2021-08-31-国际危机组织-过度杀戮_改革美国反恐战争的法律基础（英）_43页_892kb

Overkill: Reforming the Legal Basis for the U.S. War on Terror - Summary

Key Points

1. Evolving Legal Basis:

   • The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) has been repeatedly interpreted and expanded by executive branch lawyers to cover an ever-widening array of jihadist groups and locations, without significant new authorizations from Congress. This has led to a "bottomless well" of executive authority that enables unwarranted expansions of war powers.

2. Expansion of War Scope:

   • The U.S. war on terror now spans multiple countries and groups, including Al-Shabaab, ISIS affiliates, and associated forces in regions like Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, and Africa. This expansion was facilitated by legal theories extending the 2001 AUMF and the use of military force through Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF).

3. Critique of Current Framework:

   • The current AUMF lacks end dates or geographic boundaries, allowing for indefinite continuation without meaningful legislative scrutiny. This undermines Congressional oversight and the rule of law, enabling unilateral executive decisions on war engagements.

4. Notable Failures of Oversight:

   • Despite twenty years of continuous military operations, Congress has failed to pass any legislation to reform or revoke the 2001 AUMF. This institutional inertia has allowed executive branch lawyers to circumvent legislative intent through expansive legal interpretations.

5. Need for Reform:

   • Congress and the Biden administration should collaborate on a new statute that:
     • Explicitly defines combatant groups and countries in which force can be used.
     • Requires periodic reauthorization (e.g., every 2–3 years) to prevent autopilot continuation.
     • Establishes stricter rules for "associated forces," ensuring additional Congressional approval for expanded scope.
     • Enhances operational transparency by publicly disclosing target countries and jihadist organizations.

6. Biden Administration Actions:

   • The administration has suspended direct-action operations outside Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan for a policy review but continues limited military actions through Partnered Operations. The review is opaque and focuses narrowly on operational procedures rather than fundamental strategic reevaluation or legal reform.

7. Recommendations:

   • Executive Action: The Biden administration should proactively engage Congress to draft a new replacement statute.
   • Legislative Action: Congress should introduce groundwork legislation and insist on public disclosure of all military targets and their legal justification.
   • Process Change: Foster an interbranch, public debate on the necessity of continued military action versus alternative counter-terrorism measures.
   • Monitoring: Publicly release all extant executive legal opinions on military force interpretations.

By implementing these changes, the U.S. could achieve greater democratic accountability for ongoing foreign military engagements while mitigating risks of human rights violations associated with prolonged low-intensity warfare.