The constitution of the United States provides balance war powers for the legislative and the executive branches of the government. During the war, the constitution provides the authority for the president to be the commander-in-chief or the highest governing individual. On the other hand, the authority to declare war is given by the constitution to the congress (Findley & Fraser, 2008). The division of powers according to constitution is considered harmonious until concerns and issues arose after the Vietnam War (Library of Congress, 2015).
The congress has been concerned regarding the deployment of United States troops in hostile areas in the international grounds without their declaration of war. In addition, the lack of legal procedures for the president in introducing military forces to international grounds became the major worry of the congress since it could lead to another international conflict (Turner, 2005).
During the 1970s, there has been an issue regarding President Nixon’s bombing of Cambodia without the declaration of war from the Congress. In addition, past presidents have been sending troops to other countries. Due to these issues, the congress enacted the War Powers Resolution or the “War Powers Act of 1973”. The main objective of the law was to check and limit the war powers of the president specially the authority to send United States troops in international grounds during hostile conditions (Findley & Fraser, 2008).
The resolution states that the president of the United States should only send United States troops in international grounds only when the congress declared that the nation is in the state of war. The resolution was accepted by the congress and the senate in 1973 although President Nixon vetoed the resolution. However, the law was after the veto was overridden by more than two-thirds vote in the congress (Findley & Fraser, 2008).
In analyzing the intent and objectives of the War Powers Act of 1973, it could be recognized that this resolution could both affect national security in a good and bad way. The resolution could affect national security positively by avoiding minimal international conflicts due to the engagement or involvement of the military troops from the United States. Sending of troops from the United States means the hostile condition in the international grounds could affect the interest of the state.
However, the nation should be warned first before sending the military troops in order for the country to be prepared in case this involvement could result to an international conflict or war. The resolution provides a means or opportunities to check, assess and analyze the involvement of the nation in potential international conflict (Library of Congress, 2015). If possible, wars could be avoided with the help of the resolution from the congress.
The War Powers Act of 1973 could also affect the national security negatively. It limits the power of the nation to retaliate against military attacks of enemies to the United States as well as its interests since it requires a lengthy process from the congress. The resolution could also amplify the conflict between the war powers of the legislative and the executive branch of the government. Both of the legislative and the executive branches of the government are given war powers by the constitution of the Unite States. The resolution is considered by other experts as unconstitutional since it could reduce the powers of the president and greatly increase the authority of the congress with regards to war events.
Although it affect the national security in both ways, it is also safe to assume that it is a necessary policy which could help the nation avoids conflicts from international communities. It is a necessary response to the growing presidential powers with regards to war events or hostile conditions in international grounds. One of the main reasons is that the War Resolution of 1973 provides a systematic process for engaging the nation’s military troops in international grounds. Before the resolution was enacted, the previous presidents have no barriers or limitations in sending military troops to other nations even if the country is not in the state of war (Turner, 2005). The resolution also provides an opportunity for the government in checking and assessing the war power balance between the executive and the legislative body.
Another reason why the War Powers Act of 1973 is necessary is that it could not generally harm the power of the president. The president is still the chief-of-command during the war events but the congress used the resolution in order for the nation to have time for assessment regarding the country’s national safety and interests in the war. In addition, the resolution does not generally provide larger authority for the congress since congressional vote for majority is still implemented.
The War Powers Act of 1973 is considered a controversial policy since most of the succeeding presidents do not agree to this policy. In addition, this resolution is considered both a benefit and harm for the national security. In analyzing the War Powers Act of 1973, it could be recognized that it could help the nation to avoid conflicts from international communities. Lastly, the resolution provides a more balanced way of assessing and evaluating the war powers of the both branches of the government.
References
Findley, P., & Fraser, D. (2008). The battle over war powers. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-findley22-2008sep22-story.html.
Library of Congress. (2015). War Powers. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/law/help/war-powers.php.
Turner, R. (2005). The War Powers Resolution: An Unnecessary, Unconstitutional Source of "Friendly Fire" in the War Against International Terrorism?. The Federalist Society. Retrieved from http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/detail/the-war-powers-resolution-an-unnecessary-unconstitutional-source-of-friendly-fire-in-the-war-against-international-terrorism.
