[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DIPLOMACY OR DEAD END: AN
EVALUATION OF SYRIA POLICY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 9, 2020
__________
Serial No. 116-138
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://
docs.house.gov,
or http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
42-435PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York, Chairman
BRAD SHERMAN, California MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Ranking
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York Member
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida JOE WILSON, South Carolina
KAREN BASS, California SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts TED S. YOHO, Florida
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
AMI BERA, California LEE ZELDIN, New York
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas JIM SENSENBRENNER, Wisconsin
DINA TITUS, Nevada ANN WAGNER, Missouri
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York BRIAN MAST, Florida
TED LIEU, California FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
DEAN PHILLPS, Minnesota JOHN CURTIS, Utah
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota KEN BUCK, Colorado
COLIN ALLRED, Texas RON WRIGHT, Texas
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania GREG PENCE, Indiana
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey STEVE WATKINS, Kansas
DAVID TRONE, Maryland MIKE GUEST, Mississippi
JIM COSTA, California
JUAN VARGAS, California
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas
Jason Steinbaum, Staff Director
Brendan Shields, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Rayburn, Joel D., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Levant Affairs
and Special Envoy for Syria, U.S. Department of State.......... 8
INFORMATION SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Syrian American Council letter submitted for the record.......... 14
Letter to Attorney General Barr submitted for the record......... 27
STATEMENT SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Statement submitted for the record from Representative Connolly.. 63
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Spanberger...................................... 65
APPENDIX
Hearing Notice................................................... 60
Hearing Minutes.................................................. 61
Hearing Attendance............................................... 62
DIPLOMACY OR DEAD END: AN EVALUATION OF SYRIA POLICY
Wednesday, December 9, 2020
House of Representatives,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC,
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:17 a.m., in
room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Eliot Engel
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Chairman Engel [presiding]. The Committee on Foreign
Affairs will come to order.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the committee at any point, and all members will have
5 days to submit statements, extraneous material, and questions
for the record, subject to the length limitation in the rules.
To insert something into the record, please have your staff
email the previously circulated address or contact full
committee staff.
As a reminder to members, staff and others physically
present in this room, per guidance from the Office of Attending
Physician, masks must be worn at all times during today's
proceeding, except when a member or witness is speaking. We are
trying to do both. Please also sanitize your seating area. The
chair views these measures as a safety issue, and therefore, an
important matter of order and decorum for this proceeding.
For members participating remotely, please keep your video
function on at all times, even when you are not recognized by
the chair. Members are responsible for muting and unmuting
themselves, and please remember to mute yourself after you
finish speaking. Consistent with House Resolution 965 and the
accompanying regulations, staff will only mute members and
witnesses, as appropriate, when they are not under recognition
to eliminate background noise.
We have a quorum, and I now recognize myself for opening
remarks.
This is likely the final hearing of the Foreign Affairs
Committee for the 116th Congress and my final hearing as
chairman.
Yesterday, we had a hearing on the Balkans, a region that
is near and dear to my heart, and today we will deal with
another policy area that has been a focus of mine for decades,
Syria. From the Syria Accountability Act, which became law in
2003; my bill designed to push Syria out of Lebanon, to the
Free Syria Act of 2012, which was the first legislative
proposal to arm the Free Syrian Army--the opposition to Assad,
through the end of my time in Congress--I have worked with
colleagues on both sides of the aisle and with outside groups
to push back on the murderous regime in Damascus and support
the democratic aspirations of the Syrian people.
I have spoken about Syria from this dais more times than I
could count in the last few years. And each time, I cannot help
but think that there is no way it could get worse, and then it
does. Assad's henchmen butcher civilians in the street. They
drop barrel bombs full of shrapnel and glass designed to maim
and disfigure. ISIS takes over large swaths of Iraq and Syria,
barbarically raping, stealing, and murdering. Russia's air
force enters the war, further weaponizing the sky.
The regime gives ultimatums to people who are so hungry
that they are eating the grass on the ground: kneel or starve.
China and Russia block humanitarian assistance from getting to
the people who need it the most. The Trump Administration cuts
off assistance to the vulnerable people of Syria and threatens
to break off cooperation with our Kurdish partners, threatening
any gains against ISIS and alarming our closest partners.
I say, ``Enough!'' There has been too much suffering, too
many lives lost, and far, far too little done to stop the
carnage. Too little by the United States through different
times. Too little by our partners. And this conflict is far
from over. It is humanity's wound and it continues to fester.
I remember sitting here as the ranking member of this
committee in 2014, surrounded by photographic evidence of
torture and violence in Syria's prisons, listening to the agony
of Caesar, a brave military photographer who defected,
smuggling thousands of photographs and giving us proof of
Syria's killing machine. That heartbreaking testimony compelled
me to introduce the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act.
The Caesar Act imposes the most sweeping sanctions on the
Syrian regime and its backers since the start of the civil war.
Unless they stop the violence against their own people and take
irreversible steps toward peace, the United States must raise
the price of their choices.
We worked carefully with the humanitarian community to
ensure that the Caesar Act would not prevent humanitarian
assistance from getting to vulnerable populations. Those
Members of Congress who were here then remember those horrific
pictures of dead bodies and people just being tortured and
killed. They were horrific pictures. They look like they came
from the Holocaust in Germany and Poland during World War II.
They really just made me sick. So, we are making sure that
humanitarian assistance can get to vulnerable populations.
My bill passed the House three times before becoming law
last year. The anniversary of its enactment prompted me to call
this hearing today. How is the Caesar Act being used to end the
conflict? Are we closer to a more peaceful and stable future
for the Syrian people? At a time when ISIS is reconstituting in
Syria, how can we ensure that they and other violent terrorist
organizations are not able to exploit Assad's continued
presence to win the propaganda war? Congress must be part of
the solution.
Getting Syria right will not be easy, as the last few years
have shown us. We will not find a silver bullet in a grand
bargain, geopolitical positioning, humanitarian assistance, or
military action. Ending the violence and getting the Syrian
people on the path to a brighter future will require some fresh
thinking. I appreciate the fact that the next administration
faces a wide range of pressing crises and critical negotiations
around the world, but I would urge: please do not forget about
the Syrian people.
American is a haven for the oppressed. My grandparents fled
the pogroms in Europe more than a century ago. The idea that
only two generations later their grandson would be a Member of
Congress, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, it
would only have been a dream to them. But, then again, those
dreams and ideas are what have drawn immigrants to our shores
for generations.
I hope that my family's story demonstrates that we cannot
turn our backs on victims of persecution, and I hope we can
agree that refugees should always have a place in our country.
I also hope that the next administration will welcome Syrians
who have been pushed from their homes, as well as other
desperate people from around the world. At our best, we are a
country of generosity and acceptance. The last 4 years have not
shown us that way, and it is time to turn things around.
I look forward to our witness' testimony.
And I will first yield to our friend, our ranking member,
Mr. McCaul of Texas, for any opening comments he would like to
offer.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As you mentioned, this is likely our last hearing of this
Congress. And it has really been an honor to serve with you, as
the ranking member on this committee. And I want to thank you
for the respect that you have shown the other side of the
aisle, as you always have in a very bipartisan way, allowing
many of our members to pass bills in the House.
I gave my farewell address to you on the House floor, if
anybody would like to see it. But I am proud of our time
together and our record of accomplishment. I think we passed
probably more bills than any committee in this Congress, and
just about everyone on a bipartisan basis. And, sir, I think
that is a record we should all be proud of, but especially you.
And you have governed this committee with civility, with
dignity. As Real Clear Politics Stated, ``an island of calm in
a sea of partisanship''--that is this committee. It is the
tradition of this committee, as I have been on this committee
for 16 years. I know you have been on it for many more than
that.
And so, I want to just say thank you for your service and
we are going to miss you, but I know that you will be close by.
And most of all, I have really enjoyed our friendship together
and that will always continue.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. McCaul. Will you
yield to me?
Mr. McCaul. I would, absolutely.
Chairman Engel. Thank you.
Mr. McCaul, I just want to return the compliment and say
that it has been an absolute pleasure to work with you and your
staff to help us pass bills and do what is right for the United
States and around the world.
We like to say that the Foreign Affairs Committee--you and
I have said that many times--is the most bipartisan committee
in Congress. And I think that we have proven that the people
who are elected from different parties can work together,
should work together. After all, we are all Americans. We all
love this country. We care about this country. You may have
from time to time different ideas, but we should always
remember that other people from other parties are not the
enemies. There are plenty of enemies of the United States
around the world, but it does not exist in this room or in the
Capitol, or any place else where we conduct our business.
And I think it is important to remember that because what
happens is--and I have been here a while now--you really do not
get to know people unless there are on your committee or from
your home State. You just do not have much opportunity to get
to know people. Sometimes you have taken trips with them and
you know them because of those trips around the world,
different places. Sometimes you see them in the gym when you
are working out. But, by and large, if the person is not from
your home State and not on your committees, there is not much
interaction. And when there is not much interaction, people do
not know the other people, and some people demonize and the
whole cycle begins again.
I am glad that we do not do that on this committee. It
really makes me very proud of every member on this committee,
Democrat or Republican, because we try very hard to do what we
are supposed to do, and that is to work for the American
people. And that is what we do.
And so, let me again say, Mr. McCaul, it has been an
absolute pleasure working with you, being a colleague of yours,
and being a friend.
It is difficult; sometimes life gives you bumps and knocks,
but I have always believed in picking yourself up and walking
with your head held high and continuing the business. We know
that last weekend I was over at your house for dinner--thank
you--along with the previous chairman of this committee, Mr.
Royce. And it was just a pleasure to be able to go over things
from the committee and go over other things.
So, Mr. McCaul, I thank you for those kind words. I thank
you for everything you do, and I thank everyone on this
committee, both Democrats and Republicans. Thank you for
allowing me to be the chair. Thank you for really passing good
legislation and doing things to make the lives of people
better, make the lives of Americans better. I love this
country, and I am so fortunate to be here and to serve in the
U.S. Congress.
As mentioned in my remarks, my grandparents came here in
1907. And if they had not come here and they stayed behind in
Europe, they would have almost certainly perished in the
Holocaust. And so, this country of my birth, my parents' birth,
means so much. When people say, ``God bless American,'' I
really say it, too.
So, I turn it back to you, Mr. McCaul. Thank you for
everything, and we will continue, I know, to keep in contact.
Mr. McCaul. Yes, and thank you for that. And your style of
leadership has really been a model. And I think the way we have
worked here--who would think a Democrat from the Bronx and a
Republican from the heart of Texas could work so well together,
right? But it is a model for the rest of the Congress, and your
legacy, sir, will continue. You have quite a legacy with this
committee, and you will always be remembered. And I look
forward to, when we get back some normalcy, having your
portrait up in this beautiful committee room.
Chairman Engel. Thank you.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, sir.
And we have worked a lot to advocate on behalf of the
Syrian people, which is the subject matter of this hearing. And
you and I saw those photographs that were taken by Caesar. They
were horrific. They were reminiscent of the Holocaust. But that
is the reality on the ground in Syria.
And I want to thank the witness for being here. Mr.
Rayburn, I know that you just came back from Syrian. So, I
really look forward to your testimony, and I have some very
good questions, I think, for you.
But, Mr. Chairman, we have worked together on Syria to pass
legislation sanctioning Turkey's invasion of Syria, to draw
attention to the assault on civilians in Idlib, to support
access for humanitarian assistance, and to oppose countries
renewing ties with the Assad regime.
And as author of the Caesar Act, Mr. Chairman, you worked
for years to pass sweeping sanctions to cutoff resources to the
Assad regime and its backers. Now we are already seeing how
these sanctions are crippling Assad's reign of terror.
And we worked together on the Syrian policy, again, not as
Republicans or Democrats, but as Americans and as human beings
trying to protect innocent civilians. But there is still more
to be done.
For starters, we should stand by our allies in northeast
Syria to give them more opportunities to succeed. In addition,
I recently spoke with key people on the ground in Syria who
provided me with important updates. They have all said that we
need more support and we need it now. And we want to find the
best manner to do that, and I hope we can get them the relief
they need as soon as possible.
I would also like to, once again, encourage members of the
international community to refrain from diplomatic engagement
with Assad. The world cannot accept a butcher like Assad as the
leader of Syria. There can be no justice if relations with
Syria return to business as usual.
So, I want to welcome our guest here today. We are pleased
to have you. I am especially hoping you will address how the
Administration has used the sanctions and other tools to secure
justice for the Syrian people and further cripple Assad and his
Russian and Iranian backers. Our goal should be to force the
regime and its sponsors to stop the slaughter of innocent
people and to provide the Syrian people a path toward
reconciliation, stability, and freedom.
Chairman Engel, your tireless work to fight for the Syrian
people is at the core of your legacy, as I mentioned before.
So, I want to thank you for everything you have done on behalf
of the Syrian people and for making their struggle for freedom
remain at the top of your agenda in this Congress. I think it
is fitting that this is the last hearing that we have in this
Congress on this, such an important issue and such a
humanitarian crisis.
And with that, I yield back.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman yields. I thank my friend,
Mr. McCaul. Thank you for everything you do.
