Editorial: Congress must have say on Iraq

Thursday, Aug. 29, 2002 | 9 a.m.

The White House, after weeks of criticism that it has not made a persuasive case to launch a military attack against Iraq, appears to be getting the message. On Monday Vice President Dick Cheney, in a speech to war veterans, laid out what to date has been the administration's most comprehensive reasoning for why Saddam Hussein is such a menace and should be removed from power.

It appears that it was only after a drumbeat of criticism by high-profile Republicans, both in and out of government, that President Bush decided it was time to respond at length to critics of the administration's Iraq policy. It's encouraging that the White House has at least started on a campaign to persuade the public about the dangers posed by Saddam, especially his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. But Bush also needs to level with Congress and the American people as to just how expansive a military operation would be entailed to get rid of Saddam.

A go-it-alone stubbornness has been an unfortunate hallmark of this administration, especially on foreign policy, and it appears that includes the White House's thinking on Iraq. For some time now the president has been publicly calling for a regime change in Iraq, but he hasn't been forthcoming with detailed reasons why our nation should take the unprecedented step of initiating a war with a country that hasn't attacked us.

It also is disturbing that if the Bush administration decides to attack Iraq, it still hasn't committed to seek Congress' approval first through a formal vote. The Washington Post reported over the weekend that the president's legal advisers have told him that he doesn't need Congress' consent for an attack against Iraq, that permission remains intact from the 1991 resolution that Bush's father used to wage war in the Persian Gulf. But the administration shouldn't be carrying out a war against a country based on a legal technicality. That wouldn't be worthy of our nation's democracy. Although Bush advisers say the president ultimately may try to get some sort of approval from Congress, he may not seek a formal vote. But anything less than a recorded vote could be viewed as meaningless.

On Wednesday Sen. John Warner, the senior-ranking Republican on the Armed Service Committee, said Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld should testify before that committee to make the case for invading Iraq. There are many questions that require answers. Congress and the American people need to know, for example, just which nations will support a military attack, and whether anything like the Desert Storm coalition will be possible. Going it alone means we're not tied down by allies' concerns and that gives us a freer hand, but it also can increase the price tag and, more importantly, the risks for success. If Saddam is toppled, just who might replace him, and how long are we willing to stay in Iraq to make sure a stable regime is in place?

Bush shouldn't view the prospect of getting Congress' permission as some inconvenience. As Harold Hongju Koh, a professor of international law at Yale Law School who previously was an assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration, noted in an interview with The Washington Post: "The constitutional structure tries to make war hard to get into, so the president has to show leadership and make his case to the elected representatives."

The public, and its representatives in Congress, need to be involved in this decision. And once Congress enters the debate, members should ensure that it isn't partisan, and that the decision is based on what's in the best interests of the United States. The president should show faith in Congress to make the right call. Conducting a war without the backing of the public and Congress could be disastrous -- one of the Vietnam War's terrible lessons. We believe a case can be made for toppling Saddam and the threat he poses to the Middle East and to the United States. It's now up to the president to make that case persuasively and earn the consent of Congress. If he does so, Congress almost certainly will grant his request.