Senator Webb on MSNBC: Next steps in Libya “not simply the prerogative of the Executive Branch”

Asks what Administration plans to do “if there is a stalemate or the regime is overthrown”

Senator Jim Webb, a member of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, today called for a stronger Congressional role regarding U.S. involvement in Libya in line with the War Powers Act. For weeks Senator Webb has raised concerns that the Libya mission lacks clarity and the United States does not have a clear grasp of the dynamics on the ground. During an interview today on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, Senator Webb said, “We need to understand clearly what it is that we are going to attempt to do if there is a stalemate or if the regime is overthrown.”
 
A transcript of today’s interview is below:

ANDREA MITCHELL REPORTS TRANSCRIPT

Andrea Mitchell: Joining me now, Virginia Democratic Senator Jim Webb, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. We are wading into something… deadly serious, as you know better than anyone.

Senator Jim Webb: It comes back to what is it that we want to accomplish in Libya.  You and I had a discussion about that last week.  The Security Council authorization, which had five key abstentions on it, basically went to protecting civilians with this no-fly zone. We've seen a good bit of talk about mission creep here, and I think we need to be really careful looking into the future.

Mitchell: Looking to the future, Senator, what do we know about the CIA? I’m sure that it is in one way reassuring that we have people on the ground who can make contact with the opposition and figure out whom we're working with and whether or not they should be armed and what level of training they would need, but in another sense, this does make us more vulnerable.

Webb:  Yes, we have reports that there are CIA on the ground. It depends on what they are doing; if they are trying to get intelligence information on the makeup of the opposition, that is certainly something that we need in order to make estimates in terms of what a future policy might be toward them.

But the key questions that I see right now are: first of all, I think there were legitimate questions about the legality or the constitutionality of how the President moved forward in his initial decision to take military action in Libya. Second, because we cannot predict what is going to happen here, we need to have not only Congressional involvement, but something akin to the War Powers Act, if not the War Powers Act, itself. 

We've been debating the constitutional balance on the War Powers Act since I was in law school, which was a very long time ago. But at the same time, it did provide a structure on these sorts of issues. It said that if you commence actions in a foreign country like this, you, the President, need to report about the legitimacy, the legal authority and the constitutionality of what you are doing. Then you have 60 days in which the Congress can decide whether or not to support this with a Congressional resolution.

What we have seen in Libya is different than a lot of the other examples that people have been talking about. Traditionally, the President can take unilateral action if you have a direct attack, an imminent attack, or in order to rescue Americans, as President Reagan did in the Grenada Operation, or in retaliation for an attack on Americans around the world, as we did against Libya when I was in the Pentagon in 1986.

This is a situation that is either an uprising or a civil war in which Americans were not involved. So we need going forward here to try to figure out the dynamic on the ground. There is either going to be a stalemate or Gadhafi is going to fall. Either of those cases presents very serious challenges for us in terms of what we are going to do here in the next month or two.

Mitchell:  Senator Webb, you've made a distinction now between this operation and what we've seen in the past. I understand it's a useful distinction. Did the briefing yesterday, the classified briefing, accomplish one goal in terms of informing Congress? And does the Presidential finding, that we understand the President signed in order to permit the covert action, accomplish another part of this goal, legally?

Webb:  Not really. I’m going to be walking into a hearing with Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen in about an hour.  We need to understand clearly what it is that we are going to attempt to do if there is a stalemate or if the regime is overthrown. There is more than likely going to have to be some sort of a multi-national force in Libya, unless this remains a volatile combat situation for quite some time. Even then, what are we going to do?  There are calls for arming the rebels. There are calls for other countries to come in and become militarily involved. This is not simply the prerogative of the Executive Branch of the government when you reach the situation that we are in right now.

Mitchell:  Do you think that the President has already crossed a legal line?  And also, do you find encouragement in the fact that Moussa Koussa, the foreign minister there, has defected?  The Libyans are denying it, but we understand that he's in the U.K. And now we're hearing from the wires that a second top official has resigned. This could help to tighten the noose around Moammar Gadhafi and achieve a very important foreign policy goal, could it not?

Webb:  I understand the circumstances under which this action was taken. I think you could argue the legality or the constitutionality of his having taken it when there were not American lives at risk or all the other examples that I just gave. But Secretary Gates last weekend said this situation was not a vital United States interest. He kind of retreated a little bit on that in his testimony before the House of Representatives this morning. He is probably going to say the same thing before the Senate. 

I don't want to pre-judge whether we might eventually have a reasonably good outcome. We do not have a good record in that part of the world on these types of situations, but I do think that what we need is more direct reporting over the coming weeks from the Administration—not simply conferring with the Congress, but more in line with how the War Powers Act is supposed to take place. I think Senator Levin indicated yesterday he wants to get some sort of a resolution from the Congress, so we can have a debate on this.

Mitchell:  Very interesting developments. It did sound from some of the testimony earlier today at that House hearing as though the Administration is open to some kind of a resolution. So, clearly, they see the need to fill that gap.

###


The entire interview with Andrea Mitchell may be viewed online here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djjWiC9cCto

Transcripts of Senator Webb’s earlier interviews on Libya are also available online
•    With MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell (March 21): http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/03-21-2011-02.cfm
•    With CNN’s John King (March 4): http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/interviewtranscripts/03-10-2011-02.cfm