Our witness today is Mr. Joel Rayburn, the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State for Levant Affairs and Special Envoy for
Syria.
Without objection, the witness' complete prepared testimony
will be made a part of the record.
And I will now recognize you for 5 minutes to summarize
your testimony, Mr. Rayburn.
STATEMENT OF JOEL D. RAYBURN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
LEVANT AFFAIRS AND SPECIAL ENVOY FOR SYRIA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
STATE
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Engel, Ranking Member McCaul, distinguished
members of the committee, thank you for inviting me here to
testify about the Syrian conflicts today. It is one of the most
dangerous crises in the world in both geostrategic and
humanitarian terms.
Before I begin, I want to thank Chairman Engel for his
years of service, especially his dedication to solving this
conflict in Syria and his enormous work on the Caesar Syria
Civilian Protection Act. This is a remarkable legacy, Mr.
Chairman, and the Syrian people know that. And I would add
that, in literally every engagement that we have with Syrian
civil society, the term ``Kanoon Kaiser,''
[phonetic] as the Syrians refer to the Caesar Act, is
mentioned. They know its importance and they thank you for your
work and the work of this entire committee in doing that.
I have just returned from a trip to the Middle East last
night, during which I discussed the importance of advancing and
enduring political settlement to the Syrian conflict with our
allies and partners in Israel, Turkey, Egypt, and the Gulf
countries, while also spending time with our local partners in
northeast Syria.
For several years now, our vital national security concerns
have led the United States to pursue the interconnected goals
of an enduring defeat of ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria, the
withdrawal of all Iranian-commanded forces from Syria, and a
lasting political solution to the underlying Syrian conflict
consistent with U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254.
Based on what I have just heard from our allies and
partners, and what we are seeing on the ground in Syria, it is
my assessment that each of our major goals in Syria is within
reach, and I also assess that our leverage is growing over
time. Our adversaries in Syria, conversely, have failed to
achieve their goals. The Assad regime remains a pariah,
excluded from the Arab League, mired in an economic crisis of
Assad's own making, and unable to attract international
investment. The ability of the Syrian regime and its allies to
dictate the terms of Syria's future is waning. The path to our
objectives is still filled with challenges, but the strategic
situation today is encouraging, and it attests to what can be
done when diplomatic efforts are strongly backed by both this
Congress and responsible members of the international
community.
A few words about the U.S. approach to implementing and
achieving these goals. We believe U.S. strategic objectives are
best achieved by an action plan that includes various elements.
First, we must carry out a political process and a
nationwide cease-fire, as outlined in U.N. Security Council
Resolution 2254.
Second, we should continue our counterterrorism campaign
and preserve the global coalition to defeat ISIS.
And third, we must press for the withdrawal of foreign
forces not present in Syria before 2011.
The United States has developed a broad coalition of like-
minded countries to accomplish this plan of action, and we have
separately engaged with Russia on such an approach. I would add
that, in addition, the U.S. Government will continue to work
for the return of Austin Tice, Majd Kamalmaz, and every other
American who is held hostage or wrongfully detained in Syria.
And we will not give up on those objectives.
Each of the goals that I outlined above in the action plan
requires sustained pressure in order to succeed. Along with the
European Union, we are applying economic pressure via sanctions
against the Syrian regime and its enablers, as you know.
The entire international community recognizes the strong
bipartisan support from you that led to the passage of the
Caesar Act legislation, and believe me, Assad and his
supporters recognize this as well. I particularly want to thank
Chairman Engel for his leadership, as well as the whole
committee, for making the Caesar Act a reality, as I mentioned
before. Since the Act's adoption, the Administration has used
the Caesar Act and other related authorities to designate over
90 individuals and entities who use their wealth or positions
to support Assad's war.
Alongside our economic pressure, our political pressure
includes partnerships with Syrian civil society to remind the
world of the regime's atrocities, as well as active outreach to
the Syrian opposition.
On the diplomatic front, we lead efforts to withhold
normalization or reconstruction assistance to the Syrian
government, absent progress on the political process. And we
also support the U.N.-led political process Roadmap in Geneva.
And finally, our military pressure comes in the form of
U.S. and allied military actions in response to Assad regime
chemical weapons use and through U.S. leadership of the Global
Coalition to Defeat ISIS. And we also continue to support the
defeat-ISIS operations of our local Syrian Democratic Forces
partners in the northeast.
In closing, we and our international partners are clear
that there will be no peace or stability in Syria until the
violence ends, there is accountability for Assad's atrocities,
and the political process truly takes hold and meets the
aspirations of the Syrian people. That means we will continue
to marshal all of our effective economic, political, and
diplomatic tools to ensure that this brutal Syrian regime does
not dictate the terms bringing this nearly 10-year conflict to
a close.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rayburn follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Engel. Thank you very much, Mr. Rayburn. Thank you
for your good work.
Without objection, I would like to place into the record a
statement from the Syrian American Council and Americans for a
Free Syria.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Engel. I will now recognize members for 5 minutes
each. Pursuant to the rules, all time yielded is for the
purpose of questioning our witness. Because of the hybrid
virtual format of this hearing, I will recognize members by
committee seniority, alternating between Democrats and
Republicans. If you miss your turn, please let our staff know
and we will come back to you. If you seek recognition, you must
unmute your microphone and address the chair verbally. And as
we start the questioning, I will start by recognizing myself.
As I mentioned in my opening remarks, I introduced the
Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act several years ago as a
response to what we saw in this room. I mentioned before those
horrific pictures of all these dead people, emaciated. Just
awful. Awful. I will never forget it, the utter disregard for
human life and the torture of innocent victims--men, women, and
children; Muslims and Christians.
This legislation, passed into law last December, mandates
the most sweeping sanctions on Assad's enablers. I have
welcomed some recent Caesar designations against Syrian
individuals, but I would point out that the goal of the
legislation was to pressure Assad's international support
system and raise the cost of bankrolling the wholesale
slaughter of the Syrian people.
But, other than one Lebanese shipping company, non-Syrians
have not been sanctioned under the Caesar Act. Why are we not
using the Caesar Act to sanction non-Syrians? In particular,
why have there been no designations by us of Russian companies
and individuals who are so clearly and shamelessly giving Assad
a lifeline?
Using executive authority instead of Caesar implies that
the Administration is looking for a more flexible way to remove
these sanctions, should the time come. The bar for removal of
the sanctions under Caesar is fairly high, requiring the
Syrians to, among other things, stop the violence against
civilians, stop their chemical weapons program, and free
political prisoners. Are there plans between now and January
20th to sanction non-Syrians under the Caesar Act, and after
January 20th, are there going to be plans to do that as well?
Given broad bipartisan and bicameral support for the Caesar Act
and its full implementation, how could this administration and
the next administration more fully utilize the authorities
afforded to it by the bill?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Concerning the question of non-Syrians and targeting them
under the Caesar Act, and related authorities, we certainly
will, I think, extend Caesar Act designations to non-Syrians in
the future, because we agree with you and we understand the
intent of the Caesar Act provisions. It is to separate the
Assad regime from its sources of international support.
I will say that the Caesar Act had a remarkable chilling
effect on those outside Syria who might otherwise restore
economic relations with the Assad regime or do some sort of
business with the Assad regime or in the same interests with
the Assad regime. So, to some degree, Mr. Chairman, the Caesar
Act has been successful in that guard, even without designating
a large number of non-Syrians under the Caesar Act authorities
so far. And we have been pleasantly surprised by that. In other
words, increased international economic relations with the
government of Damascus has been the dog that did not really
bark.
Now, concerning the question of how we choose which
authorities we use to make designations, to be honest with you,
there is no larger purpose behind that, as we do our targeting
internally between the State Department and the Treasury
Department, with the support of the intelligence community.
Believe me, we carry out our designations against specific
targets just using the most efficient, the quickest, the most
expedient, let's say, sanctions authorities, but there is
absolutely no intent behind using other authorities in the
Caesar Act to make it easier to lift pressure on the Assad
regime in the future. In fact, our position is that we need to
continue to put accumulating pressure on the Assad regime and
its backers in the future, and that is going to be our
approach.
Your question of, will there be additional designations
under the Caesar Act between now and January 20th, I cannot
specify specifically what sanctions we will do in the comings
weeks, but we are intending to do some. And in fact, Mr.
Chairman, we now have an interagency machinery, an interagency
apparatus, that is, I would say, clicking on all cylinders in
terms of finding the nodes of the Assad regime's illicit
finance network that we most need to target to be able to also
see how the regime tries to evade sanctions and to try to stay
one step ahead of the regime. And that is working. That is
working very well. I am very pleased with the way that that has
happened.
Chairman Engel. My time is running out. I want to try to
get in one quick question because I think it is really
important, and I think it shows why we are so unhappy with what
is happening.
Because, as this year draws to a close, the Assad regime,
supported by Russia and Iran, has recaptured most areas
previously held by opposition forces and continues attacks on
pockets of Syrian resistance and civilian infrastructure in the
northwest part of Syrian. In the northeast, Turkey maintains
its hold on territory gained since the October 2019 invasion
and continues to harass and displace Syrian-Kurdish
populations, which, of course, have been very loyal to the
United States.
So, I want to just ask you, what is the future of the
remaining pockets of opposition-held territory in and around
Idlib in northwestern Syria? And could you describe the extent
of devastation and human tragedy caused by the Assad regime
there?
Mr. Rayburn. I absolutely agree with you, the war that the
Assad regime and its allies have been waging against Idlib and
the surrounding regions, and against the innocent civilians
there, has to stop. What we have seen in northwestern Syrian in
the Idlib region is, in the last 9 months or so, essentially a
military stalemate. After many months of the Assad regime, with
Russian and Iranian and Lebanese Hezbollah backing, being able
to retake territory, we saw that come to a halt when they ran
up against the Turkish military supporting Syrian armed
opposition groups in February and March of this year. And we
have not seen any indication that the Assad regime can overcome
that military opposition from Turkey and the Turkish-supported
groups there. So, there is a military stalemate.
That does not mean that conditions on the ground are good
for the civilians in Idlib and the surrounding region. They are
absolutely atrocious. The Assad regime continues to fire
artillery. So do its military allies. And so, this is why we
believe the pressure has to continue on the Assad regime. We
have to continue to use the combination of all our tools and
pressure to make it clear to the Assad regime that there is no
viable course for them other than coming to a political
solution under U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254.
Chairman Engel. Thank you very much.
And before I turn it over to Mr. McCaul, I ask unanimous
consent to allow Congressman Green of Texas to participate in
this hearing. Without objection, so moved.
Mr. McCaul.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I also want to welcome Congressman Green to the committee.
I want to thank you for your resolution on Austin Tice that
we passed this week, very bipartisan. His family are
constituents of yours and very close to my district and from
our home state of Texas. I have been briefed on this in the
classified space. So, I am not going to ask you more details
about that, but I do want to thank the Administration for your
efforts, because I know you have been pressing very hard for
his release. And we thank you for that.
I wanted to talk about sanctions, what is Turkey doing, and
then, the threat of ISIS.
On the sanctions, as the chairman Stated, we were looking
forward to these sanctions really being utilized to the fullest
extent, as intended by Congress. But I also want to ask you
about the northeast quadrant of Syria, where you have the
Syrian Democratic Forces. There have been calls to lift
sanctions on the SDF. I do not know how you could do that
because it is all within the same country. Can you speak to the
wisdom of--and if we cannot do that, how can we help the SDF?
They seem to be somewhat successful in bringing all these
pockets of different ethnic backgrounds together under one sort
of democracy that actually seems to be working and is,
obviously, in loyal opposition to Assad.
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
The first observation I would make is that we understand in
implementing the Caesar Act that this committee generated that
the focus of the Caesar Act is to be squarely on the Assad
regime and its enablers. So, we have no intention of releasing
designations that would harm our partners in the liberated
territories of Syria that are beyond the regime's control.
Mr. McCaul. So, in other words, you would argue that the
sanctions are not being applied to the SDF?
Mr. Rayburn. That is correct.
Mr. McCaul. Okay. And maybe we can followup on this when I
have more time to talk to you, but I am very interested. I know
you met with Nadine on the ground. I have a good friendship
with her and I get their reporting. And it is an area of
concern. We want to help the SDF as much as we can.
Turkey in Syria, these Turkish forces, who are they?
Because I have seen pictures and had reporting that it almost
looks like they are hiring mercenaries in Syria and some
reporting that they have actually hired former ISIS members.
Can you shed some light on that?
Mr. Rayburn. Yes, Congressman. So, the opposition fighters,
the opposition armed groups, that are supported by Turkey, a
great many of them are different elements of the Free Syrian
Army, part of which has been organized more formally into an
organization called the Syrian National Army, which gets
material support, training, and so on, and basing assistance
from Turkey and is focused on military pressure against the
Assad regime and its allies.
And the focus of their resistance is to the Assad regime
and its allies is northwestern Syria. There are some that have
been active in northeastern Syria. We have seen some of the
same information that you have and this is something that, when
we see signs that there are some elements that are potentially
extremist or we suspect they have been, we raise that with our
Turkish counterparts. We also raise that with the Syrian
political opposition.
