And rex mattis testified on the authorization for the use of military force. This hourlong portion of the hearing took place before break. Stop endless war. Stop endless war. Stop endless war. Stop endless war. Stop endless war. Thank you for being here. In the past when there have been interruptions on occasion i have n able to have people please dont do anything that causes you to have be escorted out of the room because then the process continues with being arrested and is fairly unpleasant. We have two votes today. Which is unfortunate. What we have talked about doing is adjourning the hearing at about seven minutes until 6 00. Everybody rushing down and voting of the tail end of the first vote, there will be no speaking before the second about. If we can keep going, general mattis, secretary mattis has a meeting he would like to attend and i know others wants to complete the work in an appropriate way. With that, id like to thank tillerson and mattis are being for being with us today to share the administrations perspective on the authorizations for the use of military force. We are grateful to both of you for your service to our country and your willingness to come here again as we continue this critical discussion on behalf of the American People. Oversight and debate of the 20002001 aumf is something this committee has been engaged since i started to lead it in 2013. At that time many of us from both parties sought to craft a revised authority to enable the president to atrezz the threats we face from terrorism while ensuring an appropriate role for congress. When president obama submitted an isis aumf to congress in february of 2015, our committee again held a hearing and debated the issue. But there was really no effort on the part of the white house to actually enact a new authorization. This year weve held two full Committee Hearings on this important topic, a public hearing in june with private witnesses and a classified briefing with secretaries tillerson and mattis in august. We thank you for that. Weve been working to schedule this public hearing since that time. Numbers of members both eth both on and off this committee have raised questions about the executive authorities with respect to war making. The use of nuclear war weapons, the use of nuclear weapons. And from a diplomatic perfect i, entering into and terminating agreements with other countries. As ive mentioned publicly this is the beginning of a series of hearings where our committee will also examine those issues. But today its my hope we will remain focused on the topic at hand, the 2001 aumf and the 2002 aumf for iraq. The president s ability to initiate conflict has grown in an age of advanced technology, including the use of unmanned drones and war from a distance, where large numbers of boots on the ground are not necessary to conduct a significant military engagement. Examples of significant military actions by recent president s relying solely on the article 2 of the constitution include air strikes in kosovo, regime change in libya, and the april missile strike against the assad regime in syria. In his last war powers resolution to congress, the president identified the following 19 countries where u. S. Military personnel were deployed and equiped for combat. Afghanistan. Iraq. Syria. Yemen. Somalia. Libya. Kenya. Niger. Cameroon. Uganda. South sudan. The democratic republic of congo. Central africa. African republic. Djibouti. Jordan. Turkey. Egypt. Cuba. Kosovo. As this months deadly attack in niger proved, those forces can find themselves in combat at any moment. As our men and women in uniform continue to meet threats around the world, i hope our witnesses can help us examine what the appropriate oversight role for congress is and tow howe we can Work Together to ensure our nations Political Leadership is meeting our response to believe the decide when and where our country uses military force. As i stated previously, in this hearing, we will focus primarily on the two current authorizations for the use of military force. Unfortunately, the use of lethal force against isis, al qaeda and other terrorist groups will remain necessary for the foreseeable future to prevent attacks against americans and our allies. The president , just like president obama, believe he is has the Legal Authority he needs under the 2001 aumf to fight isis, al qaeda, and other terrorist groups. And i agree. I agree with the Obama Administration and i agree with this administration that they currently have that authority. It is clear that congress is united in a strong support of the fight against al qaeda, the taliban, isis and other terrorist groups and i believe congress as a whole would agree that the president should continue to act against these threats. Congress has regularly notified been notified of troop deployments around the world, including the buildup in niger, and has responded consistently by funding the department of defense and its operations against isis and terrorists around the world. At the same time, i also believe we should update the aumf to reflect the current conflict and reassert Congress Constitutional role. But we cannot risk undermining the Legal Foundation of this critical fight. 