The End of the Perpetual War - that the state of perpetual warfare that began nearly 12 years ago is unsustainable for a democracy and must come to an end in the not-too-distant future.

[rst9]

EDITORIAL
The End of the Perpetual War
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Published: May 23, 2013 427 Comments
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/opinion/obama-vows-to-end-of-the-perpetual-war.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130524&_r=0

President Obama’s speech on Thursday was the most important statement
on counterterrorism policy since the 2001 attacks, a momentous turning
point in post-9/11 America. For the first time, a president stated
clearly and unequivocally that the state of perpetual warfare that
began nearly 12 years ago is unsustainable for a democracy and must
come to an end in the not-too-distant future.

“Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must
continue,” Mr. Obama said in the speech at the National Defense
University. “But this war, like all wars, must end. That’s what
history advises. It’s what our democracy demands.”

As frustratingly late as it was — much of what Mr. Obama said should
have been said years ago — there is no underestimating the importance
of that statement. Mr. Obama and his predecessor, President George W.
Bush, used the state of war that began with the authorization to
invade Afghanistan and go after Al Qaeda and others who planned the
Sept. 11 attacks to justify extraordinary acts like indefinite
detention without charges and the targeted killing of terrorist
suspects.

While there are some, particularly the more hawkish Congressional
Republicans, who say this war should essentially last forever, Mr.
Obama told the world that the United States must return to a state in
which counterterrorism is handled, as it always was before 2001,
primarily by law enforcement and the intelligence agencies. That shift
is essential to preserving the democratic system and rule of law for
which the United States is fighting, and for repairing its badly
damaged global image.

Mr. Obama said the Authorization for Use of Military Force, which was
passed after Sept. 11, 2001, must be replaced to avoid keeping
“America on a perpetual wartime footing.” He added: “Unless we
discipline our thinking and our actions, we may be drawn into more
wars we don’t need to fight, or continue to grant presidents unbound
powers more suited for traditional armed conflicts between nation
states.”

He did not say what should replace that law, but he vowed: “I will not
sign laws designed to expand this mandate further.” Mr. Obama’s speech
covered the range of national security, counterterrorism and civil
liberties issues facing the United States since 2001.

TARGETED KILLINGS For the first time, Mr. Obama admitted to ordering
the death of an American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, and to the
unintentional deaths of three other Americans, including Mr. Awlaki’s
16-year-old son, in drone strikes.

Mr. Obama announced important shifts in the policy of using unmanned
drones to kill citizens of other countries, in the territory of
sovereign nations, without any public, judicial or meaningful
Congressional oversight. From now on, the Central Intelligence Agency
and the military will no longer target individuals or groups of people
in countries like Pakistan based merely on the suspicion that their
location or actions link them to Al Qaeda or other groups allied with
the terrorist network. Those attacks, referred to as “signature
strikes,” have slaughtered an untold number of civilians and have
become as damaging a symbol of American overreach as the prison camp
in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

The targeting of citizens of other countries will now be subjected to
the same conditions the administration uses to kill American citizens
abroad. They must be shown to pose “a continuing, imminent threat to
Americans,” as Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. wrote in a letter to
Congress that was made public on Wednesday. In addition, the letter
said, lethal force can be used only when capture is not feasible and
there are “no other reasonable alternatives to effectively address the
threat.”

The acknowledgment of the killing of Mr. Awlaki in 2011, and, more
important, the supplying of compelling evidence that he was organizing
terrorist attacks and not just preaching jihad on the Internet, was a
much-needed step. The administration’s refusal to talk about the
Awlaki killing and other aspects of the drone policy until now had
been highly damaging to Mr. Obama personally and to America’s
relationship with other countries, like Pakistan.

We wish Mr. Obama had pledged an accounting for the civilian deaths
caused by drone strikes, and some form of reparations, but he did not.
He should do so.

1 2 NEXT PAGE »
Meet The New York Times’s Editorial Board »