The White House said today that President Reagan would comply with the War Powers Resolution if U.S. troops are sent to Lebanon to assist in the withdrawal of Palestine Liberation Organization forces from west Beirut.
The resolution, passed by Congress in November, 1973 over President Nixon’s veto, requires the President to consult with Congress before sending American military forces abroad to any area where hostilities are underway or likely to develop. It would be the legal basis for the deployment of American troops in Lebanon and the duration of their stay there.
Reagan said in Los Angeles yesterday that he had “agreed in principle to contribute a small contingent” of U.S. troops as part of a multinational force for “temporary peacekeeping” in Beirut provided agreement was reached by all parties concerned in the crisis there. The parties are Lebanon, Israel, Syria and the PLO. Reagan noted that he was responding to a request relayed to him by his special envoy for the Lebanese crisis, Philip Habib.
Habib has been in Beirut for nearly a month attempting to negotiate a settlement that would ensure the departure of the PLO from Lebanon, the withdrawal of Israeli forces and the establishment of a strong, independent Lebanese government.
Reagan, saying yesterday that “The situation is too sensitive for detailed discussion, ” disclosed that “This weekend in discussions with Mr. Habib, the government of Lebanon told us that a multi-national force might be essential for a temporary peacekeeping in Beirut and informally proposed that the United States consider making a contribution to that force.”
Reagan stressed that the Lebanese government “has not made a formal proposal but I have agreed in principle to contribute a small contingent of U.S. personnel subject to certain conditions.” He did not say what those conditions are.
This morning, White House deputy press secretary Larry Speakes spelled out the War Powers Resolution which was adopted originally in reaction to the war in Viet Nam. The law states that the President “In every possible instance shall consult with Congress before into ducing United States, armed forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances.”
When there is no declaration of war, the President also must send a written report to Congress within 48 hours of the dispatch of troops or after the number of troops already in a country is substantially enlarged.
The law requires the President to end the use of American forces after 60 days unless Congress has extended the period. Congress has the right, by vote of the Senate and House, to order the President to withdraw the troops if they are engaged in hostilities not related to a declaration of war or not otherwise specifically authorized by Congress.
Administration officials said today with respect to the situation in Lebanon that there would have to be a commitment from all parties to the conflict to a settlement before the President would agree to send U.S. troops to Beirut. Vice President George Bush said in San Francisco today that he did not believe American troops would be sent to Lebanon unless all parties involved agreed such a step was essential to establishing and guaranteeing peace in the area.
Speakes told reporters today that if U.S. troops were sent to Lebanon they would be equipped for combat. The last time American troops were involved in Lebanon was in 1958 when President Eisenhower ordered U.S. marines to land on the beaches near Beirut in a show of support for the government of the then President of Lebanon, Camille Chamoun. Chamoun had requested American aid against what he feared was an imminent coup masterminded by President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt who was believed to be acting under the influence of the Soviet Union.
CAUTIOUS REACTION FROM CONGRESS
Reagan’s announcement that he had agreed in principle to send an American military contingent to Lebanon drew a mixed, largely cautionary reaction from Congress. Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker (R. Tenn.) said he wanted more details before deciding on the matter. “I have previously expressed my opposition to the use of American troops in Lebanon, and I’ve expressed that directly to the President,” Baker said.
Sen. Charles Percy (R. III.) chairman of the. Foreign Relations Committee, said “The action should not be taken unless requested by the Lebanese government with the consent of Israel and the Palestinians … and it should be for a limited time such as 30 days.” Percy added that the plan “would be considered if this is the only way” to get the PLO out of Beirut and avoid further bloodshed.
Rep. Clement Zablocki (D. Wisc), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee was “less than satisfied by reports that while the U.S. troops are supposed to be part of a multinational force, the other participants are not yet known.” He observed: “Should this deployment take place, it is imperative that American troops not become involved in hostilities, not one American life must be lost, not one American soldier must be wounded.”
Senate Minority Whip Alan Cranston (D. Calif.) acknowledged that the dispatch of U.S. forces to. Lebanon would be a delicate and possibly dangerous mission but he hoped it might result in peace and stability in the region. Cranston, a strong backer of Israel, said: “Just as we have been urging the Israelis and Arabs to take risks for peace, we too must shoulder our share of the risk.”
Sen. Larry Pressler (R. S.D.) said he would support the participation of U.S. forces in Lebanon if they were part of an international force and restricted to the Beitut area. “This force should not be viewed as a substitute for United Nations forces in Lebanon,” he said.
Sen. Charles Mathias (R.Md.) urged that Congress and the Administration carefully weigh the many potential dangers before making a commitment. He also said the U.S. should use the opportunity to reach a new understanding with Israel on the future use of American-supplied weapons and for greater Israeli flexibility in the autonomy negotiations.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
