# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Apply for and manage the VA benefits and services you’ve earned as a Veteran, Servicemember, or family member—like health care, disability, education, and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Listen to voices of the Vietnamese refugee experience on the First Days Story Project from American Experience PBS.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Back to United States: The Constitution
Overview

This guide is intended to serve as an introduction to research on the War Powers Resolution, Public Law 93-148 (external link) , 87 Stat. 555, passed over President Nixon's veto on November 7, 1973. The War Powers Resolution is sometimes referred to as the War Powers Act, its title in the version passed by the Senate. This Joint Resolution is codified in the United States Code ("USC") in Title 50, Chapter 33, Sections 1541-48 (external link) .

The term "Resolution" can be misleading; this law originated as a Joint Resolution and was passed by both Houses of Congress pursuant to the Legislative Process, and has the same legal effect as a Bill which has passed and become a law. For more information on Bills and Joint Resolutions see this explanation of Congressional Forms of Action.

The Constitution of the United States divides the war powers of the federal government between the Executive and Legislative branches: the President is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces ( Article II, section 2), while Congress has the power to make declarations of war, and to raise and support the armed forces ( Article I, section 8 (external link) ). Over time, questions arose as to the extent of the President's authority to deploy U.S. armed forces into hostile situations abroad without a declaration of war or some other form of Congressional approval. Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to address these concerns and provide a set of procedures for both the President and Congress to follow in situations where the introduction of U.S. forces abroad could lead to their involvement in armed conflict.

Conceptually, the War Powers Resolution can be broken down into several distinct parts. The first part states the policy behind the law, namely to "insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities," and that the President's powers as Commander in Chief are exercised only pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization from Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States ( 50 USC Sec. 1541 (external link) ).

The second part requires the President to consult with Congress before introducing U.S. armed forces into hostilities or situations where hostilities are imminent, and to continue such consultations as long as U.S. armed forces remain in such situations ( 50 USC Sec. 1542 (external link) ). The third part sets forth reporting requirements that the President must comply with any time he introduces U.S. armed forces into existing or imminent hostilities (50 USC Sec. 1543 (external link)); section 1543(a)(1) is particularly significant because it can trigger a 60 day time limit on the use of U.S. forces under section 1544(b).

The fourth part of the law concerns Congressional actions and procedures. Of particular interest is Section 1544(b), which requires that U.S. forces be withdrawn from hostilities within 60 days of the time a report is submitted or is required to be submitted under Section 1543(a)(1), unless Congress acts to approve continued military action, or is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Section 1544(c) requires the President to remove U.S. armed forces that are engaged in hostilities "without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization" at any time if Congress so directs by a Concurrent Resolution (50 USC 1544 (external link)). Concurrent Resolutions are not laws and are not presented to the President for signature or veto; as a result the procedure contemplated under Section 1544(c) is known as a "legislative veto" and is constitutionally questionable in light of the decision of the United States Supreme Court in INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983). Further sections set forth expedited Congressional procedures for considering proposed legislation to authorize the use of U.S. armed forces, as well as similar procedures regarding proposed legislation to withdraw U.S. forces under Section 1544(c) ( 50 U.S. 1545-46a (external link) ).

The fifth part of the law sets forth certain definitions and rules to be used when interpreting the War Powers Resolution (50 USC 1547 (external link)). Finally, the sixth part is a "separability provision" and states that if any part of the law is held (by a court) to be invalid, on its face or as applied to a particular situation, the rest of the law shall not be considered invalid, nor shall its applicability to other situations be affected (50 USC 1548 (external link)).

U.S. Presidents have consistently taken the position that the War Powers Resolution is an unconstitutional infringement upon the power of the executive branch. As a result, the Resolution has been the subject of controversy since its enactment, and is a recurring issue due to the ongoing worldwide commitment of U.S. armed forces. Presidents have submitted a total of over 120 reports to Congress pursuant to the Resolution. Some examples of the Resolution's effect on the deployment of U.S. armed forces include:

1975: President Ford submitted a report to Congress as a result of his order to the U.S. armed forces to retake the Mayaguez, a U.S. merchant vessel which had been seized by Cambodia. This report is the only report to have cited Section 4(a)(1) ( 50 USC Sec. 1543(a)(1) (external link) ) of the Resolution, triggering the 60-day time limit; however the operation was completed before 60 days had expired.

1981: President Reagan deployed a number of U.S. military advisors to El Salvador but submitted no report to Congress. Members of Congress filed a federal lawsuit in an attempt to force compliance with the Resolution, but the U.S. District Court hearing the suit declined to become involved in what the judge saw as a political question, namely whether U.S. forces were indeed involved in hostilities.

1982-83: President Reagan sent a force of Marines to Lebanon to participate in peacekeeping efforts in that country; while he did submit three reports to Congress under the Resolution, he did not cite Section 4(a)(1), and thus did not trigger the 60 day time limit. Over time the Marines came under increasing enemy fire and there were calls for withdrawal of U.S. forces. Congress, as part of a compromise with the President, passed Public Law 98-119 in October 1983 authorizing U.S. troops to remain in Lebanon for 18 months. This resolution was signed by the President, and was the first time a President had signed legislation invoking the War Powers Resolution.

1990-91: President George H.W. Bush sent several reports to Congress regarding the buildup of forces in Operation Desert Shield. President Bush took the position that he did not need "authority" from Congress to carry out the United Nations resolutions which authorized member states to use "all necessary means" to eject Iraq from Kuwait; however he did ask for Congressional "support" of U.S. operations in the Persian Gulf. Congress passed, and the President signed, Public Law 102-1 authorizing the President to use force against Iraq if the President reported that diplomatic efforts had failed. President Bush did so report, and initiated Operation Desert Storm.

1993-99: President Clinton utilized United States armed forces in various operations, such as air strikes and the deployment of peacekeeping forces, in the former Yugoslavia, especially Bosnia and Kosovo. These operations were pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolutions and were conducted in conjunction with other member states of NATO. During this time the President made a number of reports to Congress "consistent with the War Powers Resolution" regarding the use of U.S. forces, but never cited Section 4(a)(1), and thus did not trigger the 60 day time limit. Opinion in Congress was divided and many legislative measures regarding the use of these forces were defeated without becoming law. Frustrated that Congress was unable to pass legislation challenging the President's actions, Representative Tom Campbell and other Members of the House filed suit in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia against the President, charging that he had violated the War Powers Resolution, especially since 60 days had elapsed since the start of military operations in Kosovo. The President noted that he considered the War Powers Resolution constitutionally defective. The court ruled in favor of the President, holding that the Members lacked legal standing to bring the suit; this decision was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. See Campbell v. Clinton (external link) , 203 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2000). The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from this decision, in effect letting it stand.

2001: In the wake of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Congress passed Public Law 107-40 (PDF), authorizing President George W. Bush to "use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." For the first time, "organizations and persons" are specified in a Congressional authorization to use force pursuant to the War Powers Resolution, rather than just nations.

2002: Congress authorized President George W. Bush to use force against Iraq, pursuant to the War Powers Resolution, in Public Law 107-243 (PDF).

Constitutional Provisions

1. Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 8: Gives Congress the power to declare war and raise and support the armed forces. Available online (external link) .

2. Constitution, Article II, Section 2: President as Commander in Chief. Available online (external link)

Legislation

1. The War Powers Resolution, Pub. L. No. 93-148, 87 Stat. 555 (November 7, 1973). Available online (external link) . It is codified in Title 50, Chapter 33, Sections 1541-48 of the United States Code. Available online.

2. Authorization for use of Military Force, Pub. L. No. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (September 18, 2001). Available online (PDF).

3. Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-243, 116 Stat. 1498 (October 16, 2002). Available online (PDF).

Judicial Decisions

1. INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983). Available online (external link) .

2. Campbell v. Clinton, 203 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Available online (external link) .

Congressional Hearings

U.S. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs. Withdrawal of U.S. Forces from Somalia: Markup on H. Con Res. 170. 103d Cong., 1st Sess. November 3, 1993. Washington: U.S. GPO, 1994. CIS: 94-H381-21. LCCN: 94149518.
KF27 .F6 1993k

U.S. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs. Subcommittee on Arms Control, International Security, and Science. War Powers, Libya, and State-Sponsored Terrorism: Hearings. 99th Cong., 2d Sess. April 29, May 1 and 15, 1986. Washington: U.S. GPO, 1986. CIS: 86-H381-61. LCCN: 86602640.
KF27 .F636 1986a

U.S. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs. Subcommittee on International Economic Policy and Trade. Emergency Economic Powers: Iran: Hearing. 97th Cong., 1st Sess. March 5, 1981. Washington: U.S. GPO, 1981. CIS: 81-H381-75. LCCN: 81602940.
KF27 .F6465 1981b

U.S. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs. Subcommittee on National Security Policy and Scientific Development. Congress, the President, and the War Powers: Hearings. 91st Cong., 2d Sess. June 18, 23, 24, 25, 30; July 1, 9, 23, 28, 30; and August 5, 1970. Washington, U.S. GPO, 1970. CIS: 70-H381-24. LCCN: 74608701.
KF27.F6483 1970a

U.S. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs. Subcommittee on National Security Policy and Scientific Developments. War Powers Legislation: Hearings. 92d Cong., 1st Sess. June 1 and 2, 1971. Washington, U.S. GPO, 1971. CIS: 71-S381-13. LCCN: 71613736.
KF27.F6483 1971a

U.S. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs. Subcommittee on International Security and Scientific Affairs. Legislation to Combat International Terrorism: 98th Congress: Hearings and Markup before the Committee on Foreign Affairs and its Subcommittees on International Security and Scientific Affairs and on International Operations, House of Representatives, Ninety-eighth Congress, on H. Res. 233; H. Con. Res. 339; H.R. 5612; H.R. 5613; H.R. 6311, November 9, 1983; June 7, 13, 19; September 26, 1984. Washington : U.S. GPO, 1984. CIS: 85-H381-18. LCCN: 85601445.
KF27 .F64825 1983g

U.S. House. Committee on International Relations. Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq : Markup before the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Seventh Congress, Second Session on H.J. Res. 114, October 2 and October 3, 2002. Washington, D.C. U.S. GPO, 2002. Serial No. 107-116. CIS: 2002-H461-76. LCCN: 2002495227.
KF27 .I549 2002e

U.S. House. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations. Presidential Waiver Authority of Conflict of Interest Statutes: Hearing on H.R. 3381. 102d Cong., 1st Sess. October 3, 1991. Washington: U.S. GPO, 1992. Serial no. 38. CIS: 92-H521-32.
LCCN: 92202739.
KF27 .J832 1991e

U.S. Senate. Committee on Governmental Affairs. Critical Infrastructure Protection: Who's in Charge?: Hearing. 107th Cong., 1st Sess. October 4, 2001. Washington: U.S. GPO, 2002.CIS: 2002-S401-37. LCCN: 2002435590. PDF http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS22197
KF26 .G67 2001s

U.S. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on the Constitution, Federalism, and Property Rights. Applying the War Powers Resolution to the War on Terrorism: Hearing. 107th Cong., 2d Sess. April 17, 2002. Washington: U.S. GPO, 2003. S.Hrg. 107-892. CIS: 2003-S521-19. LCCN: 2003431468. PDF http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS33315
KF26 .J8359 2002

Congressional Documents, Prints and Reports

U.S. Senate. Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency. Emergency Powers Statutes: Provisions of Federal Law Now in Effect Delegating to the Executive Extraordinary Authority in Time of National Emergency; Report. 93d Cong., 1st Sess. September 1993. Washington, U.S. GPO, 1973. Committee Print. Also available as S. Rpt. 93-549 (November 19, 1973; CIS: 73-S963-2). CIS: 73-S962-2. LCCN: 73602837.
KF31.5 .T4 1973

Books

Brien Hallett. The Lost Art of Declaring War. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1998.
LCCN: 98008926.
KF5060 .H355 1998

Journal Articles and Reports

Lori Fisler Damrosch. The Clinton Administration and War Powers. 63 Law and Contemporary Problems 125 (Winter-Spring 2000). Available online at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=256831 (external link)
K12 .A9

Kevin J. Hale (Colonel), The War Powers Resolution: Intent, Implication, and Impact, Research Project A38, The Industrial College of the Armed Forces, National Defense University (1993). Available online at: https://web.archive.org/web/20080327170655/http://www.ndu.edu/library/ic6/93A38.pdf (external link) .

Jeffrey M. Hirsch. Can Congress Use Its War Powers to Protect Military Employees From State Sovereign Immunity, 34 Seton Hall Law Review 999 (Spring 2004). Available online at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=479102 (external link)
K23 .E85

Memorandum Opinion for the Deputy Counsel to the President, The President's Constitutional Authority to Conduct Military Operations Against Terrorists and Nations Supporting Them, September 25, 2001. Available online at: https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/president%E2%80%99s-constitutional-authority-conduct-military-operations-against-terrorists-and

Andre Miksha. Declaring War on the War Powers Resolution. 37 Valparaiso University Law Review 651 (Spring 2003).
K26 .A4

Jide Nzelibe. A Positive Theory of the War Powers Constitution, Northwestern Law & Econ Research Paper No. 05-03, February 15, 2005. Available online at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=667382. (external link)

Harold C. Relyea, Congressional Research Service, National Emergency Powers, CRS Report for Congress, 98-505 GOV, updated September 18, 2001, available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20161103010625/https://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/6216.pdf

(PDF).

David Thoreen. The President's Emergency War Powers and the Erosion of Civil Liberties in Pynchon's Vineland. 24 Oklahoma City University Law Review Number 3 (1999). Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20100607060958/http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/lpop/etext/okla/thoreen24.htm
K15 .K54

The Nixon Administration and War Powers Legislation, Foreign Relations, 1969-1976, Volume II, June 19, 1969, Available online from the Department of State Web site at: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/77859.pdf (PDF)

Web Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Back to United States: The Constitution This guide is intended to serve as an introduction to research on the War Powers Resolution, Public Law 93-148 (external link) , 87 Stat. 555, passed over President Nixon's veto on November 7, 1973.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Richard Nixon, like his arch-rival President John F. Kennedy, was far more interested in foreign policy than in domestic affairs. It was in this arena that Nixon intended to make his mark. Although his base of support was within the conservative wing of the Republican Party, and although he had made his own career as a militant opponent of Communism, Nixon saw opportunities to improve relations with the Soviet Union and establish relations with the People's Republic of China. Politically, he hoped to gain credit for easing Cold War tensions; geopolitically, he hoped to use the strengthened relations with Moscow and Beijing as leverage to pressure North Vietnam to end the war-or at least interrupt it -with a settlement. He would play China against the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union against China, and both against North Vietnam.

Nixon took office intending to secure control over foreign policy in the White House. He kept Secretary of State William Rogers and Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird out of the loop on key matters of foreign policy. The instrument of his control over what he called "the bureaucracy" was his assistant for national security affairs, Henry Kissinger. So closely did the two work together that they are sometimes referred to as "Nixinger." Together, they used the National Security Council staff to concentrate power in the White House-that is to say, within themselves.

Opening to China

A year before his election, Nixon had written in Foreign Affairs of the Chinese, that "There is no place on this small planet for a billion of its potentially most able people to live in angry isolation." Relations between the two great communist powers, the Soviet Union and China, had been deteriorating since the 1950s and had erupted into open conflict with border clashes during Nixon's first year in office. The President sensed opportunity and began to send out tentative diplomatic feelers to China. Reversing Cold War precedent, he publicly referred to the Communist nation by its official name, the People's Republic of China.A breakthrough of sorts occurred in the spring of 1971, when Mao Zedong invited an American table tennis team to China for some exhibition matches. Before long, Nixon dispatched Kissinger to secret meetings with Chinese officials. As America's foremost anti-Communist politician of the Cold War, Nixon was in a unique position to launch a diplomatic opening to China, leading to the birth of a new political maxim: "Only Nixon could go to China." The announcement that the President would make an unprecedented trip to Beijing caused a sensation among the American people, who had seen little of the world's most populous nation since the Communists had taken power. Nixon's visit to China in February 1972 was widely televised and heavily viewed. It was only a first step, but a decisive one, in the budding rapprochement between the two states.

Detente With the Soviet Union

The announcement of the Beijing summit produced an immediate improvement in American relations with the U.S.S.R.-namely, an invitation for Nixon to meet with Soviet premier Leonid Brezhnev in Russia. It was a sign that Nixon's effort at "triangulation" was working; fear of improved relations between China and America was leading the Soviets to better their own relations with America, just as Nixon hoped. In meeting with the Soviet leader, Nixon became the first President to visit Moscow.

Of more lasting importance were the treaties the two men signed to control the growth of nuclear arms. The agreements-a Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty and an Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty-did not end the arms race, but they paved the way for future pacts which sought to reduce and eliminate arms. Nixon also negotiated and signed agreements on science, space, and trade.

Withdrawal from Vietnam

While Nixon tried to use improved relations with the Soviets and Chinese to pressure North Vietnam to reach a settlement, he could only negotiate a flawed agreement that merely interrupted, rather than ended, the war.

In his first year in office, Nixon had tried to settle the war on favorable terms. Through secret negotiations between Kissinger and the North Vietnamese, the President warned that if major progress were not made by November 1, 1969, "we will be compelled-with great reluctance-to take measures of the greatest consequences." The NSC staff made plans for some of those options, including the resumed bombing of North Vietnam and the mining of Haiphong Harbor. Nixon then took a step designed both to interfere with Communist supplies and to signal a willingness to act irrationally to achieve his goals-he secretly ordered the bombing of Communist supply lines on the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Cambodia. Also in keeping with his intention to convey a sense of presidential irrationality-Nixon as "madman"-he launched a worldwide nuclear alert.

None of it worked. The North Vietnamese did not yield; Nixon did not carry out his threats; the war continued. Nixon did not know how to bring the conflict to a successful resolution.

The President did not reveal any of this to the American people. Publicly, he said his strategy was a combination of negotiating and "Vietnamization," a program to train and arm the South Vietnamese to take over responsibility for their own defense, thus enabling American troops to withdraw. He began the withdrawals even before he issued his secret ultimatum to the Communists, periodically announcing partial troop withdrawals throughout his first term.

After a coup in Cambodia replaced neutralist leader Prince Sihanouk with a pro-American military government of dubious survivability, Nixon ordered a temporary invasion of Cambodia-the administration called it an incursion-by American troops. The domestic response included the largest round of antiwar protests in American history. It was during these protests in May 1970 that National Guardsmen fired at rock-throwing protestors at Kent State University in Ohio, killing four. Two weeks later, police fired on students at Jackson State University in Mississippi, leaving two more dead.

By the end of the year, Nixon was planning to finish the American military withdrawal from Vietnam within eighteen months. Kissinger talked him out of it. Nixon's chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, recorded this discussion in his diary on December 21, 1970. "Henry was in for a while and the President discussed a possible trip for next year. He's thinking about going to Vietnam in April [1971] or whenever we decide to make the basic end-of-the-war announcement. His idea would be to tour around the country, build up [South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van] Thieu and so forth, and then make the announcement right afterwards. Henry argues against a commitment that early to withdraw all combat troops because he feels that if we pull them out by the end of '71, trouble can start mounting in '72 that we won't be able to deal with, and which we'll have to answer for at the elections. He prefers instead a commitment to have them all out by the end of '72 so that we won't have to deliver finally until after the [US presidential] elections [in November 1972] and therefore can keep our flanks protected. This would certainly seem to make more sense, and the President seemed to agree in general, but he wants Henry to work up plans on it."

In 1971, South Vietnamese ground forces, with American air support, took part in Lamson 719, an offensive against Communist supply lines on the Ho Chi Minh trail in Laos and Cambodia. Since American troops would not take part in ground combat operations in either country, Lamson was considered a test (at least a partial one) of the success of Vietnamization. By all accounts, it went badly, but it disrupted Communist supply lines long enough to aid the war effort.

Nixon and Kissinger anticipated that the biggest threat to their plans would be a dry-season Communist offensive in 1972. Their worst fears were realized when the North Vietnamese regular army poured into the South in March 1972. Nixon responded by implementing some of the plans he had made in 1969. He mined Haiphong Harbor and used B-52s to bomb the North. The combined power of the American and South Vietnamese military ultimately stopped the offensive, though not before the Communists had more territory under their control.

The North Vietnamese were eager to reach a settlement before the American presidential election and subsequent removal of U.S. forces from the country. Hanoi made a breakthrough proposal in October 1972 and reached agreement with Kissinger rapidly. The South Vietnamese government balked, however, chiefly because the agreement preserved North Vietnamese control of all the territory Hanoi currently held. To turn up the political pressure on Nixon, the North Vietnamese began broadcasting provisions of the agreement. Kissinger held a press conference announcing that "Peace is at hand" without giving away too many details.

After the election, Nixon told South Vietnamese president Thieu that if he did not agree to the settlement, Congress would cut off aid to his government-and that conservatives who had supported South Vietnam would lead the way. He promised that the United States would retaliate militarily if the North violated the agreement. To back up this threat, he launched the "Christmas Bombings" of 1972. When negotiations resumed in January, the few outstanding issues were quickly resolved. Thieu backed down. The Paris Peace Accords were signed on January 23, 1973, bringing an end to the participation of U.S. ground forces in the Vietnam War.

Beyond the "Big Three"

Nixon's policies vis-a-vis China, the Soviet Union and Vietnam are his most famous and controversial, but he left his mark on a host of other diplomatic matters.

The 1973 October War alerted America to the power of oil-producing Arab nations to impose a great price - literally, in the form of higher fuel costs - to force a compromise on the disposition of lands Israel seized in the Six Day War of 1967. When Egypt and Syria attacked Israel on Judaism's holiest day, Yom Kippur, they were backed up by Gulf oil states that announced a price increase of 70 percent; and when Nixon asked Congress for emergency aid to Israel, Arab officials imposed a total embargo on oil shipments to the United States. American dependence on foreign oil meant the crisis would not be resolved on military terms alone.

With Nixon distracted by Watergate, Kissinger took charge of policy. A large-scale American airlift of supplies prevented Israeli defeat; a ceasefire negotiated with the Soviet Union forestalled Israeli victory. When Israel continued fighting after the ceasefire deadline (with Kissinger's tacit acquiescence), the Soviets threatened unilateral action. Kissinger responded by putting American forces worldwide on DefCon (for Defense Condition) Three. The Soviets' tone changed. Instead of unilateral action, they now spoke of sending observers, not soldiers. The war ended soon thereafter with no apparent victor. Over the next several months, Kissinger helped redraw the lines of the Middle East and inspired the term "shuttle diplomacy" as he flew from capital to capital seeking agreement. The result was, as one observer put it, "a reasonably stable situation on the Sinai and Syrian fronts."In Chile, Nixon's opposition to the democratically elected president, socialist Salvador Allende, helped pave the way for a military coup whose legacy of death and despotism burden that nation still. Following Allende's election, Nixon authorized the CIA to prevent him from taking office by any means. General Renee Schneider, the Chilean army chief of staff, supported his country's constitution and opposed any coup plot. With U.S. encouragement, right-wing Argentine military officials tried to kidnap Schneider, wounding him fatally on October 22, 1970.

Nixon cut American aid to Chile, which had been running $70 million a year, to less than $1 million. The CIA continued to be involved in anti-Allende political activities before the socialist president died in a military coup on September 11, 1973. A junta led by General Augusto Pinochet replaced Chile's democracy with despotism. Allende supporters were rounded up and detained in Santiago's National Stadium. More than a thousand, including two Americans, were summarily executed. The evidence that has emerged to date indicates that Nixon had no direct involvement in the coup; the President, however, had done much to suggest that he would welcome one. Fearing a tyranny of the Left, he quickly embraced a tyranny of the Right.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Richard Nixon: Foreign Affairs | Miller Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Richard Nixon, like his arch-rival President John F. Kennedy, was far more interested in foreign policy than in domestic affairs. It was in this arena that Nixon intended to make his mark.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get access to files anywhere through secure cloud storage and file backup for your photos, videos, files and more with Google Drive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
HO CHI MINH CITY - Vietnam has handed over an area of land to its former war enemy the U.S., but this time the two sides aren't fighting across an old battlefield, but working together to fight what lies beneath.

What lies beneath are the remnants of Agent Orange, the chemical that U.S. forces sprayed across this country to destroy tree cover in the Vietnam War. Now Vietnam is handing over 37 hectares of land outside Ho Chi Minh City to the U.S. temporarily to remove the chemical, which has been linked to cancer and other diseases, birth defects, and environmental destruction.

Officials from both nations participated in an official handover ceremony Friday in Hanoi, before starting on the clean-up project in southern Bien Hoa city.

"The Bien Hoa Airbase, the primary Agent Orange storage and handling site during the U.S.-Vietnam War, is the largest remaining hotspot of dioxin contamination in Vietnam," the U.S. embassy in Hanoi said in a statement. It said this marks the latest in a general effort "to cooperate on the humanitarian mission of accounting for personnel still missing from the war, and resolve wartime legacy issues including the removal of unexploded ordnance, support for persons with disabilities, and the remediation of dioxin."

FILE - Soldiers detect Unexploded Ordnance and defoliant Agent Orange during the launch of the "environmental remediation of dioxin contamination" project, in Da Nang City, Vietnam.

Even as the U.S. has tried to make up for its intervention in a war opposed by many, there are limits to its reparations. The War Legacies Project, an advocacy organization for Agent Orange victims, supports the clean-up but says the U.S. doesn't do enough to help Vietnamese still hurt by exposure to the chemical contamination.

"The U.S. government continues to be hesitant to specifically support for those believed by the Vietnamese to be impacted by Agent Orange/dioxin," the organization said on its website. While Washington has provided funding to U.S. veterans hurt by Agent Orange, it has rejected Vietnam's claims that the chemical causes cancer, deformed limbs and spines, and other harm.

Around the Bien Hoa area, the Vietnamese government and the U.S. Agency for International Development determined that there are 500,000 cubic meters of land contaminated by dioxin. That represents four times as much contaminated land in the central city of Da Nang, which is where U.S. forces first entered the country in intervening in the Vietnam War in 1965.

The clean-up of the Da Nang Airport area cost $110 million and six years.

USAID has agreed to spend $183 million for the first five years of the Bien Hoa clean-up, estimated to require 10 years.

FILE - The cleaning operation of the area that was used for storing Agent Orange is seen from a plane taking off from Danang international airport.

Although the latest clean-up is moving ahead, it is not likely to be the end of the story. Observers are waiting to see when the Vietnamese President Nguyen Phu Trong will make an official visit to Washington, expected to be by the end of the year. And issues about the Vietnam War will probably be on the agenda, Carl Thayer, emeritus professor with the University of New South Wales in Australia, said.

"Vietnam will press the United States to continue to address war legacy issues," he said, "such as Agent Orange or dioxin contamination and disposal of unexploded ordnance."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Agent Orange Still a Major Concern for Vietnam

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Vietnam has handed over an area of land to its former war enemy the U.S., but this time the two sides aren't fighting across an old battlefield, but working together to fight what lies beneath. What lies beneath are the remnants of Agent Orange, the chemical that U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
International Response to Khmer Rouge Rule — United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Foreign journalists who were in Phnom Penh when the Khmer Rouge captured the city wrote harrowing accounts of the atrocities they witnessed. After that, the Khmer Rouge sealed off the country from the outside world, but reports of unspeakable hardships continued to trickle out. Western journalists i…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You've probably seen it: the simple black walls that emerge from the peaceful Constitution Gardens in Washington, D.C., the more than 58,000 half-inch-high names inscribed on the granite. It's the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and since 1982, it has commemorated military personnel who died or were declared missing in action during their Vietnam War service.

The moment plans for the memorial were unveiled, it was clear the structure would be immediately recognizable-and controversial. It was all the more astonishing because of its creator, an unknown, 21-year-old student with no professional experience.

Maya Lin was still an undergraduate at Yale University when she beat out more than 1,400 competitors in a competition to design the memorial. A Chinese-American, Lin was born in Ohio, where her parents were professors. They escaped mainland China as young adults when it became clear that their families might be threatened by Maoist revolutionaries.

