Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Two Veterans Groups, Left and Right, Join Forces Against the Forever Wars

Dan Caldwell, left, the executive director of Concerned Veterans for America, and Jon Soltz, the chairman of VoteVets. The two groups are advocating Congress to reassert power over war.Credit...Justin T. Gellerson for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The relationship began in the most Washington way ever: on the set of C-Span.

Will Fischer, then the director of government relations for VoteVets, the liberal political action committee, was tapped to face off with Dan Caldwell, the executive director of the conservative Concerned Veterans for America. It was a continuation of a yearslong and contentious dialogue over veterans issues, including disputes over health care, which candidates care more about matters important to veterans, as well as their dueling views on the nefarious nature of the Republican or Democratic parties.

But then the two found an unanticipated policy bridge, and have now gone on to work together to persuade Congress to finally revoke authorizations of military force passed after Sept. 11, 2001, which both believe have been bent and stretched to justify wars far beyond Congress’s intentions nearly two decades ago.

“I honestly did go into the interview expecting a combative conversation,” Mr. Caldwell said, “but when we started talking about foreign policy, it was clear there were some areas of alignment especially on war powers. The wheels started turning in my head, and we came together and decided to pursue some of these shared goals.”

Both groups — who are wolf to the other’s sheepdog on nearly every other policy issue — intend to share a legislative agenda this year that presses for changes to war authorization measures and an end to the United States’ presence in Afghanistan. They plan to more strongly tie their substantial financial and news media support in 2020 to candidates’ views on foreign policy.

“There are only two vets groups in America that spend money on policies like this,” said Jon Soltz, chairman of VoteVets. “We bring a real cinder block to this house that is going to be built around this issue.”

Congress has been debating how to deal with its role in the use of military force for nearly a decade. Lawmakers voted in 2001 to authorize force in response to the Sept. 11 attacks and, in 2002, for the invasion of Iraq. But under three presidents, the executive branch increasingly stretched that authority to justify combat action far from Afghanistan and Iraq.

Many lawmakers believe that both authorizations are being extended well beyond their intent and now usurp the role of Congress under the Constitution to decide when the country will go to war. Yet both political parties have been unable to agree on how much to curtail the executive branch and have been reluctant to move forward to end the agreements.

Lawmakers in each party have already demonstrated an increasing desire to curb Mr. Trump’s decisions in Syria, Yemen and beyond. The large increase of veterans in the House, matched with the firepower behind these two organizations on both ends of the political spectrum, means that lawmakers who have long pushed for changes to the authorizations believe their time has come.

“I think with the Democrats now in control of the House it is much more likely we will have focused attention on pulling congressional powers away from the White House into the Congress,” said Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, who repeatedly pushed to repeal and replace the Sept. 11 authorization.

He has written a proposal with Senator Todd Young, Republican of Indiana, that would revoke a different, lingering war authorization from the 1991 Persian Gulf war along with the 2002 Iraq war law. “We see an increasing uneasiness with the way a president thinks he can go to war without us,” he said.

Representative Max Rose, a moderate Democrat from New York who served in the Army in Afghanistan, is already a co-sponsor of a longstanding measure written by Representative Barbara Lee, Democrat of California, that would repeal the current authorization for Iraq.

Image
Two veterans organizations with opposite political views are collectively pressing for changes to war authorization measures and an end to the American presence in Afghanistan, like this deployment in Helmand Province.Credit...Andrew Renneisen/Getty Images

“We’ve given presidents of both parties too much authority to go anywhere at any time without oversight or approval,” Mr. Rose said. “I refuse to commit another generation’s worth of blood and treasure to intractable conflicts for which we have neither a clear national security interest nor a viable exit strategy.”

Several other veterans said they also supported revisiting the issue.

Representative Daniel Crenshaw, Republican of Texas, using the abbreviation for the authorization for the use of military force, said that Congress should be receptive to modifying such measures. “We should always be open to updating A.U.M.F.s,” he said. “The question will be: What is the best way to do that without disrupting the ongoing operations around the globe that serve our national security interest?”

The subjects of war powers and congressional authority have long made strange bedfellows. Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, is now aligned with Senator Tom Udall, Democrat of New Mexico, to wind down the 17-year military campaign in Afghanistan. “I have talked to the president about 20 times about this,” Mr. Paul said, noting that Mr. Trump has been publicly opposed to forever wars. “Part of the problem is the people around him.”

But these issues have rarely had the clout of political groups like VoteVets — which played an instrumental role in pushing lawmakers to turn on the war in Iraq and spent $17 million on candidates in the last election cycle — and the Concerned Veterans for America, which has the ear of the Trump administration on veteran affairs and substantial backing by the billionaire Charles G. Koch, who has given millions to political races and policy fights.

“The Koch network has invested substantially in advancing their foreign policy vision over the past few years,” Mr. Caldwell said, adding of his group: “When we engage on an issue, we do it in a way where we can make the most impact. Also, one thing we will be weighing more heavily when considering supporting candidates is their alignment with us on foreign policy.”

Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, has been slowly seeking to build consensus among Democrats around the contentious issue by pushing measures like the one to end American military aid to Saudi Arabia.

“Congress has constitutional authority over war powers, but for too long, we’ve ceded that responsibility to the executive branch,” he said. “I’m working to reclaim our prerogatives and increase transparency about American military involvement.”

Public support for Congress asserting its authority in war powers would be “very meaningful to members,” said one Democratic aide, when told of the alliance between the two veterans organizations.

Senator Jim Risch, Republican of Idaho and the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been an ally of the Trump administration, which has opposed new authorization measures.

But he said that may come before his committee anyway. “We may get there,” he said, calling war authorization “one of the most interesting yet vexing issues” he has seen in his entire public service career. “I would love someone to come up with a silver bullet,” he said.

In the meantime, the two veterans organizations, which took opposite sides in expensive and bruising Senate battles last year, will continue to try to destroy each other outside these matters.

“We might disagree on 99 percent of things,” Mr. Soltz said, “but if we agree to get that one perfect thing done, we have credibility because of our work on those other issues.”

A version of this article appears in print on  , Section A, Page 24 of the New York edition with the headline: Two Veterans Groups Find Common Ground in Opposing Forever Wars. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT