Homeland Security Digital Library

Homeland Security Digital Library

SEARCH THE HSDL

Advanced search Help

Searching for terms: EXACT: "Weed, Matthew C." in: author

Set an Alert to get future results

Results 1 - 30 (of 49) sorted by relevance sort by date

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

U.S.-Irag Agreements: Congressional Oversight Activities and Legislative Response [May 15, 2009]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The purpose of this report is to provide detailed information and analysis on the specific oversight activities of Congress concerning the U.S.-Iraq agreements signed on November 17, 2008. This report is divided into three main parts: the first provides context both in the United States and Iraq concerning the negotiation, execution, and early implementation of the agreements; the second describes in detail the actions taken by Congress thus far in response to the announcement, negotiation, and execution of the Iraq Agreements, consisting of legislative initiatives and congressional hearings; and the third provides options for further congressional action concerning Congress's role in (1) the implementation of the Iraq Agreements, and (2) the possible negotiation and execution of amendments to the Iraq Agreement and new agreements directly related to the implementation of the Iraq Agreements. For analysis of the U.S.-Iraq agreements within the context of U.S. constitutional law of international agreements, and the law of congressional oversight over international agreements, see CRS Report RL34362, Congressional Oversight and Related Issues Concerning the Prospective Security Agreement Between the United States and Iraq, by Michael John Garcia, R. Chuck Mason, and Jennifer K. Elsea. This report will be updated when events warrant."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2009-05-15
Foreign Aid Reform: Studies and Recommendations [July 28, 2009]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"In recent years, numerous studies have addressed various concerns and provided recommendations regarding U.S. foreign aid policy, funding, and structure. [...]. While the 14 studies surveyed by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) emphasize different aspects of the importance of U.S. foreign assistance, all agree that foreign assistance must be reformed to improve its effectiveness. Of the 16 recommendation categories CRS identifies, only enhancing civilian agency resources has the support of all of the studies covered in this report. The next two most-often cited recommendations are raising development to equal status with diplomacy and defense, and increasing needs-based foreign aid, while encouraging recipient government ownership of aid effectiveness. Half of the studies urge a greater congressional role in foreign aid budgeting and policy formulation. Because these studies were written for the purpose of reforming U.S. foreign aid, it is not surprising that none of them recommends maintaining the status quo. Given the current economic crisis and budget constraints along with other major concerns, such as health care, energy policy, and global warming, however, some Members in the 111th Congress may prefer a continuation of the existing foreign aid structure. This report is a review of selected studies written between 2001 and 2008 and will not be updated."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Epstein, Susan B.; Weed, Matthew C.

2009-07-28
Foreign Aid Reform: Studies and Recommendations [December 17, 2008]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"In recent years, numerous studies have addressed various concerns and provided recommendations regarding U.S. foreign aid policy, funding, and structure. [...]. While the 14 studies surveyed by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) emphasize different aspects of the importance of U.S. foreign assistance, all agree that foreign assistance must be reformed to improve its effectiveness. Of the 16 recommendation categories CRS identifies, only enhancing civilian agency resources has the support of all of the studies covered in this report. The next two most-often cited recommendations are raising development to equal status with diplomacy and defense, and increasing needs-based foreign aid, while encouraging recipient government ownership of aid effectiveness. Half of the studies urge a greater congressional role in foreign aid budgeting and policy formulation. Because these studies were written for the purpose of reforming U.S. foreign aid, it is not surprising that none of them recommends maintaining the status quo. Given the current economic crisis and budget constraints along with other major concerns, such as health care, energy policy, and global warming, however, some Members in the 111th Congress may prefer a continuation of the existing foreign aid structure. This report is a review of selected studies written between 2001 and 2008 and will not be updated."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Epstein, Susan B.; Weed, Matthew C.

2008-12-17
International Criminal Court Cases in Africa: Status and Policy Issues [July 22, 2011]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The International Criminal Court (ICC) has, to date, opened cases exclusively in Africa. Cases concerning 25 individuals are open before the Court, pertaining to crimes allegedly committed in six African states: Libya, Kenya, Sudan (Darfur), Uganda (the Lord's Resistance Army, LRA), the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Central African Republic. A 26th case, against a Darfur rebel commander, was dismissed. The ICC Prosecutor has yet to secure any convictions. In addition, the Prosecutor has initiated preliminary examinations--a potential precursor to a full investigation--in Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, and Nigeria, along with several countries outside of Africa, such as Afghanistan, Colombia, Georgia, Honduras, and the Republic of Korea. The Statute of the ICC, also known as the Rome Statute, entered into force on July 1, 2002, and established a permanent, independent Court to investigate and bring to justice individuals who commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. As of July 2011, 116 countries-- including 32 African countries, the largest regional block--were parties to the Statute. Tunisia was the latest country to have become a party, in June 2011. The United States is not a party. […] This report provides background on current ICC cases and examines issues raised by the ICC's actions in Africa. Further analysis can be found in CRS Report R41116, The International Criminal Court (ICC): Jurisdiction, Extradition, and U.S. Policy, by Emily C. Barbour and Matthew C. Weed, and CRS Report R41682, International Criminal Court and the Rome Statute: 2010 Review Conference, by Matthew C. Weed."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Arieff, Alexis; Margesson, Rhoda; Browne, Marjorie Ann . . .

2011-07-22
U.S. Public Diplomacy: Legislative Proposals to Amend Prohibitions on Disseminating Materials to Domestic Audiences [September 21, 2012]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"Public diplomacy involves U.S. government activities to conduct U.S. foreign policy and promote U.S. national interests through direct outreach and communication with the population of foreign countries. Public diplomacy and international broadcasting activities, conducted by the Department of State, U.S. diplomatic personnel abroad, and U.S. international broadcasters such as the Voice of America, include providing information to foreign publics through broadcast and Internet media and at libraries and other outreach facilities in foreign countries; conducting cultural diplomacy, such as art exhibits and music performances; and administering international educational and professional exchange programs. For decades, Congress has enacted legislative provisions concerning U.S. government communications to U.S. domestic audiences that prohibit influencing public opinion through unauthorized publicity or propaganda. In the case of U.S. public diplomacy and international broadcasting, two additional legislative provisions prohibit the dissemination and general availability of communications and related materials intended for foreign publics to U.S. domestic audiences: Section 501 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 ('Smith-Mundt Act'; P.L. 80-402, 22 U.S.C. §1461) as well as Section 208 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1986 and 1987 ('Zorinsky Amendment'; P.L. 99-93; 22 U.S.C. §1461-1a). Proposed in the 112th Congress, the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 (H.R. 5736), and identical provisions included at Section 1097 of the National Defense Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2013 (NDAA; H.R. 4310), would amend and restate these two legislative provisions restricting domestic availability and dissemination of communications created by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to target and influence foreign publics. The proposed amendments to these provisions would remove the prohibition on domestic dissemination of public diplomacy information produced by the Department of State and the BBG intended for foreign audiences, while maintaining the prohibition on using public diplomacy funds to influence U.S. public opinion."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2012-09-21
China, Internet Freedom, and U.S. Policy [July 13, 2012]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"For over a decade, the United States government has sought to promote global Internet freedom, particularly in China and Iran. In 2006, the Bush Administration established the Global Internet Freedom Task Force, which was renamed the NetFreedom Task Force under the Obama Administration. Congress provided $95 million for global Internet freedom programs between 2008 and 2012. The Broadcasting Board of Governors has spent approximately $2 million annually during the past decade to help enable Internet users in China and other Internetrestricting countries to access its websites, such as Voice of America and Radio Free Asia. Some experts argue that support for counter-censorship technology, which has long dominated the U.S. effort to promote global Internet freedom, has had an important but limited impact. Obstacles to Internet freedom in China and elsewhere include not only censorship but also the following: advances in government capabilities to monitor and attack online dissident activity; tight restrictions on social networking; and the lack of popular pressure for greater Internet freedom. As part of a broadening policy approach, the U.S. government has sponsored a widening range of Internet freedom programs, including censorship circumvention technology; privacy protection and online security; training civil society groups in effective uses of the web for communications, organizational, and advocacy purposes; and spreading awareness of Internet freedom."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.; Figliola, Patricia Moloney; Lum, Thomas G. (Thomas Gong), 1961-

2012-07-13
U.S. Public Diplomacy: Background and Current Issues [December 18, 2009]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"After World War II, during which the U.S. military conducted most information and communication activities, authority for U.S. public diplomacy was placed in civilian hands. During the Cold War, the United States Information Agency (USIA) led U.S. public diplomacy efforts, with a primary mission of combating Soviet propaganda and the spread of communism. Once the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, USIA's role was diminished, and its resources were reduced during the 1990s. Finally, USIA was abolished in 1999 as part of a post-Cold War reorganization, with public diplomacy responsibilities folded into the Department of State. After the 9/11 terror attacks, there was new interest in promoting effective public diplomacy, as a struggle against extremist ideologies became crucial to the overall fight against terrorism. In recent years, many observers have called for increased resources for and improvement of U.S. public diplomacy efforts. A number of challenges and questions, however, currently affect the future of U.S. government communications with foreign publics. Some argue that abolishing USIA was a mistake and that the State Department is ill-suited to conduct long-term public diplomacy. Also, the Department of Defense and the U.S. military have increased significantly their role in communicating with foreign publics. Determining public diplomacy roles, responsibilities, and coordination procedures among civilian and military actors has therefore become a central issue. In addition, with the rise and rapid evolution of Internet communications, the U.S. government must determine how to effectively communicate with foreign publics in an increasingly complex, accessible, and democratized global communications environment."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Nakamura, Kennon H.; Weed, Matthew C.

2009-12-18
U.S. - Iraq Strategic Framework and Status of Forces Agreement: Congressional Response [Updated July 11, 2008]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"This report is divided into two main parts: the first describes in detail the actions taken by Congress thus far in response to the Declaration of Principles and other information concerning the planned Iraq Agreements, consisting of legislative initiatives and congressional hearings; the second provides options for further congressional action concerning Congress's role in the negotiation, execution, and implementation of the Iraq Agreements. This report may not be updated."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2008-07-11
U.S. International Broadcasting: Background and Issues for Reform [May 2, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"Since the beginning of modern U.S. international broadcasting during World War II, debates over the effectiveness, strategic direction, and necessity of broadcasting activities have persisted. Since the creation of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), arguments over its structure have only added to these debates, producing a number of reform efforts. Many Members of Congress have consistently shown concerted interest in U.S. international broadcasting, conducting oversight over the BBG and its individual broadcasters, and calling for increased resources and programming for certain regions, countries, and language services. On April 28, 2014, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Edward Royce introduced the United States International Communications Reform Act of 2014 (H.R. 4490), which would change the structure of U.S. international broadcasting, suggesting that this issue might receive increased congressional attention during the second session of the 113th Congress."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2014-05-02
Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Background and Legal Implications [April 18, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"This report provides historical background on the enactment of declarations of war and authorizations for the use of force and analyzes their legal effects under international and domestic law. It also sets forth their texts in two appendices. The report includes an extensive listing and summary of statutes that are triggered by a declaration of war, a declaration of national emergency, and/or the existence of a state of war. The report concludes with a summary of the congressional procedures applicable to the enactment of a declaration of war or authorization for the use of force and to measures under the War Powers Resolution. The report will be updated as circumstances warrant."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Elsea, Jennifer; Weed, Matthew C.

2014-04-18
Considerations for Possible Authorization for Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State [September 16, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The armed offensive of the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL or ISIS) in northern and western Iraq and northeastern Syria has raised significant concerns for the Middle Eastern governments and the United States. Since June, President Obama has ordered multiple deployments of U.S. troops to Iraq to provide security to diplomatic personnel and facilities, advise Iraqi security forces, and conduct intelligence gathering and reconnaissance. He has also ordered U.S. military airstrikes on IS forces in Iraq as part of at least four military operations since August 7. In a September 10, 2014, speech, the President also laid out plans for expanded use of military force against the Islamic State in Iraq and possibly Syria. Concerned with a perceived piecemeal build-up of troops, the President's plans for expanding uses of military force, the lack of opportunities for congressional consultation and oversight, and a possible expansion of the use of military force into Syria, several Members of Congress have expressed the view that continued use of military force against the Islamic State requires congressional authorization. Members differ on whether such authorization should be provided."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2014-09-16
New Authorization for Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State: Comparison of Current Proposals in Brief [October 21, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The armed offensive of the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL or ISIS) in northern and western Iraq and northeastern Syria has raised significant concerns for the United States. After first ordering multiple deployments of U.S. troops to Iraq to provide security to diplomatic personnel and facilities, advise Iraqi security forces, and conduct intelligence gathering and reconnaissance, President Obama began ordering U.S. military airstrikes on IS forces in Iraq in August 2014. Later in September, after laying out plans for expanded use of military force against the Islamic State in a televised speech to the American people, the President ordered U.S. military airstrikes in Syria against both IS forces and forces of the 'Khorasan Group,' identified by the President as part of Al Qaeda. […] The President in his August 2014 notifications to Congress of deployments and airstrikes in Iraq indicated his powers as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive under Article II of the Constitution gave him authority to undertake such action. Obama Administration officials and the President's September 2014 notifications2 to Congress for airstrikes and other actions in Iraq and Syria, however, have stated that two enacted authorizations for use of military force (AUMFs), the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001 AUMF; P.L. 107-40), and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (2002 AUMF; P.L. 107-243), provide authorization for certain U.S. military strikes against the Islamic State." This report discusses the legitimacy of current military action in Iraq and Syria under the aforementioned AUMFs, and Congress' proposals for a new AUMF specifically targeting the Islamic State.

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2014-10-21
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [September 11, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The Islamic State is a transnational Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group that has expanded its control over areas of northwestern Iraq and northeastern Syria since 2013, threatening the security of both countries and drawing increased attention from the international community. There is debate over the degree to which the Islamic State [IS] organization might represent a direct terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland or to U.S. facilities and personnel in the region. [...] In September 10, President Obama announced a multifaceted strategy to 'degrade, and ultimately destroy' the Islamic State organization. The announced strategy is for the United States to lead and expand a multilateral coalition that will undertake direct military action, provide support for partner ground forces in Iraq and Syria, gather and share intelligence and use financial measures to try to progressively shrink the geographic and political space, manpower, and financial resources available to the Islamic State. The Administration and its allies all have ruled out deploying combat forces to either Iraq or Syria. Some assert that the U.S. strategy will attract the support of Sunnis in both Syria and Iraq in a broad effort to defeat the Islamic State. Others assess that the strategy might have minimal effect because local anti-IS forces will not have support from U.S. or other western combat troops. For details on Islamic State operations in Iraq and U.S. policy toward Iraq since the 2003 U.S. invasion, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RS21968, 'Iraq: Politics, Governance, and Human Rights', by Kenneth Katzman. For further information on the Islamic State's operations in Syria, see CRS Report RL33487, 'Armed Conflict in Syria: Overview and U.S. Response', coordinated by Christopher M. Blanchard."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Katzman, Kenneth; Humud, Carla E.; Blanchard, Christopher M. . . .

2014-09-11
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [November 12, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The Islamic State is a transnational Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group that has expanded its control over areas of parts of Iraq and Syria since 2013. It threatens the governments of both countries and potentially several other countries in the region, and has drawn a military response from the international community. There is debate over the degree to which the Islamic State organization might represent a direct terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland or to U.S. facilities and personnel in the region. The forerunner of the Islamic State (IS) was part of the insurgency against coalition forces in Iraq, and the organization has in the years since the 2011 U.S. withdrawal from Iraq expanded its control over significant areas of both Iraq and Syria. The Islamic State has thrived in the disaffected Sunni tribal areas of Iraq and in the remote provinces of Syria torn by the civil war. Since early 2014, Islamic State-led forces, supported by groups linked to ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and many Sunni Arab tribalists, have advanced along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, seizing multiple population centers including Mosul, one of Iraq's largest cities. […] The Islamic State's tactics have drawn the ire of the international community, increasing U.S. attention on Iraq's political problems and on the civil war in Syria. On September 10, President Obama announced a series of actions intended to 'degrade, and ultimately destroy' the Islamic State organization. […] Several of the regional coalition members apparently seek an expansion of the U.S.-led mission to include an effort to oust President Bashar al Asad of Syria, arguing that the Islamic State cannot be defeated until the Syrian political situation is altered."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.; Tiersky, Alex L.; Margesson, Rhoda . . .

2014-11-12
Considerations for Possible Authorization for Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State [September 9, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The armed offensive of the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL or ISIS) in northern and western Iraq and northeastern Syria has raised significant concerns for the Middle Eastern governments and the United States. Since June, President Obama has ordered multiple deployments of U.S. troops to Iraq to provide security to diplomatic personnel and facilities, advise Iraqi security forces, and conduct intelligence gathering and reconnaissance. He has also ordered U.S. military airstrikes on IS forces in Iraq as part of at least four military operations since August 7. Concerned with a perceived piecemeal build-up of troops, accumulation of narrowly defined uses of force, and lack of clearly articulated strategy informed by congressional consultation and oversight, several Members of Congress have expressed the view that continued use of military force against the Islamic State requires congressional authorization. Members differ on whether such authorization should be provided."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2014-09-09
U.S. Diplomatic Missions: Background and Issues on Chief of Mission (COM) Authority [March 10, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"'Chief of Mission,' or COM, is the title conferred on the principal officer in charge of each U.S. diplomatic mission to a foreign country, foreign territory, or international organization. Usually the term refers to the U.S. ambassadors who lead U.S. embassies abroad, but the term also is used for ambassadors who head other official U.S. missions and to other diplomatic personnel who may step in when no ambassador is present. Appointed by the President, each COM serves as the President's personal representative, leading diplomatic efforts for a particular mission or in the country of assignment. U.S. ambassadors and others exercising COM authority are by law the cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy coordination in their respective countries. Their jobs are highly complex, demanding a broad knowledge of the U.S. foreign policy toolkit and the ability to oversee the activities and manage the representatives of many U.S. government entities, with some exceptions for those under military command. Congress plays an important role in setting standards for the exercise of COM authority and providing COMs with the resources--training, personnel, monetary--to promote its effective exercise. A number of recent developments have increased congressional attention to issues associated with the roles and responsibilities of COMs."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.; Serafino, Nina M.
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [May 27, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The Islamic State (IS, aka the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL/ISIS or the Arabic acronym 'Daesh') is a transnational Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group that has seized areas of Iraq and Syria since 2013, threatening the wider region. There is debate over the degree to which the Islamic State organization may directly threaten U.S. homeland security or U.S. facilities and personnel in the region. Its advance threatens several U.S. regional partners. The forerunners of the Islamic State were part of the insurgency against U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, and the organization has in the years since the 2011 U.S. withdrawal from Iraq expanded its control over significant areas of both Iraq and Syria. The Islamic State has thrived in the disaffected Sunni tribal areas of Iraq and taken control of some eastern provinces of Syria torn by that country's civil war. In 2014, Islamic State-led forces, supported by groups linked to ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and some Sunni Arabs, advanced along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Iraq, seizing population centers including Mosul, one of Iraq's largest cities. Since then, IS forces have massacred Syrian and Iraqi adversaries, including some civilians, often from ethnic or religious minorities, and murdered several hostages, including U.S. citizens. Islamic State attempts to make further gains continue. The group's tactics have drawn regional and international ire, and raised U.S. attention to Iraq's political problems and to the war in Syria."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E.; Katzman, Kenneth . . .

2015-05-27
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [June 11, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The Islamic State (IS, aka the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL/ISIS or the Arabic acronym 'Daesh') is a transnational Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group that has seized areas of Iraq and Syria since 2013, threatening the wider region. There is debate over the degree to which the Islamic State organization may directly threaten U.S. homeland security or U.S. facilities and personnel in the region. Its advance threatens several U.S. regional partners. The forerunners of the Islamic State were part of the insurgency against U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, and the organization has in the years since the 2011 U.S. withdrawal from Iraq expanded its control over significant areas of both Iraq and Syria. The Islamic State has thrived in the disaffected Sunni tribal areas of Iraq and taken control of some eastern provinces of Syria torn by that country's civil war. In 2014, Islamic State-led forces, supported by groups linked to ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and some Sunni Arabs, advanced along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Iraq, seizing population centers including Mosul, one of Iraq's largest cities. Since then, IS forces have massacred Syrian and Iraqi adversaries, including some civilians, often from ethnic or religious minorities, and murdered several hostages, including U.S. citizens. Islamic State attempts to make further gains continue. The group's tactics have drawn regional and international ire, and raised U.S. attention to Iraq's political problems and to the war in Syria."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E.; Katzman, Kenneth . . .

2015-06-11
2015 Leaders' Summit on U.N. Peacekeeping [October 5, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"On September 28, 2015, President Obama chaired the 2015 Leaders' Summit on United Nations (U.N.) Peacekeeping, part of his participation at the opening session of the 2015 U.N. General Assembly in New York. The summit outcome, as well as the President's new pledges for and guidance on U.S. support for U.N. peace operations, might elevate ongoing congressional interest in several policy issues related to U.N. peacekeeping, including U.S. assessed and voluntary contributions to U.N. peacekeeping costs, and concern over recent incidents of violence against civilians and sexual exploitation and abuse perpetrated by U.N. peacekeepers. These new developments could prove important to Congress as it conducts oversight regarding U.N. peacekeeping generally, any reform efforts undertaken by the United Nations, and possible budgetary effects of the President's new pledges to support U.N. peace operations."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.; Blanchfield, Luisa

2015-10-05
Memorandum: Presidential References to the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force in Publicly Available Executive Actions and Reports to Congress [May 11, 2016]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"This memorandum sets out information and analysis concerning presidential references in official notifications and records to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001 AUMF; Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. § 1541 note), enacted in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, to justify and undertake military and other action. It contains very brief discussions of the relevant provisions of the 2001 AUMF, and the uses of U.S. armed forces connected with 2001 AUMF authority, as well as excerpted language and other information from the notifications."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2016-05-11
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [March 12, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The Islamic State (IS, aka the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL/ISIS) is a transnational Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group that has expanded its control over areas of parts of Iraq and Syria since 2013, threatening the wider region. There is debate over the degree to which the Islamic State organization might represent a direct terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland or to U.S. facilities and personnel in the region. The forerunners of the Islamic State were part of the insurgency against coalition forces in Iraq, and the organization has in the years since the 2011 U.S. withdrawal from Iraq expanded its control over significant areas of both Iraq and Syria. The Islamic State has thrived in the disaffected Sunni tribal areas of Iraq and taken control of some eastern provinces of Syria torn by the civil war. In 2014, Islamic State-led forces, supported by groups linked to ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and some Sunni Arabs, advanced along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Iraq, seizing population centers including Mosul, one of Iraq's largest cities. Since then, IS forces have massacred Syrian and Iraqi adversaries, including some civilians, often from ethnic or religious minorities, and murdered hostages, including U.S. citizens. Islamic State attempts to make further gains continue. The group's tactics have drawn international ire, and raised U.S. attention to Iraq's political problems and to the war in Syria."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E.; Katzman, Kenneth . . .

2015-03-12
2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force: Issues Concerning Its Continued Application [April 14, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"In response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States, Congress enacted the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001 AUMF; P.L. 107-40; 50 U.S.C. §1541 note) to authorize the use of military force against those who perpetrated or provided support for the attacks. Under the authority of the 2001 AUMF, U.S. Armed Forces have conducted military operations in Afghanistan since October 2001. As armed conflict against Al Qaeda and the Taliban progressed, and U.S. counterterrorism strategy evolved, U.S. use of military force has expanded outside Afghanistan to include Al Qaeda and Taliban targets in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and most recently, Syria. The 2001 AUMF is not the sole authority for all U.S. uses of military force in furtherance of U.S. counterterrorism objectives; other legislation and presidential powers under Article II of the Constitution are invoked to carry out U.S. counterterrorism activities globally. Nevertheless, the Obama Administration still finds itself relying on 2001 AUMF authority not only for continuing U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, but also for beginning a new campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, with the possibility of expansion to other countries if the Islamic State or Al Qaeda groups or associates effectively expand their reach and pose a threat to U.S. national security and interests. At the same time, the President has requested that Congress enact new authority for U.S. operations to counter the Islamic State and has expressed a continued commitment to 'working with the Congress and the American people to refine, and ultimately repeal, the 2001 AUMF.'"

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2015-04-14
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [December 8, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The Islamic State is a transnational Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group that has expanded its control over areas of parts of Iraq and Syria since 2013. It threatens the governments of both countries and potentially several other countries in the region. The emerging international response to the threat is multifaceted and includes coalition military strikes and assistance plans. There is debate over the degree to which the Islamic State organization might represent a direct terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland or to U.S. facilities and personnel in the region. […] The Islamic State's tactics have drawn international ire, increasing U.S. attention to Iraq's political problems and to the war in Syria. On September 10, President Obama announced a series of actions intended to 'degrade, and ultimately destroy' the Islamic State organization. The United States is leading and seeking to expand a multilateral coalition that is undertaking direct military action; providing advice, training, and equipment for partner ground forces in Iraq and Syria; gathering and sharing intelligence; and using financial measures against the Islamic State. The objective of these measures is to progressively shrink the geographic and political space, manpower, and financial resources available to the Islamic State organization. […] The Administration has ruled out deploying combat forces to either Iraq or Syria, but it has not ruled out providing forward aircraft controllers, additional military advisors, or other related groundbased military assets. Some experts assert that coalition partners inside Iraq and Syria--Iraqi government forces and select Syrian groups--are too weak to defeat the Islamic State and will eventually require help from U.S. combat troops. Several regional coalition members apparently seek an expansion of the U.S.-led mission to include an effort to oust President Asad of Syria."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Katzman, Kenneth; Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E. . . .

2014-12-08
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [January 8, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The Islamic State is a transnational Sunni Islamist insurgent and terrorist group that has expanded its control over areas of parts of Iraq and Syria since 2013. It threatens the governments of both countries and potentially several other countries in the region. The emerging international response to the threat is multifaceted and includes coalition military strikes and assistance plans. There is debate over the degree to which the Islamic State organization might represent a direct terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland or to U.S. facilities and personnel in the region. […] The U.S. desire to show progress against the Islamic State and in the recruitment of regional partners raises questions of whether the U.S. mission and commitment might expand. The Administration has ruled out deploying combat forces to either Iraq or Syria, but it has not ruled out providing forward aircraft controllers, additional military advisors, or other related ground-based military assets. Some experts assert that coalition partners inside Iraq and Syria--Iraqi government forces and select Syrian groups--are too weak to defeat the Islamic State and will eventually require help from U.S. combat troops. Several regional coalition members apparently seek an expansion of the U.S.-led mission to include an effort to oust President Asad of Syria."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Katzman, Kenneth; Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E. . . .

2015-01-08
'Islamic State' Crisis and U.S. Policy [February 11, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"On September 10, 2014, President Obama announced a series of actions intended to 'degrade, and ultimately destroy' the Islamic State organization. The United States is leading and seeking to expand a multilateral coalition that is undertaking direct military action; providing advice, training, and equipment for partner ground forces in Iraq and Syria; gathering and sharing intelligence; and using financial measures against the Islamic State. The objective of these measures is to progressively shrink the geographic and political space, manpower, and financial resources available to the Islamic State organization. U.S. officials refer to their strategy as 'Iraqfirst' and 'ISIL-first,' ['Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant-first'] amid criticism by some in Congress that more attention should be paid to the civil war in Syria and more effort should be made to oust Syrian President Bashar al Asad. The U.S. desire to show progress against the Islamic State and in the recruitment of regional partners raises questions of whether the U.S. mission and commitment might expand. President Obama has ruled out deploying ground combat forces to Iraq or Syria, but has not ruled out providing forward aircraft controllers, additional military advisors, or other related ground-based military assets. […] In December 2014, the 113th Congress provided new authorities and funds for efforts to combat the Islamic State organization in Syria and Iraq in the FY2015 national defense authorization (P.L. 113-291) and consolidated appropriations acts (P.L. 113-235). The 114th Congress is now considering the Administration's FY2016 budget requests and its proposal for authorization for the use of military force against the Islamic State."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Katzman, Kenneth; Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E. . . .