Though she majored in architecture, Lin was far from a professional architect. And while she had little personal connection to Vietnam, she did experience the cascading effects of the war: During the 1970s, the conflict indelibly impacted American life and popular culture. Television news brought the war into peoples' living rooms in unprecedented-and graphic-detail. Young adults lived in fear of the draft and the father of one of Lin's high school friends was killed in combat.
READ MORE: 6 Things You May Not Know About the Vietnam Veterans Memorial

For veterans, the toll was even greater. The war had profound psychological effects, and even 40 years later veterans suffer from PTSD, exposure to chemicals like Agent Orange and wounds they received in the war. More than 300,000 Americans were wounded during the war.

Lin was aware of those costs, and she wanted to commemorate them with a fiercely modern design. She created it as part of a college architecture class that challenged students to make an entry for the national design competition for the planned memorial.

Instead of something heroic or celebratory, Lin imagined two stark black walls that began inside the earth, then grew and grew in height until they met-like a "wound that is closed and healing." The V-shaped wall, designed to point toward the Lincoln and Washington Memorials, would be inscribed with the names of the dead in chronological order. It would exist inside a park, as inextricable from the landscape as it was from the minds of Americans.

"I just wanted to be honest with people," Lin told The Washington Post. "I didn't want to make something that said 'They've gone away for a while.' I wanted something that would just simply say 'They can never come back. They should be remembered.'"

The jury, which judged the entries blind, agreed. (Meanwhile, Lin only got a B on her assignment; she ended up beating out her professor in the competition.) But Lin's bleak concept didn't sit well with many members of the public, who expected a more imposing, complex and grandiose monument with marble, columns and statues in the vein of other buildings on the Mall, like the Lincoln or Jefferson Memorials.
CHECK OUT: Vietnam Veterans Memorial Infographic

A group of veterans protested the design, claiming that it was an ugly insult that portrayed the war as shameful, dishonorable and worth hiding. "For too long the veterans of that miserable conflict have borne the burden of the national ambivalence about the war," wrote one critic. "To bury them now in a black stone sarcophagus, sunk into a hollow in the earth below eye level, is like spitting on their graves."

Critics found an ally in then-radio host Patrick Buchanan and Congressman Henry Hyde. They launched a campaign to change the wall to a white color and add an eight-foot-high sculpture of soldiers to the site. The wall's detractors used everything from Lin's age to her ethnicity to her as reasons the design should be changed or abandoned altogether. Lin vehemently disagreed and accused Hyde of "drawing mustaches on other people's portraits."

The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, which was in charge of the final design, finally brokered a compromise. They kept Lin's design and added a sculpture that had won third place in the design competition, Frederick Elliot Hart's "Three Soldiers," nearby. A tribute to the 11,000 in uniform-the first to honor women's military service in the nation's capital-was added in 1993.
READ MORE: Why Were Vietnam War Vets Treated Poorly When They Returned?
Lin did not attend the compromise meeting, and was so hurt by the controversy over her work that it took her years to discuss it publicly. In 2000, she published an essay about her design process. "It wasn't so much of an artistic dispute as a political one," she wrote. "It was extremely naïve of me to think that I could produce a neutral statement that would not become politically controversial simply because it chose not to take sides." She had always intended the memorial to be apolitical, she wrote, but she regretted the ways she had become a weapon in the fight against a memorial intended to highlight veterans.

The critics may have been louder at the time, but many Americans were appreciative of Lin's striking design. Spurred on by the activism of the wounded Vietnam veteran Jan C. Scruggs and sympathetic celebrities like Bob Hope, some 275,000 Americans, as well as businesses and veterans' groups, donated $8.4 million so the memorial could be built. While U.S Congress had allocated three acres on the National Mall for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, funding for the project came from the private sector, not the government.
READ MORE: G.I.'s Drug Use in Vietnam Soared-With Their Commanders' Help

Today, the wall has become a destination for visitors to Washington D.C., even those who did not experience the war firsthand. People with friends or relatives who fought in the war search for their names and rub impressions of them onto paper. Offerings like letters, medals, photos and dog tags are left almost daily.

In 1999, Congress expanded its definition of both the length of the war and the areas it covered. As a result, the Department of Defense regularly learns of more service members who died during combat or whose service records have been re-evaluated and adds their names.

In 2010, a study even found that visiting the wall multiple times can help Vietnam veterans better cope with post-traumatic stress.

Now a world-respected artist and architect, Lin continues to design iconic structures like the Civil Rights Memorial, a fountain and sculpture in Montgomery, Alabama that is inscribed with the names of activists who died during the Civil Rights Movement. A member of the National Women's Hall of Fame, she received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2016. But her most lasting legacy will likely be the wall she designed as a 21-year-old student-and how it honors the veterans it was meant to commemorate.
READ MORE: How the Vietnam War Ratcheted Up Under 5 US Presidents

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
asian american and pacific islander history

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This 21-Year-Old College Student Designed the Vietnam Veterans Memorial

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You've probably seen it: the simple black walls that emerge from the peaceful Constitution Gardens in Washington, D.C., the more than 58,000 half-inch-high names inscribed on the granite. It's the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and since 1982, it has commemorated military personnel who died or were declared missing in action during their Vietnam War service.

# data[].attributes.body
It’s important to have this data so there can be resources to help veterans affected by PTSD now and for future veterans. But this data can also be a warning towards enlisting soldiers, to remind them of the after effects of going to war. Overall PTSD still remains a reality to many Americans apart from Veterans.

