Lawyers for President Bush have concluded he can launch an attack on Iraq without new approval from Congress, in part because they say that permission remains in force from the 1991 resolution giving Mr Bush's father authority to wage war in the Persian Gulf, according to administration officials.
At the same time, some administration officials are arguing internally that the President should seek congressional backing anyway to build public support and to avoid souring congressional relations. If Mr Bush took that course, he still would be likely to assert that congressional consent was not legally necessary, the officials said.
Whatever the White House decides about its obligations under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, some House and Senate leaders appear determined to push resolutions of support for ousting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein when Congress returns after Labour Day because they consider the issue too grave for Congress to be sidestepped. Administration officials say privately that military strikes against Saddam's regime are virtually inevitable, although all the specifics have not been decided and action is not imminent.
President Bush has said repeatedly he will consult Congress before deciding how to proceed but has pointedly stopped short of saying he will request their approval. The difference between getting legislators' opinions, as opposed to their permission, could lead to a showdown this fall between Congress and the White House. "We don't want to be in the legal position of asking Congress to authorise the use of force when the president already has that full authority," said a senior administration official involved in setting the strategy. "We don't want, in getting a resolution, to have conceded that one was constitutionally necessary."
Prof Harold Hongju Koh, of international law at Yale Law School who was an assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration, called it short-sighted for the administration to try to avoid a full congressional debate about such an expensive and perilous operation.
"The constitutional structure tries to make war hard to get into, so the president has to show leadership and make his case to the elected representatives," Prof Koh said. "This argument may permit them to get us into the war, but it won't give them the political support at home and abroad to sustain that effort."
Whether to secure formal congressional support is among many questions confronting President Bush as he decides on a course of action toward Iraq. The President has strongly signalled his interest in toppling Saddam's regime, in large measure because of what administration officials describe as the country's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. But Mr Bush has not settled on the kind of military attack to pursue, nor has he mounted a full-blown effort to line up support from allies or the US public. Inside the White House, a full-throated debate over some of these issues has been underway for some time.
White House Counsel Mr Alberto Gonzales had his deputy, Mr Timothy Flanagan, develop the administration's legal position on questions surrounding a war with Iraq. That legal review is largely complete, officials said, with the consensus emerging that the president would not be legally bound to obtain approval for action against Iraq. In making this case, officials point first to the Constitution's designation of the president as commander-in-chief.
Administration officials also cite the 1991 Persian Gulf resolution authorising the use of military force against Iraq.
The resolution allowed the use of force to enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions, including demands that Iraq eliminate weapons of mass destruction and open the country to UN inspectors.
Administration officials said their position was bolstered by a September 14th resolution - passed 98 to 0 in the Senate and 420 to 1 in the House - endorsing a military response to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. That argument would depend on linking Iraq and al-Qaeda. - (Washington Post Service)