Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1046082265-scaled

Despite chicken littles, Senate votes to repeal war authorizations

The House is expected to follow suit, but the 2001 AUMF for the “global war on terror” remains in effect.

Middle East

The Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to repeal the congressional authorizations for the use of force (AUMFs) in Iraq, marking a major milestone in the years-long battle to rein in presidential war powers.

“Passing this bill is an important step to prevent any president from using these authorizations as a blank check to send servicemembers into harm’s way,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), a sponsor of the bill and long-time backer of repealing the 1991 and 2002 AUMFs, which authorized the first and second Gulf Wars, respectively.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told AP News that the repeal represents “a necessary step to putting these bitter conflicts squarely behind us.” 

With Senate approval, experts say the repeal will almost certainly become law this year. The House is widely expected to pass a corresponding bill in the coming months, and President Joe Biden has promised to sign a repeal if it reaches his desk.

The bill passed in a 66-30 vote, with 18 Republicans joining their Democratic colleagues in voting for the repeal. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) applauded the bill’s passage in a statement Wednesday.

“War is sometimes necessary, but going to war should not be the decision of one person,” Paul wrote on Twitter. “The power to declare war belongs to the American people and their representatives.”

Opponents of the repeal alleged that it would hamper U.S. efforts to counter Iranian influence in Iraq. But New York Times reporter Aaron Blake noted yesterday that such arguments are evidence of “mission creep” given that the AUMF specifically authorizes a response to threats emanating from Iraq — not its neighbors in Iran.

“[I]t’s now Congress’s default approach to outsource to the executive branch the difficult decisions involved in its constitutional war powers,” Blake wrote.

War powers advocates cheered the bill’s passage as a major step toward reasserting lawmakers’ role in decisions about foreign military interventions. 

“Today’s vote begins the process of accountability the war deserved long ago,” Eric Eikenberry of Win Without War wrote in a statement.

Concerned Veterans for America called the vote a "strong first step" in turning the page on endless wars in the Middle East. "Repealing these AUMFs also removes the possibility that they might be abused in the future to take America to war again without congressional approval," said CVA Executive Director Russ Duerstine.

Notably, the Senate voted 86-9 to shoot down an amendment put forth by Sen. Paul that would have also repealed the 2001 AUMF, passed just days after the September 11 attacks. Critics say that authorization is overly vague and easily abused by the executive branch. Recent administrations have cited it to justify America’s continued military presence in Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and numerous other countries.


Photo: Orhan Cam via shutterstock.com
Middle East
Rand Paul Donald Trump
Top photo credit: Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (Shutterstock/Mark Reinstein) and President Trump (White House/Molly Riley)

Rand Paul to Trump: Don't 'abandon' MAGA over Maduro regime change

Washington Politics

Sen. Rand Paul said on Friday that “all hell could break loose” within Donald Trump’s MAGA coalition if the president involves the U.S. further in Ukraine, and added that his supporters who voted for him after 20 years of regime change wars would "feel abandoned" if he went to war and tried to topple Nicolas Maduro, too.

President Trump has been getting criticism from some of his supporters for vowing to release the files of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and then reneging on that promise. Paul said that the Epstein heat Trump is getting from MAGA will be nothing compared to if he refuses to live up to his “America First” foreign policy promises.

keep readingShow less
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.