Mr. McCaul. My time is running out.
I mean it concerns me because they look like radical
extremists, Islamists, to be honest with you. And Turkey, of
course, came in and we worked, our Delta Forces--of course, who
are our friends in Syria? That is a real question, right? But
our Delta Forces came in and worked with the Kurds to crush
ISIS. That is how we defeated ISIS in Syria. And then, to see
Turkey go in, and I know the PKK has been designated a
terrorist organization and they are within that, but to see
Turkey come in and crush the very forces that we worked with to
defeat ISIS is disturbing as well.
Can you talk about the detention camps--my last question--
the threat of ISIS still in Syria? And I get reports about
these detention camps. They are releasing ISIS members.
Mr. Rayburn. Mr. McCaul, thank you for raising this.
The detention camps which have some ISIS members--the ISIS
members who are known to be ISIS members, a lot of these are
in, essentially, they are in detention facilities specialized
for holding, you know, with much greater security, and so on.
And there are a large number of those kind of fighters, many,
many of them who are not from Syria. They are from all over the
world, from the Arab world, from Europe, from the Caucasus,
Central Asia, and so on. That is a big problem.
There are other camps for displaced people, many of whom
either had to flee from the campaign, the last stages of the
campaign against ISIS, or some of whom are ISIS children. They
are the children of former ISIS families or they are women.
There is a large number of women who were members of ISIS, or
some of whom were virtually held hostage by ISIS. There is a
very large number of those.
And it is very concerning because the population, for
example, at the camp at Al-Hawl is somewhere around 70,000
people. There are more than 30,000 Iraqis. There are somewhere
just shy of 30,000 Syrians, and then, there are more than
10,000 who are from neither Iraq nor Syria; they are from other
countries.
And it has been very challenging to get the government of
Iraq and the governments of those other countries to cooperate
with us in repatriation of those non-Syrian individuals back to
their countries of origin, for a variety of reasons. But the
longer that they stay in Syria, it is a very big concern that
that large concentration of people is vulnerable to
radicalization, that you would have children who might be
exposed to radicalization, and it could be a problem. It could
be the next, unfortunately, the next potential caliphate. So,
it is a problem that we really need to urgently try to get a
solution to.
Mr. McCaul. Yes, it is very complex. And thank you for your
testimony.
I yield back.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Sherman?
Mr. Sherman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At our penultimate
hearing yesterday, I had a chance to pay tribute to you. And
so, I will do it in more abbreviated form today. It has been an
honor to serve with you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to
serving with Mr. McCaul and especially with Greg Meeks. This
is, apparently, the last time I will be able to ask my
questions immediately after the gentleman from the Bronx, and
perhaps, unfortunately, it is the last time I will be able to
ask my questions before the gentleman from Queens.
We have a War Powers Act that is designed to restrict the
executive branch's authority to deploy our forces into harm's
way. We have deployed forces into harm's way in Syria under the
2001 AUMF that authorizes going after Al-Qaeda and, presumably
or at least arguably, its progeny such as ISIS.
But there are many interests in Syria that might warrant,
or might not warrant, the use of our forces. You have to
wrestle with those from a policy standpoint, but do you feel
constrained at all by the Constitution and the War Powers Act
to not deploy American forces in harm's way against any
adversary that is not a descendant of Al-Qaeda?
Mr. Rayburn. Mr. Congressman, the Department's view on
this, the answer is, no, that the legal authorities for our
presence in Syria have n't changed and that they are sufficient
for what we need to do.
Mr. Sherman. Well, there are many things you may want to do
and many things the next administration wants to do. If you
were to, say, fight against Assad to protect the Kurds, is that
something you think you can legally do, and if so, what would
be the legal authority?
Mr. Rayburn. Well, I mean----
Mr. Sherman. I am not saying it is a bad idea. You might
want to come to Congress and seek authority, but what authority
do you have now?
Mr. Rayburn. Well, I hesitate to address a hypothetical
situation like that, Congressman.
Mr. Sherman. This is Congress; all we do is talk about
hypothetical situations.
Mr. Rayburn. I know, Mr. Congressman.
Mr. Sherman. Is it your intention to follow the War Powers
Act?
Mr. Rayburn. Absolutely, Mr. Congressman.
Mr. Sherman. OK. There is an authorization to use military
force to go after Al-Qaeda. Do you believe that that authorizes
the Administration to go after any enemy--and there are many
heinous enemies in Syria--or is it limited to those heinous
enemies that attacked us on 9/11?
Mr. Rayburn. It is the Department's view, Congressman, that
the 2001 AUMF provides the legal authority required to use
military forces against ISIS in Iraq and in Syria.
Mr. Sherman. Against ISIS, but----
Mr. Rayburn. Against ISIS.
Mr. Sherman. I mean, there is Assad. There is Putin. There
is Erdogan. There are many other authorities who are committing
murder in Syria. Do you think you have the authority to go
after them?
Mr. Rayburn. The Department's view, Congressman, is that
the 2001 AUMF also provides the authority to use force to
defend U.S. coalition and partner forces that are engaged in
the campaign to defeat ISIS.
Mr. Sherman. Well, that is very different than attacking--
obviously, our forces wherever they are can defend themselves.
Turkey has, the Turkish government has embraced some
extreme elements of political Islam, sometimes forming
alliances with those inspired by Al-Qaeda and ISIS. To what
extent is the Turkish government working with Al-Qaeda and ISIS
forces, or the progeny of those two organizations, in Syria?
Mr. Rayburn. I have not seen signs, Congressman, that the
Turkish government is doing that.
Mr. Sherman. Well, you talked about recruiting mercenaries.
Mr. Rayburn. No, I have not seen--I mean, the way my team
and I see it, and the way we assess the situation, is that
Turkey considers ISIS and Al-Qaeda to be threats to Turkey,
that we share a threat assessment with them, and that they
share with us the goal that those forces are defeated in Syria
and that they leave Syria. So, I have not seen a sign that
Turkey is sponsoring ISIS.
Mr. Sherman. In Idlib, they have worked with some forces
that trend in that direction, but I can see there is support
for your assessment that they are not actually dealing with
ISIS or Al-Qaeda as organizations.
Mr. Rayburn. Yes, we also, Congressman, we see a lot of
friction between the forces, like the Free Syrian Army that
Turkey really wholeheartedly supports and some of those other
terrorist elements or really radical elements on the ground.
There is an ongoing conflict between those all the time.
Mr. Sherman. I yield back.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Wilson?
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to join
with the rest of our colleagues, and it is such a rare occasion
that everybody agrees. And that is that, indeed, we appreciate
Chairman Eliot Engel on his bipartisanship and the success that
you have had in Congress and the Caesar Act. It just goes on
and on, Mr. Chairman, what you have achieved. And we appreciate
from a bipartisan standpoint.
In addition, I got the opportunity to actually live it with
you. And that is, I was on the delegation with Congressman Curt
Weldon to Pyongyang, North Korea. And you bond when you go to
North Korea because, to see the horror of the destitution of
North Korea, the oppression of the people, and we were there in
2003, Congressman Weldon, and what a visionary he was.
And, of course, then, from there, we went to Seoul, South
Korea, and you saw the contrast of free market capitalism, of
the success there, the democracy of the Republic of Korea. And
so, I will always cherish our opportunity to serve together
under the most extraordinary circumstances. But what a great
example of the success of free market capitalism as opposed to
totalitarianism and socialism/communism on the Korean
peninsula.
Now, Secretary Rayburn, you have had the hardest job I have
ever heard of--okay?--Envoy to Syria. The American people need
to actually see the map of what is occurring there, and the map
itself is startling, the divisions, and it breaks your heart. I
have been to the refugee camps in Jordan, and just
extraordinary people under the most bizarre circumstances of so
many different interests there.
But what can be a great danger to all of us is the
reconstitution of ISIS and its ability to expand zones in
northern and central Syria. What is your assessment of the
reconstitution of ISIS?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
So, the global coalition, led by the United States,
achieved military victory against the ISIS territorial
caliphate. That removed ISIS from the battlefield as a field
army and as a proto-state that could marshal state-like
resources. So, we moved beyond that phase, thank God. And the
same thing was done in Iraq, you know, with great sacrifice all
around.
Now we are in a phase where ISIS is still a threat as a
clandestine terrorist network and as a guerilla force that is
trying to reconstitute itself in the remote areas of both Syria
and Iraq. So, they remain a danger. I would not say--in
northeast Syria, where the U.S. military is, is directly
supporting Syrian Democrat Forces, we have not seen ISIS be
able to come back and regain control of territory, but they do
have clandestine networks that are a big danger, that are
intimidating and assassinating people, and trying to
destabilize that region and create an opening for them to come
back and hold territory.
I would highlight one other danger, which is that the Assad
regime and the Iranian regime are now attempting to, if you
will, subcontract to ISIS, to some of those ISIS cells, to take
action against the Syrian Democratic Forces, against U.S.
interests, against the moderate people of the Euphrates River
Valley region, in particular. And it is a very malicious and
nefarious set of activities that we are seeing.
Mr. Wilson. And that leads to the next question, and that
is the assessment of the current role and priorities of the
Iranian-backed forces in Syria, and how is their presence
evolving, as you just indicated, in the past year?
Mr. Rayburn. Well, Congressman, ever since early 2017, we
have seen the Iranian regime forces in Syria stop, essentially,
taking part to a large degree in the civil war between the
different Syrian sides, and they focus, instead, on trying to
create strategic bases for Iranian military forces and Lebanese
Hezbollah and try to establish a power projection platform that
they can use to threaten Syria's neighbors.
What we have seen over the last year, 2020, is that they
have received a lot of military pressure from Syria's neighbors
and they have not been able to establish cells to the degree
that they would like, the Iranian regime, but they have not
abandoned their strategic goal of trying to turn Syria into,
basically, an Iranian regime military garrison that they can
use to pose a new threat to the entire region.
Mr. Wilson. And it is encouraging, your report on the
Caesar Act, a credit to the chairman and ranking member. That
is past. Is there more that Congress can do to back up
sanctions against the Assad regime?
Mr. Rayburn. I would say the authorities are good,
Congressman. We really like the authorities. We can do a lot
under the authorities. I think where the departments can use
help now is in being able to build out the infrastructure to
make the optimal use of the authorities. So, I think it would
be good to have more analysts, to be able to have more
bandwidth, to be able to do more sanctions all the time.
We scrape together as much bandwidth as we can, and we have
increased that through cooperation with the Treasury Department
over the last year. We worked very hard on it. But I would
really like to see in the future, I think, and Congress could
really help out by helping to increase the State Department and
Treasury Department and intelligence community's bandwidth to
do more of these sanctions at a higher operational tempo.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, and thank you, Mr.
Chairman. But, Secretary Rayburn, you are very encouraging, how
positive you are, and thank you for your service.
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Engel. Thank you.
It is now my pleasure to call on the gentleman who will be
the next chairman, will succeed me as chairman of this
committee, Mr. Meeks. Mr. Meeks and I have been friends and
colleagues for a long, long time, not only here in Washington,
but in New York, where we both reside, and we have been active
there, very active in New York as well. I know Mr. Meeks very
well and I know that he will do an excellent job--an excellent
job--as chairman. He works very hard. He is smart. He is fair.
He has a great knowledge of both running a committee and, also,
of all the hot spots and problems around the world.
So, I am delighted to call him ``Mr. Chairman,'' and
delighted to be able to work with him. And I want to make him a
pledge that whatever help he needs from me, he will
automatically get it, and I look forward to him doing many,
many great things for our country and for the world.
So, it is my pleasure to call upon my good friend from New
York. And he and I, again, have a lot in common in terms of
where we both grew up and the types of families we came from.
And again, it shows how America is a wonderful, welcoming place
where people can do well and work hard and attain certain kinds
of goals.
So, I look forward to watching Mr. Meeks as chair, and I
know he will do an excellent job. So, it is my pleasure to call
upon the next chairman of this committee, Gregory Meeks of New
York.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And as I said, it is
bittersweet for me because we are such good friends, and I
cherish you as a friend and as a chairman and as a leader. And
so, for me, unlike many others that may be on this committee,
me and you are going to be seeing each other and talking to
each other quite frequently, as I am going to need your strong
advice and encouragement as we move forward. So, I am not
saying goodbye to you because you are going to still hear a lot
from me.
In the way that you conducted this committee, I look
forward to following in those footsteps, working with Mr.
McCaul in a bipartisan way to keep the traditions of this
committee moving forward and the standards that you set, which
are very high standards.
But I know for some of my colleagues, because of geographic
concerns, they might not get to see and talk to you often, but
Gregory Meeks will get to see and talk to you often and utilize
your expertise, your advice, and your thought patterns as we
move forward. So, this is just a blip in our piece, not seeing
you in Washington maybe as often, particularly on Capitol Hill
and in the hearing rooms and traveling with you, although I
have learned lessons on how to do appropriate travel, so that
the Members, when we do travel, get to travel again, get to
really get on the ground and understand what is taking place on
the ground, as many of your CODELs have been.
So, again, I look forward to our continuing relationship in
regards to trying to make sure that individuals who grew up in
public housing in the greatest country of the world can lead
this great committee called Foreign Affairs and actually do
some good in the world, because you have clearly put your stamp
on progress and goodness in the United States and around the
world. And I thank you for that and look forward to continuing
to work with you.
Let me, also, thank Mr. Rayburn for your testimony here
today. I know that you served over 26 years in our military and
graduated out of West Point. So, we thank you so very much for,
and are very grateful for, your service to our great country.
My question is, you know, it is, as most of my colleagues
have said, it is quite difficult in Syria when you look at that
you have got, nations like Russia that destabilized the region
and having a coherent strategy is counterproductive action by
Turkey and Erdogan. And I think that we must do all the things
that we can with empathy, so that we can never lose sight of
the Syrian people and the human tragedy that has taken place
there. They continue to suffer very terribly.
For me, I believe in a multilateral approach. I think
multilateralism is very, very important and trying to pull
together our allies and move and do things in a way that we can
make sure that we are standing up for our values and our
opposition to human rights indiscretions.
In my opinion, the Administration has failed to stand up to
Russia, and the Trump Administration has, in fact, enabled
Putin's belligerence and expanding zone of influence in the
region. And I see them as being one of the dominant forces
there, including, as you have indicated, Iran. But there
appears to be no clearly discernible strategy applied
consistently across the Administration. I do not see that that
has happened.
So, my question is, what path forward is there for the U.S.
and for the United States partners to lead a strategic change
in Syria? How can we come together with our partners to lead
this strategic change that has to take place in Syria? I do not
think it can be done by the United States alone. I think it has
got to be done with our strategic partners also.
Mr. Rayburn. Mr. Meeks, I agree with you 100 percent. The
United States, in order to achieve our goals in Syria,
particularly a political solution to the Syrian conflict under
U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254, we have got to continue
to work with our European partners, our partners in the Arab
world, and others in the international community who are like-
minded, who share with us the judgment that, in order for there
to be a stable Syria, a peaceful Syria, not just for the sake
of the Syrian people, but for our own vital interests,
including our vital security interests, there has got to be a
government in Damascus that behaves differently toward the
region, that is not hostile to the region around it, and that
behaves differently toward its own people; it is not hostile to
its own people in a way that destabilizes Syria.
So, I agree with you 100 percent. This has to be done on a
multilateral basis, and that is what I and my team are doing,
working on every day.
Mr. Meeks. So, I do not know, maybe I am out of time. I
have looked at the clock. But my one other question is, in
dealing with the Kurds, I am concerned, what can we do in
conjunction with our allies, again, around the globe to protect
the people, the Kurds who have been working with us? And then,
unexpectedly, we pull our troops out. What do you think we
should do to protect the individuals that have been working
with us through thick and through thin, whether it was dealing
with ISIS crises or the Kurds with their force and who fought
with us? What do you think that we could do collectively to
make sure that there is not another unforeseen just pullout
that leaves them subject to attacks by others, especially by
Turkey?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Mr. Meeks.
I think the best thing we can do to help our local partners
who have been working with us so closely in the campaign
against ISIS is keep the pressure on ISIS, preserve the global
coalition, continue to press home our advantage in the campaign
against ISIS, so that ISIS cannot return and threaten the
people of northeastern Syria, including the Kurdish population
there, which suffered hugely at the hands of ISIS.
And then, use our diplomatic efforts to try to keep the
situation on the northern border of Syria as calm as possible,
and to use our good offices with both sides to try to diffuse
tensions there. So that the focus can remain in eastern Syrian;
the focus can remain on the threat of ISIS, the threat that is
posed by ISIS, and also, the new threat that has been emerging
over the last couple of years of the Iranian regime trying to
carve out space in that zone. So, that is what I would say is
the best thing that we can do for our local partners.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman yields back.
Let me again say to Mr. Meeks I know that this committee is
going to thrive under his stewardship, and I look forward to
all good things continuing to come out of this committee under
his leadership.
Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for holding
this hearing. It seems like there is not a whole lot of
official business, so to speak, going on in D.C., and I
appreciate your interest in keeping important things on the
docket during the waning moments of the session.
Thanks for calling attention to this foreign policy
priority. The challenges facing policymakers with respect to
Syria are numerous, obviously. The government in Damascus is a
State sponsor of terrorism. It allows the Iranian regime, as
Mr. Rayburn points out in his witness testimony, to regularly
threaten our allies in Israel and Jordan.
Over the past several years, the Trump Administration has
made important strides in shoring up our Syria policy,
including through the implementation of the Caesar Act and
working to negate ISIS and Al-Qaeda's influences in the
country.
However, my objective today is not to highlight the
successes of this administration's foreign policy. I think
those achievements are plain enough to see. My purpose is to
underscore that these successes are despite the best efforts of
wayward, unelected bureaucrats working to undermine President
Trump at every opportunity.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit for the record a
letter to Attorney General Barr demonstrating the breathtaking
dereliction of duty of James Jeffrey, the U.S. Special Envoy
for Syrian Engagement, if I may.
Chairman Engel. Without objection.
Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Perry. President Trump announced in 2018, and again in
October 2019, his decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria
and fulfill an important promise to the American people. There
is no ambiguity about the President's position on the issue,
whether we agree with it or do not agree with it. That is why
he is the Commander-in-Chief and that is why we have elections.
In a November 12th interview with Defense One, Ambassador
Jeffrey boasted that the President never did achieve his
principal objective in Syria because he, Ambassador Jeffrey,
intentionally undermined it. After listening to Mr. Jeffrey's
counsel, President Trump decided to leave 200 soldiers in
Syria. However, and as Mr. Jeffrey made abundantly clear, there
are far more than 200 American troops in that country. The only
issue was the President was kept in the dark about that
particular material fact. This is beyond unacceptable.
The President needs to be able count on a team of advisors
to carry out his policy agenda and be honest. The American
people expect and deserve that. It compromises the security of
our Nation to have unelected bureaucrats wantonly bend and
break the law. 18 U.S.C. Code 1001 clearly States that it is a
crime to knowingly and willfully falsify, conceal, or cover up
by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact. It should be
of concern to everyone on this committee that the President,
our Commander-in-Chief, was intentionally lied to in the course
of carrying out his charge.
Now that has vitally important implications for the future
of Syrian policy and, indeed, for U.S. foreign policy as a
whole. I mean, we have got to be able to count on the actions
and the words of the chief diplomat, which is the President of
the United States.
My hope is that my colleagues will join me in bringing this
matter to light and ensuring that any and all appropriate legal
remedies are pursued to ensure the integrity of all counsel
given to a duly elected President of the United States,
regardless of who that is or from what side of the aisle they
come from.
Mr. Rayburn, are there any implications for national
security on an unelected bureaucrat to willfully lie to the
President of the United States?
Mr. Rayburn. Mr. Perry, the State Department team from
Secretary Pompeo down to the lowest level has been diligent in
executing the President's guidance on Syria. In fact, the three
goals that I mentioned in my testimony were goals that were
given to us by the President. So, we have been following the
President's guidance throughout.
I respect and admire Ambassador Jeffrey, but what was
characterized in that interview simply in my experience did not
happen. The State Department neither sets U.S. force levels nor
are we responsible for communicating them to the President. It
is the Department of Defense that does that with the
President's----
Mr. Perry. So, are you saying he did not say that in the
interview?
Mr. Rayburn. Sir, I am not saying that he did not say that
in the interview. What I am saying is that that did not happen
in reality. The State Department is not responsible, it is not
our job to----
Mr. Perry. I did not say the State Department was
responsible, but he said that he did not follow the President's
order and that there were actually more troops left in Syria.
And I am just asking if there were policy implications, or
otherwise, regarding those statements or any statements in the
future of that, like where an unelected bureaucrat, diplomat--I
do not mean to say it pejoratively--makes decisions outside the
Commander's intent.
Mr. Rayburn. Sir, in my experience it did not happen.
Mr. Perry. So, one of them has to be a lie? You just do not
know which one?
Mr. Rayburn. Sir, I cannot characterize, I cannot
characterize what happened in that interview. That was
conducted after Ambassador Jeffrey retired from the State
Department. What I can say is, at no point did the State
Department misrepresent our military posture in Syria. It is
not our job to do that.
Mr. Perry. I yield the balance.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman's time has expired. Mr.
Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can I be
heard?
Chairman Engel. Yes, you can, Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Connolly. Great.
Well, I listened with great interest to my friend's concern
about misrepresentations made to the President with respect to
force levels in Syria. I wish we had equal fervor in protecting
the President and the country from misrepresentations about a
duly elected President-Elect and the process where a record
number of Americans participated in a free and fair election
that resulted in the election of President-Elect Biden. But
that is a different matter.
Mr. Rayburn, what is our policy objective in Syria? What is
we want to accomplish?
Mr. Rayburn. Sir, as I mentioned, it is the three
interconnected goals. Those are our primary focus. It is the
goal of getting an enduring defeat of ISIS and Al-Qaeda. It is
the goal of seeing all Iranian-commanded forces withdrawn from
Syria because of the destabilizing role that they play. And the
third element of that is achieving a political solution to the
Syrian conflict under U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254,
the political solution.
Mr. Connolly. So, implicit in those three goals, is part of
our objective the replacement of the Assad regime?
Mr. Rayburn. Congressman, U.N. Security Council Resolution
2254 calls for a political process that will result in a
transition to a different government in Syria. Now exactly how
that government is constituted, that is meant to come from the
Syrian people themselves and the voice of the Syrian people in
that political process.
Mr. Connolly. Are we confident that there is any kind of
mechanism in the near future in Syrian that would accurately
reflect the voice of the Syrian people in a free, democratic
choice of leadership?
Mr. Rayburn. Congressman, I think the mechanism that is
outlined in 2254 is the best mechanism that we could hope for.
What it is going to require to bring it about is for us to
continue to employ our pressure tools to compel the Assad
regime and its enablers to come into the 2254 process, to
accede to that process. They are doing everything they can,
Congressman, to try to stay out of the 2254 process. That is
why we are putting month by month more and more pressure on
them with our political pressure, economic pressure, and so on,
and some with their pressure, to try to compel them to stop the
war and to come into the political process.
Mr. Connolly. Well, good luck with that. I do not see a lot
of evidence that that is working, but that is a discussion for
a different day.
One of the objectives you cited was defeating ISIS in
Syria. Have the Kurds been allies in that effort?
Mr. Rayburn. The Kurdish forces that are part of the Syrian
Democratic Forces, and some of them in Iraq, for example, the
Kurdish Peshmerga, of course, yes, they have been very
important partners in prosecuting the campaign against ISIS.
Mr. Connolly. Wouldn't it be fair to say, as a matter of
fact, that the Kurds were for a long time the only element on
the ground actually winning back territory and defeating ISIS
on the ground?
Mr. Rayburn. They were a major element, that is for sure. I
do not think we could say they were the only ones, I mean,
because it is a campaign that was going on across both Iraq and
Syria. And it was very important that the Iraqi Security
Forces, with our help, were making huge advances against ISIS
at exactly the same time that the global coalition was helping
local partners, who were both Kurdish and Arab and some
Christian, Syrian Christian, in Syria to sort of make efforts
on the two ends of the caliphate at the same time. So, you
wound up with a squeezing of the ISIS caliphate. So, it had to
be a comprehensive approach. The Kurdish forces under the SDF
played an enormously important role in that, absolutely.
Mr. Connolly. And at one point, did not President Trump
decide, rather precipitately, to pull out U.S. troops, and
therefore, U.S. support for the Kurds that led to the Kurds
cutting a deal with Assad, because they felt abandoned by the
United States Government?
Mr. Rayburn. Well, what transpired, Congressman, is that
the President wound up issuing policy guidance to maintain the
support to the Syrian Democratic Forces, and that is why it is
going on today. I, myself, just 2 days ago, I was on the ground
in Hasakah in northeastern Syria with our U.S. military
counterparts and our Syrian Democratic Forces partners, who are
continuing a very intense campaign of pressure against the
remnants of ISIS in northeast Syria.
Mr. Connolly. Yes, I understand, but I seem to recall at
the time when the President made this decision without
consultation with serious people, like, for example, Secretary
Mattis, that it led to resignations; it led to condemnations of
the policy. It was seen as not only inconsistent, but it could
be construed as an abandonment of our Kurdish allies on the
ground who had fought so valiantly against ISIS. Remember that?
Mr. Rayburn. Ultimately, Congressman, the President decided
to maintain our support to the local partners. So, I would say
that abandonment did not happen, and it is witnessed--I mean, I
saw it with my own eyes just a couple of days ago. The
relationship between our forces and our diplomats on the
ground--I have a small team of diplomats that are there as
well--with the Syrian Democratic Forces remains vital for the
security of northeast Syria.
Mr. Connolly. OK. If I have any time left, let me just ask
a humanitarian question. How many refugees have been generated
by the cascading crises and conflicts in Syria? How many
Syrians are refugees now?
You are mute.
Mr. Rayburn. Sorry. I muted myself instead of unmuting
myself.
More than 5 million, well over 5 million Syrians are
refugees, Congressman, and another almost 6 million or more who
are internally displaced.
Mr. Connolly. Internally displaced.
