Critics WantLegal Rationale For Strikes On Syria. The White House Says It's Secret 批评人士要求对叙利亚的空袭有法律依据，白宫称这是机密

Critics WantLegal Rationale For Strikes On Syria. The White House Says It's Secret
批评人士要求对叙利亚的空袭有法律依据，白宫称这是机密

gettyimages-943048732_wide-30d1db72a253a3da9b6b0876730876f19e5c573b-s800-c85.jpg

As the Trumpadministration evaluates potential military operations against Syria, the WhiteHouse has declined to explain why it believes it has the legal authority toconduct them without authorization from Congress.

当特朗普政府评估对叙利亚可能采取的军事行动时，白宫拒绝向公众和批评者们解释如何确定自己有合法权力不经国会授权进行军事行动。

But theWhite House does have a secret seven-page memo that may make the case.

但白宫表示确实有一份七页的备忘录，阐述了为何可以绕过国会对叙利亚进行军事行动，不过属于机密文件，不能对外公布。

Thepresident has the authority to deploy military force in the interest ofself-defense. But outside that rationale — and the White House has not madethat case — the president's legal authority becomes murkier.

总统有权为自卫而部署军事力量。但在除开这个理由，白宫没有给出任何事实根据，因此，总统是否有权力合法调动军队就显得模棱两可。

After theUnited States' missile strikes against Syria last year, a group made upprimarily of former Obama administration lawyers, "ProtectDemocracy," filed a Freedom of Information Act request to demand the legaljustification for the strikes.

去年美国对叙利亚进行导弹攻击之后，一个主要由前奥巴马政府的律师组成的团队——“民主守护”——提出了一项信息自由法案，要求政府部门为军事打击提供必要的法律依据。

When thegovernment did not comply, the organization sued.
当政府不遵守法案而对外进行军事袭击时，该组织有权提起诉讼。

Uncovered aspart of the subsequent litigation was the existence of a seven-page memoproduced by the White House on the day of the 2017 Syria strikes. While onepage containing background is classified, the remaining six pages featuring theWhite House's legal rationale is not.

2017年，白宫在对叙利亚采取军事行动的当天发表了一份长达七页的备忘录，在这份备忘录中，只有一页包含了制定对叙利亚军事行动的背景原因，但这一页是保密的，从公布的其余六页来看，白宫对叙利亚的军事行动没有法律依据，随后该团体针对此事提起诉讼。

On Monday,as the administration signaled that strikes could be imminent, ProtectDemocracy filed an update with the court asking for a speedy resolution of itslawsuit.

本周一，白宫表示对叙利亚政府军的军事打击可能即将来临，“民主守护”团体人士向法院提出新的申请，要求对其提请的诉讼案件能够快速处理。

The Trumpadministration argues that the memo was prepared for the purpose of givingadvice to the president and says in a court filing that disclosure could"chill the open and frank expression of ideas."

特朗普政府声称，该备忘录是为向总统提供建议而准备的。在一份递交给法庭的文件中他们表示，如果备忘录的内容对外披露，可能会“打击（备忘录撰写人员）公开和坦率表达意见的积极性”。

The WhiteHouse did not respond to a request for comment from NPR.

美国国家公共电台要求政府对此事给予回应，白宫方面至今没有答复。

Sen. TimKaine, D-Va., who has become a leading voice advocating for Congress'responsibility to approve military action, said the president should releasethe memo before any strikes.

参议员蒂姆-凯恩，目前是提倡“由国会批准军事行动”的主要发言人，他表示，总统应该在发动军事行动之前，对外公布备忘录。

"Withoutcongressional authorization, any military action President Trump takes in Syriathat isn't in self-defense is illegal," Kaine said in a statement onWednesday.

凯恩在星期三的一份声明中说：“如果没有国会的授权许可，特朗普总统在叙利亚采取的任何军事行动都是不合法的。”。

ContinuedKaine: "And while he's at it, he should also release the secret legal memothat reportedly justifies the airstrikes on Syria last year — which clearlyhaven't deterred Syrian leader Bashar Assad — and that the president isapparently now using as precedent for unilateral military action."

凯恩还表示：“当总统先生在决定对叙利亚发动军事行动时，应该将去年那份保密的备忘录公之于众，毕竟，他说去年对叙利亚的空袭是正当合法的——但那次行动并没有成功阻止叙利亚领导人巴沙尔·阿萨德——并且总统显然是利用特权（绕过国会）进行了单方面军事行动，这没有先例。”

Kaine toldNPR this week that while in general he would support airstrikes against Assad,he does not believe that the president can unilaterally bomb a sovereigncountry like Syria without congressional authorization.

凯恩本周接受访问时告诉国家公共电台，尽管他支持对阿萨德的空袭行动，但他不认为总统可以在没有国会授权的情况下单方面对叙利亚这样的主权国家进行轰炸。

AnotherTrump critic, Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, told NPR thatalthough he condemns the Assad regime's reported chemical attacks, there areobvious limits on Trump's authority to act.

另一位评论员，康涅狄格州的民主党参议员克里斯-墨菲对国家公共电台表示，虽然他谴责阿萨德政权使用化学武器进行战争，但对特朗普总统的权力应该有明确的限制。

"We'rea nation of laws, and we have a Constitution that says very clearly that it'sCongress who gets to decide who the United States can fight wars against,"Murphy said.

墨菲认为：“我们是一个法治国家，国家宪法明确规定，应当由国会决定美国与谁进行战争。”。

"Thepresident can take military action without congressional permission if the U.S.is attacked or is at risk of imminent attack — but that's not what happenedhere," he said. "If the president thinks he found a loophole thatlets him attack other countries without authorization, he needs to show thatjustification and make that case to the people."

他还表示：“当美国受到攻击或面临即将到来的袭击时，总统可以不经国会许可就采取军事行动，但这和现在所发生的事情迥然不同。”如果特朗普总统认为他发现了一个漏洞，允许他不经授权地攻击其他国家，他就需要证明这一点是合法的，并向人民说明。

Debate overthe privileges and responsibilities of ordering military action have doggedpresidents since the Vietnam War. In 2011, for example, Republicans complainedthat Congress hadn't been adequately consulted about the military operationsthat President Barack Obama ordered against Libya.

自越战后，有关军事行动的特权和责任的争论一直困扰着各位总统。例如，在2011年，共和党人就曾抱怨国会没有就贝拉克·奥巴马总统针对利比亚的军事行动进行充分的协商。

Later, whenconfronting the crisis Syria, Obama found himself painted into a corner afterhaving declared that the use of chemical weapons would cross a "redline." When Assad used them, Obama decided that he had the authority toorder an attack against the Syrian regime, but also decided, out of principle,to ask Congress to authorize it.

后来，在面对叙利亚危机时，奥巴马在宣称使用化学武器是越过“红线”的行为后发现自己陷入了困境。当阿萨德使用这些武器时，奥巴马认为他有权对叙利亚政权发动攻击，但从原则上讲需要得到国会批准。

Lawmakersdid not; the measure went nowhere. The United States joined a coalition ofnations in attempting to remove Syria's chemical weapons, which ultimately didnot stop such attacks there.

立法者没有批准通过，这项申请不了了之。之后美国加入了一个联合国行动，试图清除叙利亚的化学武器，但最终没能限制那里的化学武器袭击事件。

At the time,Trump demanded that Obama secure the approval of Congress.

而那时，特朗普要求奥巴马总统必须获得国会的批准。