Findings

Congress finds the following: (1)Contrary to the Weinberger Doctrine, which states that the United States should use military force only if it is in the vital national interest of the United States and only with clearly defined political and military goals, the United States went to war against Iraq in March 2003 without clearly defined political and military goals. (2)Contrary to the Powell Doctrine, which states that if the United States is to use military force it should be overwhelming military force, the United States went to war against Iraq without the troop levels or strategy needed to secure a post-invasion Iraq. (3)Ignoring the advice of United States military leaders and experts, the President sent United States troops into war against Iraq without sufficient levels needed for post-conflict success and without sufficient armor and related equipment, and has used the United States military in such a way that today it is straining under the weight of the war. (4)The justifications cited by the President for using military force against Iraq—that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and Iraq had links to al Qaeda—have not, to date, been proven correct. (5)On May 1, 2003, the President announced the end of major combat operations in Iraq, thus starting an entirely new phase—the occupation of Iraq. (6)The justifications cited by the President for using military force against Iraq have shifted dramatically since Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243), from combating the threat that Saddam Hussein allegedly posed to the United States, to establishing an Iraqi democracy, and to a larger vision of Middle Eastern democracy. (7)Public Law 107–243 authorized the President to use force to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq. (8)Currently, United States troops are not facing a military force or direct threat to the United States in Iraq, rather they are facing both a Sunni insurgency against the United States occupation of Iraq and a violent, long-standing struggle between Sunni and Shia Islam on the streets of Baghdad—neither of which pose a continuing threat to the United States. (9)Public Law 107–243 clearly reflected the President’s policies of preemption and unilateralism that have left the United States with an open-ended and ill-defined occupation of a country in the middle of a civil war. (10)The President’s policies of preemption and unilateralism that led the United States into Iraq now leave the United States with no clear exit strategy from Iraq. (11)The escalation of the use of military force in Iraq continues the retreat from long-held United States policies of diplomacy, deterrence, and containment.

Repeal of Public Law 107–243

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243) is hereby repealed.

Sense of Congress

It is the sense of Congress that— (1)Congress should vote on a new authorization for use of force resolution that— (A)reflects the current situation in Iraq; (B)abandons the Bush Doctrine of preemption and unilateralism; and (C)realigns United States policy with its long-held engagement priorities of diplomacy, deterrence, and containment; (2)the United States should establish a quick-reaction United States military force with an over-the-horizon presence in the region to respond as needed to imminent security threats in the Middle East; (3)the United States should enhance and intensify diplomatic relations that will provide the proper external environment and support for the difficult internal steps that the Government of Iraq should take to promote national reconciliation; (4)the United States should increase efforts to engage all neighboring countries and the League of Arab States in promoting stability in Iraq; (5)the United States should maintain its commitment to continue to provide humanitarian and reconstruction assistance in Iraq; (6)the United States should redirect diplomatic, economic, and military support to Afghanistan, where the Taliban continues to destabilize the region; and (7)the United States should aggressively pursue Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations that continue to pose an imminent threat to the United States.