Mr. Rayburn. So, it is more than 11 million Syrians--that
represents more than half of Syria's prewar population--are
displaced from their homes as a result of the conflict.
Mr. Connolly. Right.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Connolly. Well, can I just ask real quickly, Mr.
Chairman----
Chairman Engel. Yes.
Mr. Connolly [continuing]. And how many Syrian refugees
have been allowed into the United States in the last year?
Mr. Rayburn. In the last year, Congressman, I believe the
number if 481.
Mr. Connolly. Five million refugees and we have accepted
481? Do you think that is doing our fair share? And I will end
with that.
Chairman Engel. Thank you.
Mr. Connolly. Your number is correct.
I will just end, Mr. Chairman, by saying I just think it is
scandalous that this administration has abandoned refugees. We
talk about trying to have a resolution in Syria, and yet, we
have almost closed the doors. We have gone from accepting 5500
refugees in the last year of the Obama Administration to 481
last year. And by the way, in this fiscal year, a total of
eight, with 5 million refugees. I think that is scandalous and
I think it, frankly, undermines whatever policy we are pursuing
in Syria.
I yield back.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Kinzinger.
Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me, just first off, say that, obviously, Syria is a
huge tragedy, and I think, in hindsight, we are going to look
back and see the things we should have done and did not do. I
think there is this idea that America is war-fatigued and any
involvement anywhere is over the top.
But I just remember early on, with people using different
examples--if the U.S. intervenes, you are going to see all this
horrible stuff happen, and if we do not, it will not. But I
think where we are at in Syria is beyond even our wildest kind
of horrible scenario. You have, in essence, kind of great world
powers all parked there. You always are on the edge of some new
conflict brewing. And, of course, the human tragedy is
unspeakable.
You think about the 7 million refugees, as you mentioned.
That is a prime breeding ground and recruiting ground for
terrorism. If you have no hope and opportunity, it is real easy
to be susceptible to somebody coming along and saying, ``The
West is at fault. Here is some extreme ideology. Your hope is
in this.'' And it is easy to recruit terrorists out of it.
But I just want to ask you--and, sir, thank you for being
here, by the way. I appreciate it. And thank you to the
chairman for calling this.
One area that I believe the Administration has done a good
job is in pushing back against Iranian influence in Syria. And
through your maximum pressure campaign, the IRGC both has
limited funds and a limited willingness to conduct their malign
influence in Syria. Can you talk a little bit about how Iran's
calculus has changed following the increase in sanctions and
the strike that killed Soleimani?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Mr. Kinzinger.
I would say that the Iranian regime over the last year,
since the strike against Qasem Soleimani, I think it has been
proved that the Iranian regime cannot overcome the maximum
pressure that we place upon them and they cannot overcome the
military pressure that the Israelis, for example, put against
the Iranian regime activities in Syria, in a way that Qasem
Soleimani had hoped for.
However, we have also seen that, though I believe the
Iranian strategy in Syria has failed--and what we have seen
over the last year, it has been demonstrated that it cannot
succeed because they cannot overcome the pressure from the
Israelis and from us--that the Iranian regime senior leadership
remains committed to executing that strategy that really has no
hope of doing what they intended it to do. And that is a very
dangerous situation.
So, they continue to try to move in strategic weapons. They
continue to try to control Syrian territory in order to
establish a strategic road from Iran over to southern Syria,
and even to Lebanon, to threaten Syria's neighbors. And they
continue to try to establish outposts, maintain militias of
really non-Iranians--from Iraqis, Afghans, Lebanese, and so on,
as well as local Syrians that work for the Iranian regime--and
different outposts to try to control territory to both
destabilize the local situation, but also to try to consolidate
that strategic ground line of communications.
They continue to try to do that, even though any objective
assessment I think tells us they cannot succeed. So, they need
to recognize reality. It means that there has to be continued
pressure, so that they give up the strategic goal, and so that
they withdraw their forces and abandon this strategy.
Mr. Kinzinger. Yes, I think it is interesting, when you
look at that, you know, you look at the Soleimani strike and it
is different than, I think, the fight against certain terrorist
groups where, if you kill a leader, another leader rises up.
This is a situation where I think Soleimani had unique
influence and unique, I guess, abilities. And they are
struggling now after this. You see that in Lebanon and every
place, frankly, where Iran has had, tried to have, proxies and
influence, that they have actually failed.
I always think it is interesting how, when the Israelis
pushed back against Iran too close to their country and Syria,
it does not really make news. When we do something that is a
massive thing, we have to debate here. And the reality is I
think Iran is desperate. And I think, as much as I can
understand my friends on the other side of the aisle with the
Iran nuclear deal, I think replugging into that would only send
a lifeline to Iran to continue the kind of tragedy that we are
seeing.
I did have a bunch more questions, but that conversation
went long. I will just say I really appreciate the work you are
doing. I really appreciate the attention you have given to
this. It is a huge tragedy. There is a lot more that unites
Republicans and Democrats on Syria than not, and I hope that,
going forward, we can continue to maintain pressure on Assad
and understand the difficulties that some of these countries
hosting these refugees have faced.
So, with that, thank you for being here.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Mr. Kinzinger.
Mr. Deutch.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Rayburn, for joining us today.
I want to just take another moment to congratulate my
friend, Chairman Engel, at this, his final hearing. Mr. Engel,
during your time as chairman, you have advocated for a
principled American role in the world. You have fostered a
spirit of bipartisanship on this committee. I think it is
especially appropriate that yesterday we were here focusing on
the Balkans and today on the Middle East, two regions where you
have played an outsized role, including and especially in Syria
through the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act. I value your
friendship and leadership and know that you will remain engaged
on these important issues in the future.
I also want to congratulate Mr. Meeks on his historic
selection as chairman-elect and commend Mr. Sherman and Mr.
Castro for their work on the committee. And I look forward to
working with all of you in the next Congress to help restore
America's global leadership.
In March, we are going to mark a 10th anniversary of the
start of the war in Syria. The last decade has seen the deaths
of 600,000 people, the displacement of more than 11 million,
both inside Syria and around the Middle East. Assad's reign of
terror, including starvation and indiscriminate bombing, has
caused destruction and devastation to millions of innocent
civilians.
The conflict and associated humanitarian tragedy has
destabilized neighboring countries like Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq,
and Turkey, and will reshape the region for decades to come.
For 10 years, there has been a humanitarian crisis in Syria,
and ending the conflict through negotiated diplomatic solution
is key to stabilizing the Middle East and achieving U.S.
interests in the region, and most importantly, providing a
better future for the Syrian people.
The President's policy has been defined by the
irresponsible choice to rapidly withdraw U.S. forces from
northeastern Syria, a decision made without coordination with
our allies and partners, without much input from his advisors,
leading to the resignation of Secretary Mattis. The President's
decision destabilized Syria and made the American people less
safe, strengthened Russia as the main international power
deciding the future of Syria. And finally, it reduced U.S.
leverage to shape a political outcome and tipped the balance of
diplomatic and military power in favor of Iran, Russia, and
Assad. And if we are going to avoid a dead-end in Syria and
revive diplomacy, it is important that we openly acknowledge
these and other mistakes and that we learn from them.
Mr. Rayburn, your testimony acknowledges only a political
solution will end this conflict, but the Assad regime has held
to its desire to use military force to end it. You also
acknowledge that it has been exacerbated by Russia's refusal to
lean harder on Assad.
So, we have two different political processes--Geneva and
Astana. And we were sidelined in the Turkish-Russian Security
Corridor Agreement. Russia blocked Security Council Resolutions
that are meant to just help get assistance to those in need.
And my question is pretty simple. What is our leverage at
this point to jumpstart the process in a way that furthers our
security interests, that protects the Syrian people, and that
produces real peace rather than just a stalemate, as recently
retired Special Envoy Jeffrey called it?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
I think the centerpiece of our leverage is what we have
been able to do under the Caesar Act authorities and other
related authorities to apply economic pressure and the pursuant
political pressure to the Assad regime and its allies. But what
we have seen over the past year is that--and we weren't sure
about this when we started--but what we have learned is, I
think, that the Assad regime cannot absorb the shock over time
of our accumulating economic and political pressure that the
Caesar Act gave us. And at the same time in 2020, we learned
that the Assad regime does not have the military wherewithal to
accomplish a military victory, a military outcome, and create
facts on the ground.
So, I have been encouraged, but the situation on the ground
for the Syrian people remains awful in pretty much every corner
of Syria. But, strategically speaking, I think 2020 has been
the year when we have seen the leverage of our adversaries in
Syria has hit its ceiling, while our leverage has grown and, in
particular, with what we have been able to accomplish with the
Caesar Act.
Mr. Deutch. What about designating Russians, Mr. Rayburn?
Mr. Rayburn. That remains a distinct possibility.
Mr. Deutch. What leverage do we have with Russia?
Mr. Rayburn. Well, I think we have a lot of leverage with
Russia. I think the most important leverage we have with Russia
is the pressure that we put on the Assad regime, Russia's
client, which has been unrelenting and which I know, because we
have our plans, we know what we would like to accomplish with
our designations and political pressure in the future. We know
that that pressure is only going to deepen.
Mr. Deutch. Mr. Rayburn, I'm sorry.
Mr. Rayburn. Sorry.
Mr. Deutch. I appreciate that. I just want to ask one quick
question, Mr. Chairman.
Very quickly, you noted, Mr. Rayburn, that the U.S. will
continue to work for the return of Austin Tice and Majd
Kamalmaz, and every other American who is held hostage or
wrongly detained in Syria. You may know I represent the
Levinson family. So, issues of American hostages hit very close
to home for me. The members of this committee strongly support
efforts to bring all Americans held in Syria home. Do you
believe that those efforts to achieve their release should
occur separately or must they be a part of diplomacy to reach a
political solution in Syria?
Mr. Rayburn. So far, Congressman, our diplomatic engagement
on trying to find out the status and get back our missing and
unjustly detained Americans is carried out by our Special
Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs. I play a close
supporting role in that, but the engagement has gone through
Hostage Affairs.
Mr. Deutch. Yes, I appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Deutch.
Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I would like to
reiterate the comments relative to yourself about your
leadership, and I want to thank you for the many years of
service and dedication and commitment you have given to us.
Regardless of which side of the aisle we were on, you have
treated us all with tremendous respect and deference, and you
are totally what a chairman should be. And that is why you are
getting so much praise from both sides. You deserve it, and we
all wish you all the best in the future.
And I am running out of superlatives that I can give for
you because we have had a number of hearings here, but they are
all heartfelt. You are a great friend, and even though you are
a Democrat and I am a Republican, I consider you a tremendous
human being and wish you nothing but the best.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Mr. Rayburn, I wanted to focus first on Idlib, if I could.
The situation there in Idlib province is precarious at best,
with well over a million internally displaced people who have
been the target of Assad bombings. What can be done to prevent
Assad, backed by Russia and Iran, obviously, from invading the
province or committing further atrocities there?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
Of course, we make clear in our engagements with our
Russian counterparts, and with others, that our political and
economic pressure is meant to, among other things, in addition
to pushing for a political solution to the conflict, it is also
meant to deter the Assad regime from continuing this brutal war
against his own people. So, we apply our own economic and
political pressure.
We also signal support for what Turkey has done militarily
on the ground in the Idlib region by being willing to use
Turkish military force to stop the Assad regime and its allies
from continuing an assault on those, you know, the people who
are living under horrific conditions in Idlib.
So, it is a combination of the two. It is the political and
economic support that we are able to place, and it is Turkish
military pressure.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
As you know, both the U.S. and Turkey have designated the
PKK as a terrorist organization. How do you assess statements
by Mazloum Kobani from the Syrian Democratic Forces during a
recent interview with The Crisis Group--it was published back
on November 25th--mentioning the presence and role of thousands
of PKK-trained non-Syrians; in other words, foreign elements
within the SDF ranks? And are there ongoing consultations with
the SDF on this issue, and if so, at what level?
Mr. Rayburn. We absolutely believe that it is a
constructive step for all parties in northern Syrian, all
parties in Syria, for that matter, to agree that part of
settling the conflict, part of reducing tensions and violence
against Syrians, is that non-Syrians need to leave Syria. Non-
Syrians should not be using Syria as a base to attack Syrians
or to attack others in the region. So, I think Mazloum's
comments were very constructive in that regard. And the answer
is, yes, we are ready to be helpful to try to help local groups
go through that process of trying to get foreign elements to
leave Syria.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
I have probably got time to squeeze one more question and
answer into my time. So, let me go to this. Could you discuss
our efforts to provide humanitarian assistance to the people of
northwest Syria, and what kind of coordination mechanisms are
in place with Turkey to accomplish that?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
Well, I mean, we have a lot of coordination mechanisms. In
fact, I have a team, the START team, that is located in
Istanbul, which helps to oversee the implementation of U.S.,
the delivery of U.S. aid programs into northern Syria,
northwest Syria, in particular, where the need is so acute. We
work very closely with Turkish counterparts to do that, and to
try to overcome some of the bureaucratic hurdles or logistical
hurdles because it is so essential for those people.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
Actually, I do have time to get one last one in. A central
aspect of the Caesar sanctions bill, which we have already
talked about in committee, was sanctions on the Syrian Central
Bank, but, thus far, the bank has not been sanctioned. When do
you expect progress on that?
