Commentary: Trump’s blockade is an act of war, not the end of war – The Spokesman-Review
Color Scheme
Subscriber Actions
Staff Options
Connect With Us
Support Local Journalism
This column reflects the opinion of the writer. Learn about the differences between a news story and an opinion column.
President Donald Trump recently described the U.S. naval blockade of Iran as “a very friendly blockade.” There is no such thing.
A blockade is an act of war, using armed forces to restrict another nation’s movement, commerce and access to the sea. It does not become peaceful because no one challenges it on a particular day.
Trump’s administration says the ceasefire with Iran means he no longer has to seek congressional authorization to continue the war beyond 60 days, even though federal law requires it. A ceasefire may pause the shooting. It does not make an ongoing act of war disappear. The president can argue that the blockade is necessary. He cannot honestly argue that the war is effectively over while keeping the blockade in place.
More dangerous than Trump’s word choice is Congress’ silence. The United States is more than two months into this war with Iran, the U.S. Navy is still enforcing a blockade and lawmakers have not voted to authorize the continued use of force. If Congress will not decide whether the country remains at war, what exactly is it for?
The War Powers Resolution was passed after Vietnam to prevent any president from turning temporary military action into open-ended war without authorization from Congress. It gives presidents some room to use military force in an emergency, but not unlimited room. Once a president reports hostilities, he has 60 days to get congressional authorization or terminate “any use of United States Armed Forces.” If a naval blockade is not a use of armed forces, that phrase has no meaning.
Trump’s argument is part of a broader attempt to make Congress optional in matters of war. He defended his position by suggesting that presidents have “been involved in things that are very big” before without seeking lawmakers’ approval, and that no other president had been forced to do what lawmakers were asking of him. He also argued that congressional scrutiny would hurt his negotiating position with Iran.
Trump is treating congressional weakness as presidential permission. Because other presidents have stretched their war powers and Congress has too often failed to stop them, he now treats lawful congressional action as an illegitimate constraint. But a failure to exercise power does not automatically surrender that power to another branch of government. It shows how badly the legislative branch has been weakened.
His grasp of history is wrong too. Presidents have gone to Congress for major wars. Lawmakers authorized the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the use of force after Sept. 11 and the Iraq war in 2002. Earlier Congresses exercised their constitutional power to formally declare war.
The framers of the Constitution did not expect legislators to control individual ship movements or troop deployments. But they did expect the legislative branch to decide whether to send the country to war – and whether to keep it there – because that choice is too grave to leave to one person.
That is the responsibility Congress is avoiding now. As the 60-day deadline arrived on May 1, members were leaving Washington for a weeklong recess. Rather than forcing a decision, they went home.
Members who support the war should vote to authorize it. If they believe Trump’s blockade is necessary, if they believe continued military pressure will produce a better settlement, they should put their names on that position and defend it to the people they represent.
Members who oppose the war should vote to stop it. If they believe the U.S. is drifting into an unauthorized and open-ended conflict, they should put their names on that position too. They should not settle for speeches or performative social media posts.
The one indefensible position is the one Congress appears most comfortable taking: avoiding its responsibility to vote while the country remains at war.
Every day the blockade continues, American sailors are being ordered to carry out an act of war. Every day Congress declines either to authorize or stop this operation, it makes itself part of the decision. Members may prefer to let Trump carry the blame alone, but constitutional responsibility does not work that way.
This is how military commitments become forever wars. They continue because no one with power is willing to force the question. The result is a conflict without a vote, without a clear end state and without the public accountability the Constitution requires.
Trump may call the blockade friendly or say hostilities have terminated. He may argue that congressional oversight is a threat to his negotiating leverage. But none of that changes what U.S. forces are being ordered to do, and none of it excuses Congress from doing what the people elected it to do.
If Congress believes the United States should remain at war with Iran, it should vote that way. If it does not, it should stop the war or stop funding it. What it cannot do is hide from its responsibility while pretending this remains Trump’s war alone.
This is Congress’ war now too.
Jon Duffy is a retired naval officer. He writes about leadership and democracy.
Local journalism is essential.
Give directly to The Spokesman-Review’s Northwest Passages community forums series — which helps to offset the costs of several reporter and editor positions at the newspaper — by using the easy options below. Gifts processed in this system are tax deductible.
Meet Jesse Tinsley. As a certified drone pilot, this veteran Spokesman-Review photographer often can be seen capturing beautiful aerial photographs of our region. Sometimes though, the job requires getting down with the dogs.
Jim Meehan is no stranger to Zag Nation. As the lead writer covering the Gonzaga men’s basketball team, he tells the stories behind the game and gets fans a bit closer to their favorite players.
There is no artist in Spokane like Molly Quinn. Her whimsical style is instantly recognizable to readers of The Spokesman-Review. She has painted gorgeous illustrations that instantly elevate the journalism accompanying it. She brings to life the stories that defy photography. She makes our pages better.
Spokesman-Review editor Rob Curley loves to talk with people and learn about their lives, whether it's a best-selling author or a stranger he meets downtown on his walk to lunch. It's that inquisitive nature combined with a playful sense of storytelling that helps make our newspaper different than most.
Get breaking news delivered to your inbox as it happens.
We can all use a little hope and redemption.
Follow Us
Support Local Journalism
Subscribe
Help
User
Advertising
More
Contact Us
© Copyright 2026, The Spokesman-Review | Community Guidelines | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy