition includes training Saudi pilots, providing spare parts for airplanes, logistical assistance, and intelligence sharing. Experts agree, if the US cuts off support for the coalition, the war in Yemen would quickly come to an end.
The US-backed Saudi-led war has had a devastating impact on Yemen’s civilian population due to the coalition’s tactics and regular targeting of infrastructure.
“Unauthorized United States military participation in the Saudi-led war in Yemen has contributed to producing the world’s largest humanitarian crisis, with an estimated 20 million people dependent on food aid and two million children under five years of age requiring treatment for malnutrition,” the bill reads.
“Over five years of military conflict, 50 percent of Yemen’s healthcare infrastructure has closed, and Saudi-led bombings have destroyed over 70 hospitals. COVID-19 is now spreading largely undetected across Yemen’s immuno-compromised population.”
The bill is co-sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI), Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX), Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI), Rep. Francis Rooney (R-FL), and Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL).
President Trump has vetoed previous efforts to end the war in Yemen, including bills banning arms sales to Saudi Arabia, but the incoming administration could support the measure. Joe Biden has said he plans to end US support for the Saudi’s war in Yemen.
I am willing to have an open mind about the possibility of Biden signing this bill into law. If, by some miracle, Biden may actually be telling the truth that he would end the war in Yemen, it would be wonderful. I am curious, however, about the timing. Would the bill, if it is passed by both the House and the Senate, require a signature by Trump, or Biden?
Trump I believe the bill would stagnate at the end of the term, I somehow doubt though it would ever see the Senate as the blocker would refuse to allow a vote!
I find it repugnant that a President can block legislation that forbids him to wage a war, when the Power of War does not lay with him in the first instance. time to clear up the matter with a Constitutional change!
“time to clear up the matter with a Constitutional change!”
As you mentioned above, the Constitution already does not give the president the authority to unilaterally go to war. It does not require a Constitutional change, it requires simply that it be obeyed.
except as we saw Trump vetoed the matter, and of course the lilly livered Republican Senate leader refused to do anything about it. There was no wish by the Republicans to Impeach and the Republican Attorney General refused to bring charges against a sitting President, as he is a believer in the Presidential Supremacy doctrine! When there is wholesale actions to stop the Constitution being followed as has happened in other matters like Jim Crow laws, then it is Constitutional amendments that must take action, it should also include the Doctrine that a Sitting President can be prosecuted for criminal actions whilst in the Presidency!
” it should also include the Doctrine that a Sitting President can be prosecuted for criminal actions whilst in the Presidency!”
Amen.
As long as the war on terror AUMF exists, war will continue. That is the legal basis. The dems, with minimal gop support passed a house bill to do just that just 5 months ago. Naturally, the gop senate blocked it, tho trump would have surely vetoed it. Solution ? Keep militant republicans out of government.
Oddly, the US uses the terror AUMF to war on ISIS, which didn’t exist until years after it’s passage.
Likewise, time to close out the Iraq AUMF.
“Joe Biden has said … ”
More than any other politician I’ve ever had the unfortunate experience to hear flap his/her face, Biden exemplifies the old truism, “You can tell when a politician is lying: Just watch closely, and whenever you see his lips move … ”
Whenever he speaks to the tv cameras, I have to fight off gut-twisting cognitive dissonance and defend my brain against his decades-long practice of mind-rape.
Totally phony, utterly fake, the definition of gaslighting and betrayal, absolutely nothing he ever says has even the slightest connection to truth or human decency
My vote would go to Pelosi. Thankfully she sounds like she has a mouthful of rocks when she speaks so I can no longer understand her. McConnell is right behind her.
“the slightest connection to truth or human decency”
Exactly like what is presently in office. Cadaver Joe has better manners.
A little humor from our pusillanimous leaders is always welcome.