Department of Defense News Briefing
Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Lawrence Di Rita
[Excerpt on Proposal to Require Presidential Findings for Special Ops][...]
Q: What can you tell us about congressional restrictions on Special Forces and requiring presidential finding?
Di Rita: I suppose you may be referring to the article in the paper.
Q: Yeah.
Di Rita: Okay. It's a complicated issue. It's one that has a history to it. It's an issue that has had a lot of -- there are overlapping jurisdictions within the Congress with respect to various titles in law and how they apply to the military and other special activities of the United States government. It's complicated.
I think that it's safe to say that it's unlikely. It would clearly not be helpful for additional -- any kind of additional restrictions to be placed on the ability to engage in the global war on terrorism, using the kinds of capability that the United States has across the board.
But I also think it's safe to say that this is an issue in which, as I said, there's several committees of Congress that are engaged in it, that understand it, that are working on it. As I understand it from the story, there's -- the story refers to a particular committee and a particular body. That may be that committee's view. But more broadly speaking, we would just wait to see how the full Congress might speak to the issue.
But as I said, we -- this is not a new issue. It's a complicated issue. It's one that deserves scrutiny, and it gets it a lot. We clearly need the kinds of flexibilities that we've seen in use in Afghanistan, in Iraq, to be able to be agile and quick and capable of sort of short-notice targeting of enemy activities. And we wouldn't be seeking any undue restrictions on our ability to do that.
But I think it's early to say what the Congress might do with respect to this particular issue this year, because, as I said, there's several committees involved. And we've tried our best to remain in front of all the committees and make sure that our needs are understood. And I think there is a good understanding of what we need. So, it's a bit early.
Q: But it would make life very difficult if they did --
Di Rita: It's speculation, because it's just way too early to say what the Congress will do in this particular matter.
Q: Has the Pentagon given a nod to it in any way? (Inaudible) --
Di Rita: I think the article probably -- or, not the article; the -- what may or may not have been interpreted as what Steve -- Dr. Cambone, who understands this issue very well and who has been very helpful with respect to helping the Special Operations Command and the special operators in the department think about the way -- the future of warfare within their particular area -- Cambone has been very involved in that, is one of the real original thinkers in that area and, I think, has the respect of the special operations community from that standpoint -- I think to interpret whatever he may have been up to the committee talking about in the way that it appears to have been interpreted in the report language is probably a stretch.
Q: So he feels that maybe he was misinterpreted or by --
Di Rita: I just would refer you to him on how he feels, but I can say that he wouldn't knowingly have agreed to something that's been interpreted the way that it's being interpreted. And we're engaged with the committees to make sure that that's clearly understood.
Q: But the Pentagon will oppose any movement in that direction.
Di Rita: The Pentagon will remain engaged on the issue with the committees involved, and I think we have been. So.
[...]