WASHINGTON: US Secretary of Defence James Mattis has informed Congress that the administration needs unfettered authority to use military force for defeating terrorists in South Asia and other regions.

At a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Monday night, Secretary Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson laid out three conditions for Congress to follow should it pass a new war authorisation. The two senior most members of the Trump cabinet told the committee that a new war authorisation should not have time or geographic constraints.

They also said the 2001 authorisation for the use of military force (AUMF) should not be repealed until a replacement is in place, maintaining that the existing law gives sufficient legal authority to the president to wage war.

Mr Tillerson added that he does not believe Congress should place restrictions on ground troops, either, “given the way this particular enemy morphs, changes its tactics. He noted that terrorists often start as “a fairly limited group of terrorists who then are able to overrun large areas of territories and amass armies.”

Secretary Mattis also brought the new South Asia strategy into the debate, saying: “President Trump’s South Asia strategy is conditions-based, not time- based, because war is fundamentally unpredictable. We cannot put a firm timeline on conflict against an adaptive enemy who would hope that we haven’t the will to fight as long as necessary.”

Mr Mattis said that since terrorists do not respect international borders or geographic limits on their areas of operations, “we must (also) be prepared to swiftly engage this global enemy in conjunction with our allies and partners.”

Secretary Tillerson added that the collapse of ISIS’s territory in Iraq and Syria meant the terrorist group would spread to other countries.

Therefore, “our legal authorities for heading off a transnational threat like ISIS cannot be constrained by geographic boundaries. Otherwise, ISIS may re-establish itself and gain strength in vulnerable spaces.”

The 2001 Authorisation to Use Military Force (AUMF), given right after the Sept 11 terrorist attacks, is up for renewal and some US lawmakers have indicated that Congress needs to make a new law as the threat to the United States is not as imminent as it was 16 years ago.

Secretaries Mattis and Tillerson argued against new legislation, but said that if the lawmakers felt compelled to make a new law, they should not place any constraint on the president’s power except that of authorising war funds.

The Trump administration relies on the 2001 AUMPF for legal authority in the war against Daesh militants in Iraq and Syria, as did the Obama administration before it. Both also cite the 2002 AUMF that authorised the Iraq War.

The 2001 AUMF authorised military actions against Al Qaeda, the Taliban and other perpetrators of the Sept 11 terrorist attacks.

The lawmakers, however, are divided on this issue, some that since new terrorist group grew out of Al Qaeda the 2001 AUMF can be used against them as well. Others say that since Daesh did not exist in 2001, a new law is needed to fight them.

At the hearing, some lawmakers also demanded scrutiny of the extent of US military operations in Niger where four US soldiers were killed in an ambush last week.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker also advised against making a new law, noting that the 2001 law sent signal of complete unity within Congress against the perpetrators of terrorism but current partisan divisions could send a wrong signal to the world, if lawmakers disagreed on some aspects of the new law.

“We cannot risk undermining the legal foundation for this critical fight,” Senator Corker said. “We must also be mindful that moving an AUMF without significant bipartisan support could send the wrong message to our allies and our adversaries that we are not united and committed to victory,” he said.

Senators Jeff Flake, who has proposed a new AUMF with fellow committee member Tim Kaine, took issue with Mr Mattis and Mr Tillerson’s call for a new law without a sunset date, saying that any concerns about signalling to the enemy are outweighed by Congress need to have a voice.

“Congress needs to weigh in,” Senator Flake said. “We have to make sure that our adversaries and our allies and most importantly our troops know that we speak with one voice.”

Published in Dawn, November 1st, 2017

Opinion

Editorial

Judiciary’s SOS
Updated 28 Mar, 2024

Judiciary’s SOS

The ball is now in CJP Isa’s court, and he will feel pressure to take action.
Data protection
28 Mar, 2024

Data protection

WHAT do we want? Data protection laws. When do we want them? Immediately. Without delay, if we are to prevent ...
Selling humans
28 Mar, 2024

Selling humans

HUMAN traders feed off economic distress; they peddle promises of a better life to the impoverished who, mired in...
New terror wave
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

New terror wave

The time has come for decisive government action against militancy.
Development costs
27 Mar, 2024

Development costs

A HEFTY escalation of 30pc in the cost of ongoing federal development schemes is one of the many decisions where the...
Aitchison controversy
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

Aitchison controversy

It is hoped that higher authorities realise that politics and nepotism have no place in schools.