Mr. Rayburn. Well, I think the Syrian Central Bank is
sanctioned under other authorities. So, it is the Treasury
Department which has to make a determination under the Caesar
Act about the qualifications of the Syrian Central Bank under
the Caesar Act provisions. I do not have an answer for you on
when Treasury is going to complete its work on that, but I know
that it is something that they have been working for some
months.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you very much.
My time is expired, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Cicilline.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to
begin by thanking you for your extraordinary leadership of this
committee. You have been a principal voice for American global
leadership and for the power of America's example around the
world. And you have promoted bipartisanship throughout the work
on this committee in the best traditions of our national
government and for the benefit of the American people. And you
have, obviously, been a terrific leader of this committee, a
great friend, and wonderful colleague. And I, too, want to say
thank you. I look forward to staying in contact with you.
And I congratulate our incoming chairman, Mr. Meeks, who I
know will be a great leader of this committee, and, of course,
thank Mr. Castro and Mr. Sherman for their participation as
well.
And I want to thank you, Mr. Rayburn, for being here today.
I want to focus first on our Russian and Turkish
involvement in the region. In March 2020, Russian President
Putin and Turkish President Erdogan reached an agreement that
established a security corridor. And I wondered if you could
tell me kind of what is the status of that, to what extent is
the U.S. able to monitor military movements and violence
against civilians in these areas, and how much longer do you
envision this arrangement holding? There has been a lot of talk
that it could collapse at any moment. So, your assessment of
that, please.
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
A very important issue. You are talking about the cease-
fire agreement that was reached between Russia and Turkey in
Sochi. That was an important point at which it was clear that
the Assad regime and its allies had to abandon their major
offensive to try to overrun Idlib. It was an important point
when we saw the military balance, the strategic military
balance, shift against the Assad regime in northwest Syria. I
would say it has been tense, but, roughly, durable as a cease-
fire. We have not seen the Assad regime attempt to return to a
major offensive against Idlib in the intervening months.
And frankly, Congressman, I think that is because they
recognize that they suffered a significant defeat at the hands
of the Turkish military and its local Syrian partners back in
February and March. So, I think they realize that they cannot
tangle, the Assad regime does not have the military means to
tangle with the Turkish military and its local partners.
So, I do not expect the Assad regime to try to upset that
cease-fire agreement. Now, in terms of the actual
implementation of the agreement between the Russians and
Turkish, some of that we are not privy to, but we have seen
that I think that it is clear that the Assad regime, and
Russia's preferred option of trying to achieve a military
solution to the Syrian conflict, was rendered irrelevant as a
result of that February-March confrontation.
Mr. Cicilline. Okay. Thank you.
I want to try to get in a couple of more questions. The
Defense Intelligence Agency reports evidence of increasing
cooperation between the Syrian Democratic Forces, our Kurdish
partners in Syria, and the most potent anti-ISIS force,
obviously, and Russian forces. What is the Administration doing
to move the SDF away from cooperation with the Russians? Is
that even possible?
I think you are on mute.
Mr. Rayburn. Sorry.
Since October 2019 and the confrontation in northeast Syria
at that time, there has been coordination between Syrian
Democratic Forces and Russian forces, and even Assad regime
forces, in parts of northeastern Syria, where the U.S. military
is no longer located.
What we would not like to see is that turn into some sort
of political agreement between the communities of northeast
Syria and Damascus.
Mr. Cicilline. Mr. Rayburn, I have really limited time and
I want to get one more question in. My question is very
specific. Is the Administration doing anything to move the SDF
away from corroboration with Russia?
Mr. Rayburn. Specifically, well, look, we maintain our
partnership with the SDF. So, we are the indispensable partner
for the SDF and we make that clear in our----
Mr. Cicilline. I take it that there is not a specific
effort underway. I am just raising this. I think it is a very
serious issue, but I want to get to one last question.
You mentioned the Al-Hawl camp was built to house about
10,000 people, but it has housed, as you mentioned, 70,000
people for the last 2 years. Ninety-four percent of them are
women and children who fled ISIS-controlled areas. And so, the
public reporting from NGO's has been that the conditions are
horrific. Five hundred people at least the last year perished
in the camp due to malnutrition, poor health, and hyperthermia.
And I just would like to know a little more about the
conditions there, what we are doing, and what is your
assessment of SDF's ability to continue to administer this
camp? What is the situation with COVID in Al-Hawl, and
particularly with the concerns that all of us have about the
radicalization of people who are left in those conditions?
Could you talk more about that camp and the prospects for kind
of continuing the conditions over there and whether things are
going to improve and people are going to be repatriated? But
just a more full discussion on that.
Mr. Rayburn. Sure. There is a COVID problem in Al-Hawl, and
it is very challenging because the medical conditions there,
the medical infrastructure there is very rudimentary. So, it is
a problem. There is more help that is needed for the local
authorities to try to tackle that COVID problem, and so it does
not spread. It is a very vulnerable population, very densely
contained.
For the SDF to administer a security camp, it takes an
enormous amount of resources. So, I mean, the best answer for
Al-Hawl camp over time is to try to reduce it, first and
foremost, by vetting people who are in Al-Hawl. And so, those
who do not pose a risk who are Syrians, where it is possible,
could return to their local Syrian communities, again, only
after they have been very closely vetted and it is established
that they are not a risk. And the SDF is working on that.
There are more than 30,000 Iraqis that need to be
repatriated to Iraq. There is not yet a fully working mechanism
to make that happen. And so, that needs a lot of attention. It
needs a lot of diplomatic energy in the future.
And then, for those several thousands who are neither
Iraqis nor Syrians, but who are many from Europe or North
Africa, from other places internationally, it has been very
challenging to get those host nation governments to accept the
repatriation of their citizens. And so, that is something that
really we have got to apply more energy with trying to reduce
that population in the future.
But the bottom line, Congressman, is the problems there are
very difficult and the best answer is to try to reduce the
population of Al-Hawl camp as quickly as we can, and it is very
tough.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank
you, Mr. Cicilline.
Mrs. Wagner.
Mrs. Wagner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to add my
voice to the chorus of those expressing their praise and
respect for you, your chairmanship, your bipartisanship, your
leadership, and grace. So, I wish you and your family all the
best, and I know that you will not be a stranger to this
committee or to any other service to our country.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. Thank you.
Mrs. Wagner. Definitely. It is my pleasure, sir.
I also want to welcome Deputy Assistant Secretary Rayburn.
And I thank the chairman, in particular, again, for his work on
the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, critical legislation
that has given the United States the tools to hold the Assad
regime accountable.
Deputy Assistant Secretary Rayburn, I was horrified last
year when Turkey initiated a military offensive against Kurdish
forces in northwestern Syria. I believe that the United States
has a duty to prevent genocide of the Kurds, contain ISIS so
terrorists cannot regroup, and ensure any repositioning of U.S.
forces will promote stability in the region.
More than a year after a cease-fire resulted in the
withdrawal of Syrian Democratic Forces from the Syria-Turkey
border, how has the Turkish incursion affected the situation on
the ground in Syria, particularly regarding the safety of our
Kurdish partners?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, ma'am.
So, that situation in October-November 2019, it was a very
challenging one. It was very difficult. We were able to produce
an agreement with the government of Turkey to observe a cease-
fire in that zone of northeastern Syria, where their military
operations had extended. And that cease-fire has been,
essentially, durable. It is a tense situation there. We see
occasion flare-ups along the line, but we have not seen any
major moves from either side.
And our message to both sides has been it is not in your
interest--it is not in Turkey's interest; it is not in the
SDF's interest--to see a renewal of that confrontation. It
distracts, we think, both sides away from the major problems in
Syria, which are the Assad regime, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, the Iranian
regime, and so on.
So, I would say we have been able to continue the campaign
against ISIS. The global coalition has been able to continue
its efforts, and there has not been a resurgence of ISIS in
northeast Syria. They continue to act as a clandestine network,
but they have not experienced a resurgence. And so, it is
something that has really complicated our task in northeast
Syria over the past year, but we continue to do our work there.
Mrs. Wagner. And I would like to get in a couple of
questions here.
Assad seems to reject the necessity of a negotiated end to
the Syrian civil war, believing, instead, that it can achieve a
military victory over opposition forces. Russia is not putting
sufficient pressure on Assad to convince the regime to
participate seriously in any kind of negotiations. In your
view, does this undermine the Russian-backed Astana talks, and
what leverage can the United States use to rejuvenate
negotiations?
Mr. Rayburn. That is a good question. In our view, the
Astana Forum, which we do not participate in, is defunct. It
was meant to be a cease-fire forum, and then, the Assad regime
and the Russians attacked all the cease-fires, attacked all the
cease-fire zones. So, that is a dead forum. They still meet,
but there is no political solution going to come out of the
Astana Forum.
That is why we spend all of our time applying pressure to
the Assad regime and its allies to compel them to come into the
only viable forum that exists, which is the one in Geneva, the
political process in Geneva that is U.N. supervised under U.N.
Security Council Resolution 2254. I think we can get them
there. It will take more pressure. It will take more actions
under particularly the Caesar Act and other Syria sanctions
authorities, but I think we can get there.
Mrs. Wagner. Humanitarian assistance ensures that our
efforts to hold the Syrian government accountable are not
hurting the Syrian people, who have already suffered so very
much. At the same time, we must prevent the regime from using
humanitarian assistance to circumvent economic pressure. I
understand that Russia and China are using their veto power at
the U.N. to try to funnel aid through the government's seat in
Damascus. How is this complicating our ability to provide aid
to the people of Syrian?
And I am out of time here. So, very quickly, sir.
Mr. Rayburn. You got it exactly right, ma'am. It is very
difficult. So, a lot of the humanitarian assistance that we
support comes cross-border. It does not go through the Syrian
government in Damascus. The Russians would like to compel
everyone to do humanitarian assistance cross-line working
through Damascus. We resist that. We try to exercise oversight
over the humanitarian assistance that we contribute to that
does have to go cross-line, and there is some. We support
humanitarian assistance throughout Syria, even in the areas
that the Assad regime controls. But it is something we have to
watch very closely, and I think we need to work more closely
with the U.N. agencies in the future to try to guard against
the Assad regime being able to divert humanitarian assistance
away from the Syrian people and into the channels the Syrian
regime would benefit from. It is a problem we need to watch
closely.
Mrs. Wagner. Thank you. Thank you, Secretary Rayburn, for
your service over time.
I appreciate the chair's indulgence, and I yield back, Mr.
Chair.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Mrs. Wagner.
Mr. Keating.
Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And again, thank you
for all your work. I have enjoyed working with you and hope to
continue to do so.
Along those lines, I had an amendment that passed the NDAA
that the chairman worked with me--thank you, Mr. Chairman--to
establish a coordinator for ISIS detainees. And as part of the
congressionally appropriated dollars for the Counter-ISIS Train
and Equip Fund, the U.S.-trained Provincial/Regional Internal
Security Forces, PRISF, is funded to detain roughly 12,000 ISIS
militants in custody and roughly 2,000 foreign fighters. Mr.
Rayburn, could you tell us the status of that? And can you tell
us with confidence that these prisoners, these dangerous ISIS
and foreign fighters, that they are secure?
Mr. Rayburn. Congressman, it is a tough problem. I think
they are secure right now, but there is always a danger. And
the longer those foreign terrorist fighters are on the ground
in Syria, there is a danger that, for example, they would
overextend the Syrian Democratic Forces and other local
security forces that have to try to guard them, that have to
secure them. So, the answer for the foreign fighters, in the
same way that it is for Al-Hawl camp, the answer is to try to
get the foreign fighters processed and repatriated back to
their home countries, and that has been very challenging.
Mr. Keating. Mr. Rayburn, are there efforts in place, not
only with these detainees, but also with the refugees, to
inhibit the coordination and further radicalization of those
individuals? It is a real concern. So, what is being done in
that regard with the detainees and, also, with these refugees?
Mr. Rayburn. I would say there is not enough being done.
And it happens that on Monday, when I was in northeast Syria
talking to U.S. military counterparts and our local partners,
that the recognition that there needs to be a de-radicalization
campaign in not so much the foreign fighter facilities, because
a lot of those are really hardened ISIS people, but more among
the displaced population or the lower-threat population, maybe
people that were sort of auxiliaries to ISIS, but they weren't
necessarily dyed-in-the-wool radicals. But there needs to be an
effort to help with de-radicalization efforts there.
As far as the refugees are concerned, that is an enormous
problem, and really, there needs to be more attention to that.
It is different in each different place because the refugees
are spread out over so many countries.
Mr. Keating. All right. Well, it is an ongoing concern, and
I hope that some of the pullbacks we have had, some of the
support we have, has not deteriorated or inhibited our ability
to deal with an important issue. And I hope that the
Administration can work successfully repatriating these people,
so they can go back to their own countries to seek justice, an
ongoing concern that I do not think was helped as we pulled
back some of our influence militarily through the area.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Engel. The gentleman yields back. Thank you, Mr.
Keating.
