Peril From an Imperial Presidency : Our military colossus has been sent into war by one man’s order. Won’t anyone rise in defense of the Constitution?

Few presidential acts in our history have been as dangerous and arbitrary as President Bush’s decision to send troops to the Persian Gulf. He has abandoned all pretense of constitutional authority, made no gesture to obtain approval of Congress, offered no explanation of the source of his power to unilaterally commit American military forces to foreign territory half a world away. A military dictator could not be less restrained.

No one has questioned whether the President’s decision was constitutional. We have become inured to arbitrary action from the Oval Office--invading the small nations of Grenada and Panama, bombing sleeping cities in Libya. The question of constitutionality, of law and democratic institutions, does not arise.

President Bush did not even feel it necessary to invoke the usual, and usually false, justification that military action was necessary to protect American citizens. The depth of the Administration’s commitment to that canard is revealed by its failure to take steps to protect the several thousand Americans in Iraq and Kuwait before acts were committed that might--and did--put them in jeopardy. That, of course, is but a small part of the human risk arising from the President’s action: Millions of Iraqis, Kuwaitis, Saudi Arabians and foreigner in their countries are in direct peril.

The President’s precipitous self-appointment as policeman for the Persian Gulf also preempted the possibility of Arab, regional or United Nations efforts to resolve the problems created by Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

The Administration did persuade the United Nations to impose sanctions, and has coerced support from other nations that are severely indebted to and dependent on the United States. But the cost and deadly consequences are mostly ours.

In the interest of peace, the United Nations must act independently of superpower control. But even if the United States were to place its 250,000 troops, its aircraft carriers, tanks and weaponry behind a U.N. fig leaf, we still cannot disguise the naked U.S. role powering this colossal and dangerous intervention. Forty years after the United Nations gave its name and little else to what was in reality a U.S.-Korean war, 48,000 U.S. troops and nuclear weapons remain in South Korea.

Everyone understands that oil is the issue. Not our oil, Persian Gulf oil. Had oil not been present, the United States’ reaction to Iraq would have echoed Henry Kissinger’s reaction to the terrible Iran-Iraq war--let them kill each other. It is the oil we want, just as we chose chrome over sanctions against racist Rhodesia. We profited for a generation from trade with apartheid South Africa, claiming sanctions wouldn’t work.

This is not the first time that countries outside the Arab world have used force to secure natural resources and impose alien policies. Throughout this century the Persian Gulf and Middle East have been carved and recarved for the table of foreign powers. Actions that ignore the deep hatred of colonial intervention in the region can only destabilize existing governments, strengthen extremism and make peaceful change impossible.

Had we remembered who profited most, and extravagantly, all these years from these resources, we would have resisted taking the risk of intervention. It is the industrial rich countries, through their transnational oil companies, that have exploited Arab oil. How long will it be before we trade equitably, with respect for the natural resources of the world, and its fragile environment? How will peace be found until we do?

What will be the economic impact of this crisis for the world economy and our own? How high will oil prices and inflation grow? How many jobs will be lost? How many billions of dollars will we spend in this adventure? How high will taxes go to pay for it, and how many social services programs will be cut? How will poor nations fare after the conflict?

How long will the people of the United States, with no voice in determining their destiny, risk the consequences of an Imperial Presidency?

The American people should demand:

--Immediate withdrawal of all U.S. forces from the Persian Gulf region.

--Renunciation of any intention of establishing bases, or maintaining any military presence, temporary or permanent, in the region.

--Full support for regional, Arab and United Nations diplomatic efforts and actions to end and not escalate the crisis.

First, of course, Congress has to take down the “out to lunch” sign and get back to work. Compliance with the Constitution--starting in the Oval Office--should be at the top of its agenda.