2015-02-11
United Nations Issues: Congressional Representatives to the U.N. General Assembly [August 1, 2018]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The annual session of the United Nations (U.N.) General Assembly is held at U.N. Headquarters in New York City. Generally, the President appoints one Democrat and one Republican to serve as U.S. representatives to the session, alternating each year between the House and Senate. At the 72nd session of the Assembly, which opened in September 2017, two House members (Barbara Lee and Christopher Smith) served as congressional representatives. Two members of the Senate will likely serve as representatives to the 73rd Assembly session, which is scheduled to open on September 18, 2018."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Blanchfield, Luisa; Weed, Matthew C.

2018-08-01
U.N. Report Recommends Burmese Military Leaders Be Investigated and Prosecuted for Possible Genocide [September 4, 2018]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The U.N. Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar (UNFFM) has recommended that the U.N. Security Council (UNSC) authorize the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate and prosecute 'senior officials in the Tatmadaw' (Burma's military) for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The UNFFM found over the course of a nearly 18-month investigation that there are 'reasonable grounds' to conclude that: (1) Tatmadaw leaders planned a genocidal attack on the Rohingya that was implemented in September and October 2017 by Tatmadaw soldiers and other Burmese security forces; (2)'Crimes against humanity have been committed in Kachin, Rakhine, and Shan States, principally by the Tatmadaw'; and (3) The Tatmadaw, other Burmese security forces, some of the ethnic armed organizations (EAOs), and the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) committed war crimes."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Martin, Michael F.; Weed, Matthew C.; Willett, Colin

2018-09-04
International Criminal Court: U.S. Response to Examination of Atrocity Crimes in Afghanistan [Updated April 16, 2019]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
From the Document: "On April 5, 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo revoked the U.S. travel visa permitting International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda to enter the United States, unless visiting U.N. headquarters in New York, citing legal authority (8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(3)(C)(i)) to restrict entry of persons 'whose ... proposed activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.' Secretary Pompeo explained the reason for the decision was Ms. Bensouda's possible investigation of allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity in and related to Afghanistan since 2002, arguing such activities could 'illegitimately target American personnel for prosecutions and sentencing.' The Secretary's decision is the latest development in the recent worsening of U.S.-ICC relations, a relationship in which Congress has involved itself through legislation and oversight since the ICC's creation."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2019-04-16
New Authorization for Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State: Comparison of Proposals in Brief [December 19, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"In 2014, the armed offensive of the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL [Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] or ISIS [Islamic State of Iraq and Syria]) in northern and western Iraq and northeastern Syria raised significant concerns for the United States. After first ordering multiple deployments of U.S. troops to Iraq to provide security to diplomatic personnel and facilities, advise Iraqi security forces, and conduct intelligence gathering and reconnaissance, President Obama began ordering U.S. military airstrikes on IS forces in Iraq in August 2014. Later in September, after laying out plans for expanded use of military force against the Islamic State in a televised speech to the American people, the President ordered U.S. military airstrikes in Syria against both IS forces and forces of the 'Khorasan Group,' identified by the President as part of Al Qaeda. The intensified U.S. military engagement has raised numerous questions about the President's authority to use military force against the Islamic State."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2014-12-19
New Authorization for Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State: Comparison of Current Proposals in Brief [November 6, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The armed offensive of the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL or ISIS) in northern and western Iraq and northeastern Syria has raised significant concerns for the United States. After first ordering multiple deployments of U.S. troops to Iraq to provide security to diplomatic personnel and facilities, advise Iraqi security forces, and conduct intelligence gathering and reconnaissance, President Obama began ordering U.S. military airstrikes on IS forces in Iraq in August 2014. Later in September, after laying out plans for expanded use of military force against the Islamic State in a televised speech to the American people, the President ordered U.S. military airstrikes in Syria against both IS forces and forces of the 'Khorasan Group,' identified by the President as part of Al Qaeda. The President in his August 2014 notifications to Congress of deployments and airstrikes in Iraq indicated his powers as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive under Article II of the Constitution gave him authority to undertake such action. […] Most recently, the President on November 5, 2014, indicated that he intends to enter into discussions with congressional leaders to develop a new AUMF specifically targeting the Islamic State, in order to 'right-size and update whatever authorization Congress provides to suit the current fight, rather than previous fights' authorized by the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Weed, Matthew C.

2014-11-06

1 2