# data[].attributes.body
The Boat People's Journey: Most Vietnamese people emigrated from Vietnam by boat. On these journeys over, one of every three people died from any number of causes; including dehydration, starvation, pirate attacks, rough seas, and bad weather. The risk of emigration outweighed their fate of staying in Vietnam.

A New Life in America: The Vietnamese people who immigrated to America rarely had anything more than the clothes on their back. Many escaped by the skin of their teeth, only to face a long, painful, and often fatal journey. Those who survived were transported to refugee camps to start their new lives.

# data[].attributes.body
One big takeaway lesson from the Watergate Scandal is the dangers of media and how easily people can blame their own mistakes on it. I think Watergate has also made people more suspicious of people, in particular, president's actions. Media and reporters are much more cautious and suspicious of the information they get politically and presidents are not given nearly as much leniency as they used it.

# data[].attributes.body
What president George H.W. Bush did in 1990-1991 somehow showed  the War Powers Act was not effective. He showed that "he did not need authority from congress" for his action.

# data[].attributes.body
Reducing the tension between China and Soviet Union was the most helpful action they did. The most harmful action was not ending the war successfully.

# data[].attributes.body
Here are the lyrics if you want to check your answer after listening.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the second part of the first lesson is really important because it states that "American veterans deserve our respect, gratitude, and support", which is 100% true. They sacrificed so much in order to fight for out country and the least we can do for them is give them the respect and support that they warrant. Another lesson I think is important is the second one because to me, it is important that everyone knows what is going on and what the plan is going to be. I think that in order to cut down on the caos there needs to be some sort of honest communication and also because the people who were fighting for out country have a right to know what the officials are planning to do as they are the ones making the sacrifices.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the U.S has a responsibility to Vietnam to help clean up Agent Orange. This is because it still has harmful long term effects like cancer and birth defects. However I think that the U.S is doing enough. think that the fact that a plan has been set in place is good progress.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with the controversy over Maya Lin's memorial design, because her purpose for that design is to remember the people who died during the war. There is no wrong about that.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it is very important to have this data so the US is able to help veterans who suffer from long term health and metal health problems. This data can help provide solutions and assistance to veterans affected by the war. It will also be important for the future, to possibly prevent future veterans from having mental health problems.

# data[].attributes.body
People mainly leave Vietnam to get better work opportunities. Leaving their country was a real challenge since they were not allowed to,  they had to find strategies which mainly implied finding or building a boat. Often families were separated in the process and struggled for years to reunite.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think that the Wars Powers Act was effective, especially during 1993-99. In President Clinton's case representatives charged him with violating the Wars Powers Act since the start of military operations in Kosovo, even though Clinton noted that he considered the War Powers Act constitutionally defective. The court ruled in his favor in Campbell v. Clinton court case.

# data[].attributes.body
Out of Nixon's policies, I believe that one of the most helpful policies was SALT I, which limited the sales, distribution and use of arms by administrations of both China and Russia, and deescalated tensions between all three. The action that was most harmful was hesitating and stalling the end of the Vietnam War over the wishes of the people, and refusing to provide a straight, candid version of the facts of the conflict.

# data[].attributes.body
some references are H2Ogate which was is watergate also the lie detector blues which is about the philly mayor trying to dig up dirt on his opponent.
A modern song would be The bigger Picture by Lil baby which talks about the racism thats is still present today in America

# data[].attributes.body
I think the second part of the first lesson is super important because it is about respecting the veterans. Which I think is very important because they fought for our country.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the US has the responsibility to remove the chemical from Vietnam and do their part to help Vietnamese who are still effected by Agent Orange. Although the US has begun the clean-up project of Agent Orange, they still have not admitted that this chemical causes cancer and other diseases, birth defects, and environmental destruction. Many Vietnam citizens are still effected by Agent Orange so I think the US should be doing more than just removing the chemical.

# data[].attributes.body
I mostly disagree with the controversy over Maya Lin's memorial design, although I can see where it is coming from. I think that Maya's point of being straight forward and acknowledging all of the people that died is the way it should be for a memorial. I also like how she made the shape of the memorial have an important meaning of healing. On the other hand, I do think it can be nice to make memorials a little more "fancy" and nicer looking to have a better way to commemorate all of the people that had lost their lives.

# data[].attributes.body
It's extremely important to have this data to inform Americans the true cost of war. Veterans mental health needs to be talked about more so the public realizes the effects of war that they rarely take time to think about. This data can also help young kids to want to join the army to make a better informed decision and understand what they could endure after going into combat.

# data[].attributes.body
Poverty and the continuation of war were the main reasons Vietnamese fled their country. They risked spending years in reeducation camps and several failed attempts to get to the US. Life after the war was different for many people but overall there was a positive effect on their lives, a new beginning.

# data[].attributes.body
I researched when President Reagan employed military advisors to El Salvador in 1981. Reagan did not submit a report, but this shows how the War Powers Act was not taken seriously at first. Later, he was faced with a lawsuit but it never ended up getting a hearing.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the most helpful foreign policies under Nixon was him going to China to prove that he wasn't against them. That helped the tension that was between them

# data[].attributes.body
The song H2Ogate blues was a song that reference numerous historical events that relate to Americas corrupt government after the watergate scandal opened many americans eyes about the American government. They reference the united states energy crisis, the unethical fighting in vietnam, including ecological warfare, school segregation, minimum wage issues, inflation. election sabatoge of watergate, the  massacre at Attica prison, and the murder of Bobby Seale by the government by being gagged and bound. A song that describes America today would be "This is America" by Childish Gambino.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the U.S needs to do its part and clean up Agent Orange. The reason I think this is because t of the terrible deseases/ long term effects that put them at a major risk. I think the U.S needs to go back and revise their plan and offer more help.

# data[].attributes.body
I think Maya should've matched the style of the other memorials around her but I don't think it's that big of a deal to spark controversy over.