Mr. Mark Green.
Mr. Green of Tennessee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you for your work in this region and, of course, on the
committee. My comments from before go and I wish you the best.
Chairman Engel. Thank you.
Mr. Green of Tennessee. Ranking Member, thank you for
your--thank you, sir--thank you for your comments, too.
And, Mr. Rayburn, thank you for your testimony today. I
want to start my comments with a good, hardy ``Go Army, Beat
Navy.''
I started my company, my medical company, in Panama City,
Florida, where I met a physician named Oussama Rifai. Dr. Rifai
had grown up in Syria, in fact, grown up in Aleppo. And this
was in the 2007-2008 timeframe. And I got to know Dr. Rifai,
and then, he convinced me that I should join the Syrian Medical
Society and go back to Syria to teach physicians in the
country.
So, in the early part of 2011, I began to prep some
lectures to do and to deliver in Aleppo, Syria. I was excited
to go. Dr. Rifai had shared with me the amazing beauty of that
city, the city of Aleppo, where Christians and Muslims worked
together in peace. He described it, citing examples where the
Muslim families would babysit the children of Christians while
the Christians did Christian festivals and services, and vice
versa. It was an unbelievable city.
My friend calls me a few weeks into the summer and says,
``Are you still going to Syria?'' And I am like, ``Well, I
think so.'' And, of course, it deteriorated, continued to
deteriorate, and I wound up not getting to go.
But this war comes and destroys the beauty of that city,
crushes the people of that country, spawns the amazing,
unbelievable, horrific ISIS caliphate that President Trump and
the United States military so crushed, and has created this
unbelievable situation where Turkey and the Kurds and Russia
and the Syrian government are not in this milieu, and it is
probably the hardest foreign policy challenge of the United
States. It is a 9.9 out of 10.
Clearly, this guy Assad is a butcher and he is following in
the line, if you go and study what happened in Hama, Syria
years ago, he is following in the footsteps of his father. The
apple does not fall very far from the tree.
But just a few quick questions. Most of my questions have
already been asked by committee members. I just wondered, Mr.
Rayburn, if you could talk a little bit about Russia's long
game, what their footprint is today, and what their long game
is there, and what our plans are to thwart what they are doing.
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
The Russians have been there for a long time. They have had
a military presence there going back into the cold war. so, it
is half a century that the Russians have had a naval base
there, that they have had a very close relationship with the
Syrian military.
What we would like to see is that all the forces that were
not there before 2011, ultimately, go home, and that there is a
political solution that makes it so that they have no rationale
to be there. I mean, that is us included.
As far as what the Russians are doing there, to be honest
with you, I think the Russians now, since 2016, have been
trying to enable Assad to win a military victory that he cannot
win and that they cannot sort of lift him up and carry him over
the finish line. The Syrian regime military is too hollow. That
regime is too brittle and weak.
And so, what is their long-term game? It is not clear to me
that there is a viable one because of the path that they have
been on. The path they have been on for the last four or 5
years has hit a dead-end or a cul-de-sac and there is nowhere
for it to go.
So, to be honest with you, I think, honestly, it is time
for a reality check for all the allies of Assad to realize that
there can only be a political solution to this conflict. They
are not going to get their military Reconquista.
Mr. Green of Tennessee. Thank you for that.
And I am, essentially, out of time. Chairman, I yield back.
And thank you, Mr. Rayburn, for your comments.
Mr. Rayburn. And beat Navy, sir.
Mr. Green of Tennessee. Yes, beat them.
Chairman Engel. Thank you.
Mr. Espaillat.
Mr. Espaillat. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I turn
to Mr. Rayburn, I would like to acknowledge the chairman's
final hearing, and thank him for his tireless commitment to
this committee.
Chairman Engel and I share neighboring districts, and he
has been a wonderful friend and mentor to me in my first two
terms. And while in the State Senate, I represented his home
district as a State senator. So, our friendship is deep and I
value it, and I wish him all the very best.
My question is that, despite the dire threats facing
refugees to return to Syria, neighboring States like Lebanon
and Turkey that have hosted thousands of Syrian refugees since
the beginning of the civil war in 2011 are increasing calling
on those Syrians to return home. Reports have emerged,
verifiable reports have emerged, that Syrian refugees have been
forced to return from both neighbor States, including hundreds
in the late 2019 year, documented by both Amnesty International
and various Lebanese press reports throughout 2020. These
evictions and forced returns of Syrians from Lebanon are very
well-documented. Could you provide an update on the latest in
terms of these forced refugee returns, Mr. Rayburn?
Mr. Rayburn. Yes, Congressman. Thank you for raising this.
It is really important, I think less so Turkey, because I think
Turkey shares with us the fundamental position that refugee
returns have to be safe, voluntary, and dignified, and there
has to be an independent assessment that conditions on the
ground are safe enough for people to return.
In Lebanon, we have had a challenge with that with our
Lebanese counterparts, and we have seen them try to remove the
``voluntary'' out of that formula of safe, voluntary, and
dignified. And there has been a great deal of pressure on
Syrian refugees from time to time to try to coerce some of them
to go home.
We have tried to make it very clear in our engagement with
Lebanese counterparts that it is unacceptable to see refugees
of any kind suffer back to Syria, when we know that the
conditions----
Mr. Espaillat. Are these----
Mr. Rayburn. Sorry.
Mr. Espaillat. Are these refugees safe going back there or
are their lives in danger? What is the status, for the most
part, of these refugees?
Mr. Rayburn. I think you can say, Congressman, the
situation in Syria is not safe for people who would like to
return home, because, simply put, the Assad regime has not
ended its war against the Syrian people. And that is the sine
qua non; that is the starting point, if there is going to be
the creation of conditions on the ground in Syria before people
will feel safe enough to voluntarily go back.
Mr. Espaillat. So, what additional steps should the U.S.
take to work with our other partners, as well as multilateral
organizations, to let the U.N. to prevent these forcibly
returns that could lead to the deaths of many of these
refugees?
Mr. Rayburn. I think we have to look if there is--I mean,
there are avenues open to us, even in terms of if it gets down
to economic sanctions, certainly political pressure. But we
will issue warnings, if we see that kind of activity beginning,
we will issue warnings to those countries.
Now, at the same time, it is incumbent on us, I think, and
the international community to continue supporting those
countries who have very meager resources and who are bearing
the burden of, and the pressure of, having to host a large
refugee population, to help them with resources to make it so
that they can bear that burden better.
Mr. Espaillat. Let me turn real quickly to the Caesar
sanctions. Now I think that we can all safety say that,
although throughout the decades the United States has applied a
range of sanctions to Syria and the Assad government, it really
has not significantly changed the behavior of the government.
What makes the Caesar sanctions different?
Mr. Rayburn. The Caesar sanctions, first of all, I love the
Caesar sanctions, as someone who is implementing them, because
not only does it mean that we can use the prongs that are
within the Caesar sanctions, it means that everyone we
designate under any Syria authority, the Caesar Act attaches
secondary sanctions to them. And that is what is really
powerful, because it is not just the people or the businesses
or the organizations that we sanction directly; it is anyone
that does business with them or interacts with them is
vulnerable to sanctions as well. And that is where we get the
real power of the Caesar Act.
I think we are seeing things change on the ground in Syria.
The Syrian regime did not dream that it would be at the end of
2020 and would have its currency crashing, its regime economy
failing, and its resources that it uses to fund its war against
the Syrian people dwindling the way it has. And I think the
Caesar Act has played the central role in helping to bring that
situation about. So, I think things are changing, and you will
see that more in the coming months.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you,
Mr. Espaillat.
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Engel. Thank you.
Ms. Wild? Ms. Wild.
[No response.]
Okay, we will move on.
Mr. Levin.
Mr. Levin. All right, Mr. Chairman. Here I am. Can you hear
me all right?
Chairman Engel. Yes, we can hear you fine. We can hear you
fine.
Mr. Levin. Thank you so much.
Well, I want to start by just expressing my immense
gratitude to you for your service to this Nation, to this
House, to this committee, and your mentorship and friendship to
me, in particular.
I will never forget coming to Congress, and, you know, one
courts the chairmen of the committees one wants to serve on.
And not only were you gracious and respectful of me as a
freshman, but your enthusiasm for the work of this committee
and your sort of intellectual depth you bring to it, it just
has been a real inspiration to me. And so, that is something
that I will take forward with me. So, I am really grateful to
you for all that.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Levin. So, let me ask a question about chemical
weapons. Earlier this year, the Administration reported--and I
am quoting--``We believe the Assad regime is seeking to
reestablish strategic weapons production capabilities it lost
in the course of the conflict, and we continue to see Syrian
procurement activity in support of its chemical weapons and
missile programs.''
So, aside from sanctioning Syrian individuals, what is the
State Department doing to respond to a renewed Syrian chemical
weapons program and is there a diplomatic strategy?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
Yes, there is a diplomatic strategy, and it can be
summarized in building an international consensus, building a
coalition of like-minded countries to use all of their
pressure--political, economic, whatever kind, some law
enforcement--to hold the Syrian regime accountable, not just
for the chemical weapons use that has been documented in the
past, but this very real danger that the Syrian regime retains
the ambition to reconstitute its chemical weapons arsenal.
Right now, you are seeing on the diplomatic side, I think
the most important forum that is underway right now is at the
OPCW in The Hague, where we and many other like-minded
countries are going through a process of following up on the
OPCW's ultimatum to the Syrian regime to come clean about its
chemical weapons use and its program, and if not, then to be
under the danger of suspension from the OPCW.
Mr. Levin. Sir, so would you say that this is a good
example of the importance of multilateral institutions and of
the U.S. working collaboratively with many allies to achieve
our foreign policy goals?
Mr. Rayburn. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. Levin. Okay. Well, that is good, and I hope on a going-
forward basis, we will really emphasize our work with other
countries and not take a go-it-alone approach.
Let me ask you about the humanitarian situation. As of this
fall, roughly half of Syria's prewar population remains
internally displaced, 6.2 million people, or registered as
refugees in neighboring States, 5.6 million people, and nearly
80 percent of the remaining population is living below the
poverty line. The U.S. has directed more than $11.3 billion
toward Syria-related humanitarian assistance since Fiscal Year
2, and Congress has appropriated billions more for security and
stabilization initiatives in Syria and neighboring countries.
What is the Administration's humanitarian assistance strategy,
given the dire, dire circumstances in Syria right now?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
Actually, when we bring it up-to-date, we are actually over
$12.2 billion in humanitarian assistance that the United States
has contributed for the Syrian people since the beginning of
the conflict. The strategy right now is to try to continue the
humanitarian assistance flow, especially cross-border into
northern Syria. Right now, we are in the middle of trying to
work with the U.N. agencies and other humanitarian providers to
do winterization, because there is the onset of winter in Syria
which can be harsh conditions or awful.
We, also, over the last several months were able to put
together assistance for Syrians inside and outside Syria of
$141 million to address the particular emergent needs brought
on by the COVID pandemic, which has hit Syria very hard.
So, I think in the coming months what you will see us do is
try to--and we have had to respond to the Russian pressure to
reduce the capacity, to reduce the U.N. mandate to do cross-
border assistance. So, I think what you will see us do in the
coming months is to continue to work with like-minded countries
to lock in ways to have that humanitarian assistance be
predictable and continue, enduring into the liberated
territories of northern Syria, at the same time that we watch
for measures to try to contain the COVID pandemic in Syria.
Those are, I would say, the two priority areas right now.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. The gentleman's time has
expired.
Mr. Levin. Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired, but it
is difficult to say this for the last time, but, with
gratitude, I yield back to you.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Mr. Levin. I very much
appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Ms. Wild.
Ms. Wild. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I join in the comments
of my colleagues about your service. It has been my great honor
to be on this committee with you as the chairman.
I am going to be moving as I ask this question because I am
about to run out of charge, and I apologize for that. But I
will go ahead.
And I wanted to start, Mr. Rayburn, sort of following up on
what Mr. Levin just asked you about. And that is, and without
restating the obvious that all of us are aware of in terms of
the terrible suffering that is happening in Syria, I do want to
know whether you believe that we should reevaluate our
sanctions policies toward--we will just limit it to Syria right
now--in light of the unintended effects that those sanctions
appear to be having on everyday Syrians' food supply in areas
controlled by the Assad regime. And I guess a followup to that
is, what specific steps is the Administration taking to help
alleviate the hunger crisis in Syria?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Ms. Wild.
Since the beginning of Fiscal Year 2020, the United States
has actually spent $1.7 billion on humanitarian assistance to
the Syrian people. So, we have stepped up our contribution. At
the same time, we have made very clear, through our diplomatic
engagements, through our engagements with civil society and
business communities, that there are specific carve outs to our
sanctions programs, so that we do not constrain humanitarian
assistance on the ground, nor things like food production.
The Assad regime has undertaken, along with its allies, a
propaganda campaign to claim that we do, but we have clarified
at every opportunity that we do not sanction that kind of
activity. The kind of people and businesses and organizations
that we are sanctioning under our sanctions program right now
are the worst of the worst of the entourage of Bashar al-Assad
and his regime, and they are not doing anything--the kind of
people we are sanctioning, the kind of organizations we are
sanctioning are not doing anything to alleviate suffering of
the Syrian people. They are the ones causing the suffering of
the Syrian people.