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. So far, congress has been untable bridge the gap between those who seek a who see a new aumf as primarily a way to limit the president and those who believe constraining the command for the chief in wartime is unwise. Unfortunately, the inability to reconcile this divide without threatening the existing authorization has allowed the status quo to prevail. This committee has always recognized we have a special responsibility to try to speak with one voice on Foreign Policy. We have a great tradition of working together in a bipartisan way to advance the national interest. It is my hope that we will be able to do the same on this issue. I thank both of our distinguished witnesses and the members of this committee for the seriousness with which they approach the topic before us today. I hope that together we can have a productive discussion about a way forward. Our distinguished Ranking Member, senator cardin. Mr. Cardinr thank you, mr. Chairman, i join you in welcoming our two witnesses and join you in our strong desire for this committee to operation in a nonpartisan way for the betterment of our National Security. I thank you for conducting with hearing. This is one of the most important topics the United States senate and this committee would ever consider. Under what circumstances and legal authorities should the United States send men and women into war . Mr. Chairman, im pleased that you are reasserting this committees prerogatives on this issue. I hope that soon we will also be considering the repeal of the existing overextended authorizationers in use of military force from 9 11 and the iraq war and a new aumf tailored to the current terrorist threats. America faces unprecedented crises around the world. From isis in multiple countries and al qaeda affiliates continuing to plot attacks against the United States to a worsening Nuclear Crisis against north korea and a newly manufactured crisis with iran. Im deeply concerned about President Trumps inclination to go to war rather than find Diplomatic Solutions to these crises. It seems we have u. S. Troops deployed almost everywhere in the world. In addition to significant deployments in iraq, afghanistan, and syria, an major deployments in south korea, japan, and europe, u. S. Forces are and have been engaged in Counterterrorism Operations in yemen, so mall ark ethiopia, yemen, and chad with extensive advice, train, and Capacity Building efforts in many more. Two weeks ago we learned that four servicemen were killed in niger in circumstances that are still unclear. Their mission and the mission of what many may be as many as 800 u. S. Troops in niger is also unclear. The loss of these four courageous soldiers, sergeant ladavid johnson, Staff Sergeant dustin wright, Staff Sergeant brian c. Black and Staff Sergeant jeremy w. Johnson show the danger faced by men and women deployed around the world whether they were deployed with the expectation of combat or not. Our hearts are with the families of these soldiers. They served their country courageously and their families deserve the respect and appreciation that all men and women should receive after losing a loved one. During this hear, im going to be asking the witnesses some specific questions about the niger incident, the mission these sole juniors were performing and legal authorities for their deployment. Thats our responsibility this committees responsibility. If our witnesses are unable to answer these in open hear, then im going to ask that you return to provide this committee a classified hearing. I think we and the American People are now asking if the United States is fighting and dying in niger where else are u. S. Forces put in harms way . Some information has been provided to the congress on this issue, including the june 27 notice to congress that the chairman referred to. But theres been inadequate explanation of what activities are actually being done under what Legal Authority. That is this committees responsibility to deal with the authorization. Protecting the American People from terrorism stemming from threats around the world is certainly important. But i think there needs to be more public discussion and light on these activities because i do not think the American People want the United States conducting a global, endless shadow war under the radar, covert, and beyond scrutiny. There have been developments since this Committee Last conversation since the committees last conversation on this topic in august. First, isis control of contiguous territories in iraq and syria have been broken. With hundreds of isis fighters killed and hundreds more surrendering. Second, the crisis with north korea has gotten worse, with north korea testing the icbm with the ability to reach the United States and thermonuclear device amid a bitter war of words and threats between President Trump and kim jong un. Third the president has responded to the crisis in venezuela. Im aware we cannot discuss alls a penths for the thrsation of the use of mill fair force in this hearing. Secretary mattis and secretary tillerson, ill be asking you to for the use of military force in this hearing. Secretary mattis and secretary tillerson, ill be asking you to commit to come up shortly to the committee an brief us in a classified setting on the use of the 2001 aumf including for counterterrorism purposes. As i said at our hearing in union, the 9 11 and iraq aumf have now become mere authorities of convenience for president to conduct military activities anywhere in the world. They should not be used as the legal justification for the administrations military activities around the world. I am not convinced that the evolving threat of isil to the United States and to our friends and allies necessitates committing more of our brave men and women to Ground Combat operations and certainly not under the rubric the aumf against al qaeda for their attacks in washington and new york. Im going to repeat one more time, the 2001 a mumbings; aumf says the president is authorized to use all Necessary Force against those he determines planned, authorized or committed those the attacks on september 11, 2001 or harvard such persons to prevent future acts of National Terrorism against the United States. As one who voted for the aumf when i was in congress in 2001, i never intended and i think all of us never intended it would still be used today to justify the use of military force against isis. One last point, if i might, mr. Chairman. That is, i think its very clear that under this authorization there is no authorization for the use of military force against north korea, unless theres an imminent attack upon the United States or forces or allies in this region. Id be interesting in hearing the secretarys belief as to what authorizations exist today for military operations against north korea. Finally its important for congress to better exercise its oversight over the use of force now. The United States has relied for too long on military force as the First Response to the problems of terrorism, insurgency and instability abroad. In this Administration One wonders whether its become the first and only response it has proposed dramatic increase in the Defense Budget while the Foreign Affairs budget has been slashed by 30 . Very soon practically the only tools left in the foreign toolbox will be the massive hammer applied everywhere for lack of better options. We need to authorize and set limits on the use of the hammer. In so doing perhaps the administration will rediscover the necessity and value of diplomacy, development and support for human rights as the means to build safer worlds for everyone, especially the United States. I know our two witnesses share the commitment to our National Security and think importance of diplomacy and the use of our military and i look forward to their testimony. Mr. Corker thank you, senator cardin. We thank you both for being here today, we have tremendous respect by almost every member of this committee. We support your efforts around the world. And if you could limit your comments to about five minutes or so, youll have a lot of questions, i know. Any written materials youd like to have entered into the record will be done without objection. And i guess well start with you, secretary tillerson. Again, we thank you for your extraordinary efforts on behalf of our country. Mr. Tillerson thank you. Chairman corker, Ranking Member cardin, i appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today. I know the senates desire to understand the legal basis for military action is grounded in your constitutional role related to Foreign Policy and National Security matters. I understand your sense of obligation to the American People well in this regard. In the 2001 authorization for use of military force, or aumf, congress authorized the president to, quote, use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or personals he determined planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on september 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons. Congress granted the president this Statutory Authority, quote, in order to prevent any future acts of interNational Terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations, or persons. The 2001 aumf provides statutory as well as activities we take with our new partners in the coalition to defeat isis. It provides a domestic legal basis for our detention operations at guantanamo bay, where the United States members ofetained the taliban, al qaeda, and associated forces. Using appropriate force to defend u. S. Coalition and Partner Forces engaged in need to defeat isis, rock, and syria. In syria, we are aimed at the defeat of isis. The United States does not seek governmente syrian or prosyrian forces, however, the United States will not hesitate to use necessary and proportionate force to defend u. S. Coalition or Partner Forces engaged in the campaign against isis. To usesidents authority force against isis is further reinforced by the authorization for use of military force against iraq or and more plain umf. , the 2002 eight in addition to authorities granted by statute, the president has the power under article two of the constitution to use military force under certain circumstances to this important to advance issues. T as an example, president reagan relied on his authority as commanderinchief in 1986 when he ordered airstrikes against terrorist facilities in libya following a terrorist attack i libya and west are live in which killed and wounded both civilians in the u. S. Military personnel. The u. S. Has the authority to prosecute campaigns against the taliban, al qaeda, and associated forces including isis and is currently not taking any new additional authorization for the use of force. The 2001 8 umf remains a cornerstone for ongoing Legal Operations and continues to provide authority relied upon to defeat the threat. However, should congress decide to write new legislation, i submit several recommendations the United States would consider necessary to a new eight umf. First, it must be