Mattis, Tillerson say new war authorization legislation "not legally required"
President Trump's Secretaries of State and Defense made the case that a new version of the Authorization for Use of Military Force or AUMF was not necessary and in fact drafting new legislation could potentially cause a disruption to America's military readiness.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis testified Monday three months after they informed the panel the post-Sept. 11, 2001, law gave the military ample authority to fight terrorist groups and a new one was unnecessary.
A separate authorization for the war in Iraq approved by Congress in 2002 also remains in force.
Tillerson said that while the administration relies on the AUMF to provide "domestic legal authority" in operations around the world in countering terrorist organizations, he urged however, that the U.S. "will not hesitate to use proportional forces" to defend those engaged in the campaign against ISIS.
Tillerson suggested ways in which the administration would support Congress writing new legislation in place of the AUMF.
He said that new authorizations must be in place prior to the repeal of old ones. Failure to do so can cause "confusion in military operations" and "cause allies in the global coalition to question the U.S.' commitment to defeating ISIS."
He added that a new AUMF should not be time constrained, allow the U.S. freedom to quickly move against enemies without constraints of a "feedback loop" and should not be "geographically restricted."
Defense Secretary James Mattis echoed those calls and parameters, saying the 2001 and 2002 AUMF should not be repealed in order to prevent greater confusion and stalling current military operations.
"We can't put firm timeline on conflict," urged Mattis, adding "We must recognize we're in an era of frequent skirmishing."
The testimony provided also came on the heels of the deadly ambush in Niger, which has ignited a push among many lawmakers to update the legal parameters for combat operations overseas.
Mattis was asked to detail what the exact mission was in Niger at the time of the deadly ambush.
He explained that the troops were in the region under Title 10 in a train and advisory role which was directed in 2013. 100 troops were deployed in "furtherance of U.S. national security interests."
He added that the mission in Niger was a combined patrol in conjunction with Niger troops to teach them how to conduct "key leader engagement" but urged awaiting further investigations to expand on their exact roles.
Asked how the president can respond to further threats of Boko Haram in the region, Mattis said "If the president detects there's a treat to the U.S. and under the AUMF if they say they're aligned with ISIS" he believes the administration can indeed order more troops to that area.
And on North Korea, both Tillerson and Mattis were asked to to detail the case in which the president would or would not need congressional authorization to engage in military activity against the North Koreans. Tillerson said that it would "depend all on circumstances" but would ultimately be a "fact-based decision."
Mattis echoed Tillerson, saying the president has to "responsibly protect the country, and if theres not time, I can imagining him not consulting or consulting as he's doing something," similar to the air strike conducting in Syria where Mattis said Congress was "notified immediately" of the action.
"In this case of North Korea it would be a direct imminent or actual attack on the U.S. that Article 2 would apply, said Mattis.
When asked to postulate on a hypothetical situation in which President Trump could launch nuclear weapons against a country where that country has not launched nuclear weapons against the U.S., Mattis said, "If we saw they were preparing to do so and it was imminent, I could imagine it. It's not the only tool in the toolkit to try to address something like that, but I believe that congressional oversight does not equate to operational control."
Mattis, further describing what a potential response to North Korean strikes would look like, said ballistic missile defense forces from across the country and various radars would feed in and "do what they're designed to do as we make every effort to take them out."
He added that the "response after the immediate defense would depend on the president and laying out options and in alliance with our allies as well."
He added, "We rehearse this routinely, let's just leave it at that."
The Senate just last month voted to reject a bipartisan push for a new war authorization against the Islamic State and other terrorist groups, electing to let the White House rely on the 16-year-old law as the legal basis to send U.S. troops into combat.
Senators voted 61-36 scuttle an amendment to the annual defense policy bill by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., that would have allowed war authorizations, created in the wake of al-Qaida's 9/11 strikes, to lapse after six months. Paul, a leader of the GOP's noninterventionist wing, said Congress would use the time to debate an updated war authority for operations in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere before the old ones expired.
GOP leaders said voting to rescind existing war authority without a replacement in hand risks leaving U.S. troops and commanders in combat zones without the necessary legal authority they need to carry out military operations.
Follow along for live updates:
Military options in North Korea
6:22 p.m. Asked by Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, to detail the case in which the president would or would not need congressional authorization to engage in military activity against the North Koreans, Tillerson said that it would "depend all on circumstances" but would ultimately be a "fact-based decision."
Mattis echoed Tillerson, saying the president has to "responsibly protect the country, and if theres not time, I can imagining him not consulting or consulting as he's doing something," similar to the air strike conducting in Syria where Mattis said Congress was "notified immediately" of the action.
