Tensions between Washington and Pyongyang have caused concern among us lawmakers
U.S. senators held hearings about the powers of the President in the matter of a nuclear strike. The debate took place amid rising tensions between Donald trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-UN.
In the debates led by renowned critic Donald trump democratic Senator Chris Murphy, have considered a hypothetical decision of the President of the United States about nuclear strikes against the enemy.
“Let’s just acknowledge the uniqueness of this moment,” said the Senator during a hearing in the Senate Committee on foreign Affairs.
“We are concerned that the President of the United States has such a volatile nature, so extravagant approach to decision-making that he could order a nuclear strike, which does not correspond to the interests of U.S. national security,” added Chris Murphy.
In the case of continuing or imminent nuclear attack, the senators and speakers at the hearing, the experts agreed that the President has full authority to protect the country in accordance with the Constitution of the United States.
Only the President can order a nuclear strike.
“After the order is given and confirmed, there is no way to cancel it,” – said the Chairman of the Senate Committee Bob Corker.
The Senator has publicly lashed out at trump, telling him last month that he leads a nation “to the third world war” with his statements about North Korea and the verbal sparring with Kim Jong-UN.
In August, trump promised to “fire and fury” for the previously expressed threat of North Korea can attack GUAM.
Kim Jong-UN, in turn, called trump a “senile old man” whose conduct indicates that “mental disorder”.
Time 12 day trip trump in Asia, where has been discussed the nuclear program of Pyongyang, trump called 33-year-old North Korean leader and his “fat little man” and warned that erroneous recognition of American resolve as weakness will be a “fatal miscalculation”.
The verbal sparring has alarmed U.S. lawmakers.
“The human factor”
In that time, some senators, including Democrat Edward Markey expressed their concern that in the era of trump impulsive commander has the right to unilaterally launch a nuclear strike, experts have warned against changes in U.S. law that would enhance the ability of decision-making in this matter at a lower level.
“I think if we could somehow change the decision-making process – because of the distrust of this President, it would be a bad precedent,” said Brian McKeon, a former Deputy Minister of defense in the Obama administration.
One of the issues discussed was the concept of “imminent threat” when the President, believing that the other country poses a direct threat to the United States, orders a preemptive nuclear strike.
Three experts agreed that there is no clear definition of “imminent threat,” implying that the North Korean missile on the launch pad may fall under this qualification, but other scenarios can be less clear.
Robert KEhler, head of US strategic command from 2011 to 2013, made reference to important military rule: “Military must follow lawful orders, but shall not be obliged to execute unlawful”.
She said that the military rules of “necessity” and “proportionality” also apply to decisions about the use of nuclear weapons.
When the General asked what he would do, if they consider that the President’s order was illegal, she could not give a clear answer.
“I don’t know,” he replied. “Come into force the human factor”.
In such a situation, according to Brian Mackean, the President may replace not only the leader but also the Minister of defence. “Then you will face a true constitutional crisis,” said McKeon.
This caused concern among some Republican senators.
“Our opponents are watching us,” said Senator Marco Rubio, warning of the steps that can raise doubts about the authority of the President of the United States in the conflict.
“One of the things that I think electors” in the presidential election in the United States, Rubio said, “whether they want to trust the President that opportunity.”