# data[].attributes.body
I also think this is important to have for the Veterans to know what will the long term effects like mental and physical issues. Going to war is already a brave thing to do, and having those effects is not the Veterans fault. This would help many upcoming veterans about the effects of going to war.

# data[].attributes.body
People left Vietnam for better job opportunities, to be reunited with their family, and/or have the chance at a better life. But, individuals and families faced many risks when leaving. Some people even made their own boats to leave Vietnam even though there was a big chance they could die on the journey.

# data[].attributes.body
The Campaign finance reform was created after the Watergate Scandal. The relationship between the press and president has changed and the press has become harsher and more critical toward the president. The public also became more critical of the president and became aware of the ways the president can cover up his actions and the power he has to hide things from the public.

# data[].attributes.body
The War Powers Act was created in order to increase control in foreign policies over the executive branch. I don't believe this was effective because in 1990-91, George Bush said himself that he had no intention on getting authority from Congress.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the U.S. has the responsibility of cleaning up the land and getting rid of the Agent Orange chemicals. It seems like the U.S. has started to helo but there is more they can do. I think they owe it to Vietnam to clean up the chemical and help those who were affected by it as it have severe effects.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with the controversy over Maya Lin's design because by reading her explanation, you can see that the intended goal was to create a neutral statement, because she didn't want to pick sides. I understand that people had a problem with it because they didn't think it fully honored the soldiers, but that doesn't mean they should be able to blame the memento on Maya's age and ethnicity. I think that the compromise with the sculpture was a good addition to make more citizens content.

# data[].attributes.body
Its important to have this data for the veterans so they can get the help they need. Without the data it would be hard to help them with PTSD. Its also important for the future veterans or people who want to join.

# data[].attributes.body
Many people fled Vietnam in search of freedom in another country.  They did this, understanding the risks of death, and separation from everything they knew. After the war, some soldiers were able to leave Vietnam. However, the ones that stayed were sent to re-education under the new communist government.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that a take away from this video is how the American System uses it checks and balances. which allowed the legislative branch through the Committee hearings, and the judiciary branch. I think the Senate hearings exposed the depth of the scandal, and the court system provided the venue for bringing the offenders to justice.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think it was effective because he stated "he did not need authority from congress" to carry it out.

# data[].attributes.body
The US caused a lot of long term damages because of Agent Orange in Vietnam and it is the US responsibility to help make up for these damages. Because of Agent Orange people are still victims of radiation which causes cancer, birth defects and environmental destruction. I think that the US is on the right track by helping to remove chemicals but could do more like provide financial aid for the medical treatment of patients who are suffering from Agent Orange’s effects.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with the controversy surrounding Maya Lin's memorial. I see how her neutral design could have been interpreted as mocking veterans, but I think that, while keeping the majority of the country's stance on the war in mind, an apolitical memorial would shed less light to the actual politics of it all, and more so to the real people who lost their lives.

# data[].attributes.body
It’s crucial to have data regarding the mental health of veterans  because mental health issues are not always evident and recognized compared to a physical disability. Mental health issues are real that need to be addressed to help not only those who are suffering but the future generation as well.

# data[].attributes.body
In the story “I was on the plane that crashed”, children and babies from a Vietnamese orphanage were airlifted by the US for a better life in America but the plane crashed. There were numerous casualties but the narrator was one of the survivors who was plucked from the rice field, overcame the struggles and in the end had a successful life in America as she saw the crash as a reason to strive and appreciate life.

# data[].attributes.body
U.S. is responsible for the people who had cancer and area that are still dangerous because of Agent Orange. I think the U.S. is putting effort in helping cleaning up that area, but I think the U.S. can provide more medical support for those people who is affected by Agent Orange.

# data[].attributes.body
I Disagree with the controversy even though I do think it should match the style of the other designs around her. But its just not that big of a deal to me.

# data[].attributes.body
At the time the president was angry at the press because they had tape proofs of what he was saying and were publishing suspicions they had toward him, so a sort of back and forth argument battled started. Today the press changed the way it responds to a president and have more funded arguments toward him.

# data[].attributes.body
The US is most definitely responsible for Agent Orange and cleaning the chemical from Vietnamese land. Though the US is making active strides in wiping the chemical and exterminating it from Vietnam, they have been very hesitant to acknowledge the harm it has also done to the people themselves, and reluctant to provide support for the people to overcome the effects induced by the chemical.

# data[].attributes.body
I somewhat what agree with the controversy over the monument.This is because like they said it was very modern and was not like the past monuments with marble and extensive detail. I also find that a-lot of the people that fought in the war didn't want to go to war but had to as they were drafted. and to not get the the treatment that past wars got would be like a slap in the face.

# data[].attributes.body
The US is responsible for all the damage that was caused. Because of Agent Orange cancer and other diseases has affected people.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Controversy over Maya Lins Memorial design because I didn't see a problem with it remembering the people that died during the war.

# data[].attributes.body
The US is responsible for the Agent Orange chemicals. They are doing good and working to help aid this effort, but I believe they could and should be doing more.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with the controversy, simply because Maya when designing this memorial she had no thoughts about any of the controversy that are stated. She just wanted to make this as a memorial for the people who died during war.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with the controversy, as Lin was simply trying to memorialise the victims of the conflict. I find it disrespectful to the memories of the innocent victims to argue over whether it's shiny and flashy or not; it's still a memorial. The main purpose is to provide a reminder and make sure the victims are never forgotten, which I believe Lin did quite well-it shouldn't be a huge deal about how it looks or how much attention it catches.

# data[].attributes.body
i Agree because even though many died it would be remember that they didnt die in vien. She said " I wanted something that would simply say they can never come back." In my opinion it would mean to move on knowing that the person died so that they could live for them and a country where it was protect.