With the possible exception of fights over the national debt and Supreme Court nominations, there is no issue that arouses more partisan hypocrisy than the presidential use of military force. And globally, there is no topic that raises more hypocrisy than Israel. Put them together and you have a perfect storm of double standards.
Let's establish some relevant facts.
On October 7, Iran-backed Hamas launched a brutal attack on Israel, a close US ally, from Gaza. Israel counterattacked. President Biden repeatedly warned regimes in the region, specifically Iran, not to get involved. On October 24, Secretary of State Antony Blinken fiance The United States would respond to attacks against American forces, “quickly and decisively.”
Iran did not listen. Iran-backed militias attacked US bases in Iraq and Syria. In November, the Houthis, an Iranian proxy group that controls parts of Yemen, began launching rocket, drone and missile attacks against both Israel and international shipping in the Red Sea, with support from Iran.
The Houthis claimed they were simply attacking ships trading with Israel, but the attacks were indiscriminate, trapping ships with no ties to Israel and disrupting global trade. In December, a US warship shot down three drones in self defense.
Last week, after an intense criticism for not following his warnings, Biden ordered major attacks on Houthi assets in Yemen, with the help of Britain and other allies.
There is not space to catalog the full list of hypocrisies on display, but let's review the most obvious ones. One of the first things Biden did upon taking office was eliminate the Houthis from the official list of terrorist organizations. Now he says they are terrorists.
Many on the right who criticized Biden for dithering are now angry that he did not consult with Congress before retaliating. Many on the left, who raised no objections to the Obama-Biden administration's attacks on Libya in 2011, are angry at Biden for attacking a Hamas-allied group.
Globally, Israel's critics, who claim to be supporters of international law, are gathering toward Houthis cause. a song, It was heard in New York and London: “Yemen, Yemen, make us proud, turn another ship.” This crowd insists that its animosity toward Israel is driven by a passionate commitment to human rights, but it appears to have no notable objections to the atrocities of the Houthis, including the Houthis. restoration of slavery in Yemen.
Anti-Zionism, as we are constantly told, has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. The official motto of the Houthis is “God is great, death to the United States, death to Israel, curse to the Jews and victory to Islam.” You can tell me that “death to Israel” is merely anti-Zionist. But “curse the Jews”?
Perhaps because that hypocrisy is so difficult to defend, the substance of the opposition to the strikes, at home and abroad abroad“He is an American military man.”climbing” without required congressional approval (or parliamentary approval in the United Kingdom). Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) stated: “This is an unacceptable violation of the Constitution. Article 1 requires that military action be authorized by Congress.”
Throughout this crisis, “escalation” has been code for fighting back. Even in the immediate hours after the Hamas carnage, there were demands that Israel not “escalate” the situation by responding. As for the United States, many opponents of escalation had no problem with the Houthi “escalation” by indiscriminately attacking global shipping and threatening American interests.
This illustrates the weakness of the constitutional argument. In 1801, President Jefferson sent two-thirds of the United States Navy to wage war on the Barbary pirates. He did not formally notify Congress until December. As legal historian Robert Turner says grades“the Annals of Congress reveal no expression of concern that the president should have first obtained prior legislative sanction.”
The constitutionally dubious War Powers Act requires congressional authorization for the use of force, except in cases of “a national emergency created by an attack on the United States, its territories or possessions, or its Armed Forces.” Even if, for some tendentious reason, the Houthi attacks are not believed to qualify for the exception, it is worth remembering that they are only one facet of broader Iranian aggression… and its escalation.
I have no problem getting congressional buy-in, and Biden's critics are right: If he were willing to wait that long to respond to the Houthi attacks, he could have consulted with Congress. The problem with Biden is that he shouldn't have waited so long in the first place.