"In this case of North Korea it would be a direct imminent or actual attack on the U.S. that Article 2 would apply, said Mattis.
Asked to outline what a response might look like if North Korea would strike the U.S. first, Mattis said ballistic missile defense forces from across the country and various radars would feed in and "do what they're designed to do as we make every effort to take them out."
He added that the "Response after the immediate defense would depend on the president and laying out options and in alliance with our allies as well."
"We rehearse this routinely, let's just leave it at that," said Mattis.
Hearing takes a brief recess
5:56 p.m. Before departing for a brief recess for Senate votes, Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Arizona urged his colleagues that Congress needs to be able to "weigh in" on military operations and that "our troops must know we speak with one voice."
"We ought to aspire to be more than a feedback loop," Flake added.
Tillerson, Mattis detail current U.S. operations
5:50 p.m. Tillerson says the U.S. will remain in Iraq "until ISIS is defeated" under the 2001 and 2002 AUMF's.
"We are there at the invitation of the Iraqi government and Prime Minister Abadi has given me no indication that he's in no particular hurry for us to depart," Tillerson adds.
Hearing shifts to Niger
5:34 p.m. Mattis is asked to explain what the exact mission was in Niger and when the deadly ambush occurred.
Mattis says that the troops were in the region under Title 10 in a train and advisory role which was directed in 2013. 100 troops were deployed in "furtherance of U.S. national security interests."
He adds that the mission on patrol in Niger was a combined patrol in conjunction with Niger troops to teach them how to conduct "key leader engagement" but urges awaiting further investigations to expand on their exact roles.
Asked how the president can respond to further threats of Boko Haram in the region, Mattis said "If the president detects there's a treat to the U.S. and under the AUMF if they say they're aligned with ISIS" he believes the administration can indeed order more troops to that area.
Mattis offers testimony
5:26 p.m. Defense Secretary James Mattis echoes Tilllerson's calls, saying the 2001 and 2002 AUMF should not be repealed in order to prevent confusion and stalling current military operations.
"We can't put firm timeline on conflict," urges Mattis, adding "We must recognize we're in an era of frequent skirmishing."
"Regardless of adaptations, we must make for the common defense its incumbent on DOD to keep Congress fully informed and fulfill its constitutional role and I will continue to do so," adds Mattis on Defense's transparency.
Both Secretaries Mattis and Tillerson agree that the AUMF must be "statement of unity" between Congress and the administration.
Tillerson offers testimony
5:16 p.m. Secretary Rex Tillerson says the administration relies on the AUMF to provide "domestic legal authority" in operations around the world in countering terrorist organizations and in its effort to defend coalition forces in Syria.
He urges however, that the U.S. "will not hesitate to use proportional forces" to defend those engaged in the campaign against ISIS.
Tillerson suggested ways in which the administration would support Congress writing new legislation in place of the AUMF.
Tillerson said that new authorizations must be in place prior to the repeal of old ones. Failure to do so can cause "confusion in military operations" and "cause allies in the global coalition to question the U.S.' commitment to defeating ISIS", according to Tillerson
He adds that it should not be time constrained, should allow U.S. freedom to quickly move against enemies without constraints of a "feedback loop" and should not be "geographically restricted."
Hearing begins
5:05 p.m. Sen. Corker says the use of lethal force against terrorist groups will remain necessary foreseeable future to prevent attacks against Americans.
Corker says while he agrees with the fact that the president has the legal authority to authorize military force under the 2001 law to fight these groups, he urges a "united" Congress to stand behind the law.
Ranking member Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Maryland calls the issue of the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) one of the most important issues facing the country and Congress today.
Cardin cites the Niger attacks as reasoning for transparency in the administration's role in deploying troops around the world.
"The 9/11 and Iraq AUMF have become mere authorities of convenience to conduct military activities anywhere in the world," adds Cardin.
He adds that he, along with his colleagues "never intended to use the AUMF to justify the use of military force against ISIS." Cardin says military force appears to be relied on as the first response to growing threats across the country and world.
Tillerson, Mattis arrive to hearing
4:56 p.m. Secretaries James Mattis and Rex Tillerson arrive to the hearing room as protesters chant "stop endless war!"
Demonstrators were quickly removed for their disturbance as both Mattis and Tillerson took their seats before lawmakers
5:02 p.m. Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee says the president's "de facto ability initiate conflict grown in an age of advanced technology, citing air strikes and drone operations.