It is commonplace to say that Hillary Clinton “voted for the war in Iraq”. She herself has apologized for her vote for the AUMF in Iraq, stating that it was a mistake. However, that has not had much of an impact on her critics. I decided I wanted to go back over the documents from that epoch, to see how reasonable it might be to cut her some slack for that vote.
The first document is a much-cited speech by GW Bush, given in Cincinnati in October of 2002. The full text is here. Some key extracts are:
By taking these steps, and by only taking these steps, the Iraqi regime has an opportunity to avoid conflict. Taking these steps would also change the nature of the Iraqi regime itself. America hopes the regime will make that choice. Unfortunately, at least so far, we have little reason to expect it. And that's why two administrations -- mine and President Clinton's -- have stated that regime change in Iraq is the only certain means of removing a great danger to our nation.
I hope this will not require military action, but it may. And military conflict could be difficult. An Iraqi regime faced with its own demise may attempt cruel and desperate measures. If Saddam Hussein orders such measures, his generals would be well advised to refuse those orders. If they do not refuse, they must understand that all war criminals will be pursued and punished. If we have to act, we will take every precaution that is possible. We will plan carefully; we will act with the full power of the United States military; we will act with allies at our side, and we will prevail.
[...]
Later this week, the United States Congress will vote on this matter. I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America's military, if it proves necessary, to enforce U.N. Security Council demands. Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable. The resolution will tell the United Nations, and all nations, that America speaks with one voice and is determined to make the demands of the civilized world mean something. Congress will also be sending a message to the dictator in Iraq: that his only chance -- his only choice is full compliance, and the time remaining for that choice is limited.
The second document is the text of the AUMF in Iraq itself. Read it here (pdf). Here is the key section:
The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to—
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
The final document is Hillary Clinton’s speech before the Senate, explaining her reasons for voting for the resolution. The full text can be found here. Some key extracts are:
President Bush's speech in Cincinnati and the changes in policy that have come forth since the Administration began broaching this issue some weeks ago have made my vote easier. Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible.
Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore, war less likely, and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause, I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go way with delay will oppose any UN resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.
[...]
So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.
There was a lot of information, misinformation, and propaganda floating around during that time. If you read the two full speeches and the resolution, you’ll see that a lot of false information was accepted as true. Almost no one dreamed, for example, that there would be no functional WMDs found in Iraq.
Based on the extracts, it is clear that Bush was inviting those outside his close circle of advisors to infer that he was only trying to use the threat of military force to cause Saddam to make a certain set of changes, and that once those changes were in progress, the threat of war would be withdrawn. The AUMF itself was phrased in a manner consistent with this, in that it did not order a war or invasion, but rather simply authorized the President to use force to defend the US against Iraq and to enforce UN resolutions. Here is what Congress could have passed, if they had been determined for us to bear arms against Iraq (adapted from the 1941 Declaration of War with Japan):
Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Republic of Iraq which has thus been thrust upon us is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Government of Iraq; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.
Instead, the AUMF was constructed to suggest that war was not imminent and that a peaceful resolution was still the hope of our government.
It is clear from Hillary Clinton’s speech that she believed President Bush about the purpose of the AUMF. The genuine hope of Senator Clinton, along with the other Democrats and probably many of the Republicans who voted in favor of the AUMF was that it would finally force Saddam to comply. The inspections would be completed, and everyone would be able to stand down.
As we all now know, President Bush lied in Cincinnati and elsewhere. Many of the supposed facts cited in the speech, in the AUMF, before the UN, and elsewhere, were barefaced lies or suppositions. In fact, within a few months—a time during which no WMDs had been found, in spite of greatly increased compliance by Saddam’s government—we invaded Iraq.
It is true that some members of Congress, whether due to great wisdom, to great mistrust of President Bush or of the UN, or to an unbending opposition to all war, did not vote for the AUMF. Clinton’s argument that bipartisan support for the AUMF would make it easier for the UN to act was unconvincing to them. After the fact, they now receive great credit for their vote, and of course those who did vote for it are now routinely blamed for the whole Iraq fiasco.
I believe that the evidence shows a more complicated picture than that. I put the blame for the Iraq fiasco squarely on the shoulders of the GW Bush administration: they were determined to do it. The invasion would still have happened even had the AUMF passed with only Republican votes. In fact, I believe that even had the AUMF failed, the invasion would still have taken place: Bush and his band of thugs would have ginned up something along the same lines as the Gleiwitz incident in 1939. In other words, the reality was that there is no way that the Democrats could have prevented Bush’s invasion of Iraq. Once that is accepted, then the last-ditch effort to give Bush the best possible hand in the UN becomes the only available option.
Bottom line: yes, I believe that the available documents do make it reasonable to cut Hillary Clinton and the other Democrats who voted yes some slack regarding their vote for the 2002 AUMF in Iraq.