A new bill, part of the National Defense Authorization Act, was approved last week by the US House Armed Services Committee and is heading for the floor this month. If passed, it will allow the US military to attack any "associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States" anywhere in the world.

As House Democrats protested, this bill will "grant the president near unfettered authority to initiate military action around the world without further Congressional approval".

The real concern for the international community is that the translation of such US domestic law into action would collide with international law and infringe upon the sovereignty of other nations.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force, approved by Congress a week after the Sept 11, 2001 attacks, gives the US president the authority to go after anyone who committed or aided in the 9/11 attacks, or who harbored such people, to prevent acts of terrorism.

Armed with this domestic authorization, President Obama ordered the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound in Pakistan. While the demise of the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks against the US was welcomed by most nations, the unilateral military action caused outcry and outrage in Pakistan, which protested the violation of its territorial sovereignty. US-Pakistan relations have deteriorated as a result.

Why are House Republicans going even further with this widely expansive authorization at a time when bin Laden has just been killed and there is no threat of terrorism against the US other than the Taliban and the remnants of Al-Qaida?

Domestic politics is the answer.

While the $690 billion defense budget for the 2012 fiscal year is lower than that for the previous fiscal year, the $553 billion base budget focusing on buying military equipment has increased. The arms industry, which has serious political clout, especially with the campaigns for president looming, certainly has a vested interest in the bill.

International politics also matter. Some US congressmen may think this is a good time to demonstrate global dominance by authorizing the US forces to "pursue virtually anyone suspected of terrorism, anywhere on earth, from now to the end of time."

The deliberately vague phrasing could include anyone who doesn't like the US. If the bill is approved by Congress, it could serve as carte blanche for more unilateral military action by the US upon other nations.

The New York Times was right in sounding the alarm about "a conflict without end" for the US: "This wildly expansive authorization would, in essence, make the war on terror a permanent and limitless aspect of life on earth, along with its huge potential for abuse."

The question the world should ask now is this: Are we ready for this new form of Pax Americana in the name of anti-terrorism?

(China Daily 05/23/2011 page8)