In particular, under the Caesar Act, the point of the
Caesar Act is to put pressure on the regime, so that they will
stop killing and stop inducing the suffering of Syrians. So, I
think the regime's propaganda tries to put it absolutely upside
down.
Ms. Wild. So, let me ask you this: how much assurance do
you personally feel that the humanitarian aid that the United
States is providing is actually getting to the everyday
Syrians?
Mr. Rayburn. I think we can be more confident in that in
places where we have access--northeast Syrian, for example--and
in places where we have NGO partners that can have less
restricted access. That is northern Syria. We are less
confident in that in places that the Assad regime controls.
There is always the risk of diversion, but it is something that
we stay in close touch with the U.N. agencies to try to guard
against things like Assad regime cronies being able to get
subcontracts by using front companies, and things like that, to
implement assistance that they, then, will divert into militia
hands, Assad Shabiha hands, or other Assad regime crony hands.
Ms. Wild. I am going to switch gears and try to be quick
because I am running out of time. But I want to return to the
issue of Ambassador James Jeffrey and some statements that he
made, specifically one in an interview last month in which he
said, ``We were always playing shell games to not make clear to
our leadership how many troops we had there.'' My question to
you is, is that statement accurate, No. 1? And No. 2, what is
the actual number of troops we have in Syria today?
Mr. Rayburn. In terms of the actual troop numbers, I would
defer to the Defense Department for comment on that. And I
know, for example, simply put, troop numbers are beyond the
purview of the State Department. I mean, that is for the
Defense Department to set, and we all----
Ms. Wild. Okay. Could you comment on Ambassador Jeffrey's
comment?
Mr. Rayburn. Sure. I mentioned this earlier in the hearing.
The State Department team, from Secretary Pompeo on down, has
been very diligent in executing the guidance of the President,
and in my experience at no time did the State Department
mischaracterize the military posture in Syria. We had no reason
to do that. We did not have the responsibility to either set
force levels or to report them to the White House. So, as far
as I know, that did not happen.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. The gentlewoman's time has
expired.
Ms. Wild. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Ms. Wild.
Ms. Houlahan.
Ms. Houlahan. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and, of course, I will
very much miss you, but I do not think that this is goodbye. I
think that we will talk and see one another. But thank you for
being such a good mentor to me and to so many others.
My question has to do with a statement that was made by
CENTCOM Commander General McKenzie about Syrian refugees. And
the quote that I have is that he said, ``Unless the
international community finds a way to repatriate, reintegrate
into home communities, and to support locally grown
reconciliation programming for these people, we are buying
ourselves a strategic problem 10 years down the road when these
children will grow up radicalized. If we do not address this
now, we're never really going to defeat ISIS.'' And that is
what he said.
So, my question is, do you agree, sir, with General
McKenzie's assessment and what role has the State Department
played in this effort? What role should the State Department
play in this effort?
Mr. Rayburn. I do agree with General McKenzie's assessment.
I do think the number of Syrian refugees and displaced people
outside Syria/inside Syria is so immense. It is a population
that is very vulnerable to radicalization in the future, and it
is something that has to be addressed. The No. 1 way to address
that is to end the conflict through a political solution under
U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254, so that the war ends, so
that conditions inside Syria change, and so refugees and IDPs
can go back home. That is the single greatest thing that we can
do, and that is what the State Department team works for 24/7.
Now, in terms of the specific threat of refugee and IDP
settlements/camps, especially inside Syria, we work very hard
to try to encourage repatriation of non-Syrians back to their
countries of origin. And that is really hard because a lot of
the countries of origin do not want to take them back. They are
not open to taking them back. So, it is going to take a lot of
diplomatic energy. We have got to redouble our efforts to press
those countries to take their people back, and some of them are
not good people. We know that. Some went off and joined ISIS,
went off and joined Al-Qaeda. So, they are a danger, but it is
doing no good to anyone for them to remain in Syria.
Ms. Houlahan. So, as we are talking about the progress in
defeating ISIS and Al-Qaeda that we have made, how do you in
the State Department kind of envision reconstruction in Syria,
specifically the role that the U.S. plays in that effort? And
also, frankly, kind of what lessons have we learned from
Afghanistan, bad lessons or good lessons that we have learned
from Afghanistan, and how should those lessons be applied in
the reconstruction of Syria?
Mr. Rayburn. Concerning reconstruction, which is another
way of saying, I think, normal economic relations between the
international community and the Syrian government, we withhold
that and we press others to withhold that until the Syrian
government has acceded to the implementation of the political
solution under U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254. So, until
there is irreversible progress under 2254 and that political
process, the United States should not contribute to
reconstruction in Syria, and we shouldn't encourage it. We
should discourage others from doing so, to keep the pressure on
the Syrian government.
As far as lessons from Afghanistan, I think you are
probably meaning about the different studies that have been
done about how reconstruction wound up fueling corruption, and
so on. I think that is a problem that will have to be addressed
when the time comes. It is one that we have to watch out for
for sure. I mean, I was involved in Iraq for many years, as we
witnessed a similar problem in Iraq. So, it is a problem. It is
a problem I would like to have, though. That would be a better
problem to have right now than having the war in Syria raging
fully. So, if we get to a reconstruction phase, it should be
once the political solution is irreversibly being implemented
and the war is over.
Ms. Houlahan. So, I only have a couple more seconds. But
you spoke a little bit about the pressure that we had. Other
than sanctions, what kind of other leverage could we use, to
your point, to help the Syrian government find their way and to
have other allies and non-allies help make progress a reality
in this area? What other leverage points do we have? And I only
have, I'm sorry, about a half a minute, 15 seconds.
Mr. Rayburn. Sure. The biggest way is political isolation
and accountability, including through law enforcement or
international cooperation for law enforcement. Isolation has to
remain. The Assad regime/the Syrian government has got to
remain isolated from the international economy, from the
international community, until it accedes to 2254.
Chairman Engel. Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Houlahan. I ran out of time, and I yield back. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Ms. Houlahan.
Mr. Malinowski? Is Mr. Malinowski here?
[No response.]
Okay. We will move on.
Mr. Vargas.
Mr. Malinowski. I am here.
Chairman Engel. Mr. Malinowski.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry, I was
muted.
First of all, I just wanted to add my words to all the
words of thanks, to the praise that you have received. It has
been such a pleasure and honor for me to work with you on this
committee for the last 2 years.
Somebody mentioned that there will be a portrait of you
hanging in the committee. There are many former chairmen with
portraits. There are, I think, very few former chairmen who
have had streets named after them in the
[audio interference] of countries that the United States
has helped, as you have been honored, which is a tribute to you
and to the kind of American leadership that you have championed
and will continue to champion through your career.
Since it is the last hearing of the year, I also just want
to say a word of thanks to everyone I have had a chance to work
with: my subcommittee chairs, Mr. Castro, Mr. Deutch; to the
members on the Republican side with whom I have partnered, Mr.
Kinzinger, Mr. Curtis, Mrs. Wagner, our ranking member, of
course--the bipartisanship on this committee is wonderful--and
to members of the committee staff who have been so helpful to
me, Mira Resnick; Jen Hendrixson White, who helped so much with
the Hong Kong bill that we passed this week; Ed Rice; Laura
Carey; Jay
[audio interference]; Sajit Gandhi; Janice Kaguyutan, and
so many others for their hard work.
I just have a couple of questions to Mr. Rayburn on the
subject of today's hearing. I think a number of members have
raised all of the problems that arose from the President's
aborted decision to withdraw troops from Syria and to leave our
allies in northeastern Syria in the lurch, so to speak.
Fortunately, that was aborted. But I think there has been less
attention paid to the decision the Administration made to
basically stop stabilization funding for the parts of Syria to
which we do have access, including not sending appropriated
funds or seeking additional funds from Congress. I think the
argument was made, well, our allies our stepping up. Most of
that money from our so-called allies was from Saudi Arabia,
which has very different priorities and values from the United
States.
So, my first question to you, Mr. Rayburn, is really where
that stands in terms of American contributions to
stabilization, USAID programming, in those areas. And would you
recommend to the next administration that the United States
play a leading role on the civilian side, in addition to the
military side, in the Syria to which we have access?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Mr. Malinowski.
We do agree we are in a stabilization phase in the campaign
against ISIS in eastern Syria and Iraq as well. And so,
stabilization activities of all kinds have to continue. I mean,
that includes military stabilization, but it is also
reestablishment of essential services to try to get those
communities up on their feet.
Of course, we do contribute as well with humanitarian
assistance. And the stabilization projects in Syria to date
have totaled about $1.3 billion. That has included, as you
mentioned, contributions from our Gulf partners. The Saudis
contributed $100 million; the Emiratis contributed $50 million
that were used across 2018 and 2019. Those went into U.S.
programs. So, they were not independently executed by the Saudi
government or the Emirati government. So, they went according
to our priorities and they funded our projects.
And so, yes, the stabilization activities like that need to
continue, and we will continue both doing what we can from the
U.S. side, but also trying to solicit partner contributions as
well. And there have been a number of stabilization activities
that continue under the auspices of our partners in the global
coalition as well.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you. I guess the final questions with
the little time I have left. We are all concerned about the
humanitarian situation for ordinary Syrians under Assad's
control. You began to address this, but how would you weigh the
balance in terms of responsibility for suffering of ordinary
civilians in, say, Damascus between sanctions and the Assad
regime's own economic policies and corruption?
Mr. Rayburn. I think we have to continue the pressure that
we are applying, and we have to try to target that as precisely
as possible, so that we are sanctioning the parts of the regime
that we need to sanction in such a way that it is not having a
spillover effect to harming the Syrian people. But, I mean, in
the end, as I mentioned earlier in the haring, the single
greatest thing we can do to try to end the suffering of the
Syrian people is to hold the Assad regime accountable, so that
it has to stop the war and it has to accede to the political
solutions, come into the political process in a meaningful,
irreversible way.
You have to understand, the Assad regime is still bombing
the Syrian people. It is still shelling the Syrian people. It
is still disappearing the Syrian people into its prisons right
now. And that is the single greatest cause of suffering of the
Syrian people.
Chairman Engel. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Malinowski.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you.
Chairman Engel. Mr. Castro.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Rayburn, thank you for your testimony today.
In August, The New Republic reported that an American shell
company has gotten an unusual license to export Syrian oil. The
report alleges that the company is closely connected to a
prominent donor, to certain U.S. politicians. And the report
also alleges that U.N. Ambassador Jeffrey met with Nechirvan
Barzani to talk about this deal. Can you tell us why you met
with Mr. Barzani to discuss this deal? And also, did you meet
with Mr. Barzani to discuss oil deals with any other American
companies or only the one that was for this particular
prominent donor?
Mr. Rayburn. Congressman, you are speaking about the
license that was issued to Delta Crescent Energy to help the
local authorities of northeast Syria to try to raise the
efficiency of those local oil installations that our local
partners control. We supported that. We issued foreign policy
guidance. The Treasury Department issued a license. We
supported that because we support trying to get the economy of
northeast Syria up and running to the extent that it can under
the present conditions of war across Syria. So, I mean, we
thought it was a good thing for not just U.S. companies, but
others to be able to come in to help the local communities
stand back up on their feet.
We are talking about the communities that were victimized
by ISIS. They were in the heartland of the caliphate. So, when
you go through those communities, they are completely blasted
from years and years of war. They need everything. So, for them
to be able to use their resources, oil resources----
Mr. Castro. But did you lobby for this deal for this
particular company?
Mr. Rayburn. No, we did not lobby. I would have to--we did
not lobby anyone for the deal. We issued----
Mr. Castro. You had a discussion about it, though?
Mr. Rayburn. Yes.
Mr. Castro. You had a meeting about it?
Mr. Rayburn. Oh, yes, we met with members of that company.
We met with local authorities.
Mr. Castro. You met with Mr. Barzani also?
Mr. Rayburn. With Nechirvan Barzani, yes.
Mr. Castro. Yes. And did you discuss deals for any other
American companies besides that one?
Mr. Rayburn. No.
Mr. Castro. So, just that one deal?
Mr. Rayburn. That I was involved in, yes.
Mr. Castro. The reason I ask the question, you know, this
is a huge donor to some important U.S. politicians. I am going
to editorialize a little bit, but I do not know that there
would be too much dispute from many Americans that we are just
leaving what has been a dark period of corruption and graft, in
some cases fraud, that has been looked the other way at,
sometimes, I would argue, encouraged by the Trump
Administration. And so, that is the genesis of my question.
Mr. Rayburn. I do not have any visibility on those aspects,
Congressman. I mean, this was a straightforward issue of
issuing foreign policy guidance for a license request, which is
something that we do routinely.
Mr. Castro. All right. I am going to ask you about some
humanitarian issues real quick and following up on Mr.
Malinowski's question.
Despite a large portion of Syrian territory no longer
facing active fighting, the humanitarian situation has only
worsened. More than half the Syrian population needs
humanitarian assistance, as you know. The U.N. announced
earlier this year that 9.3 million people are now food-
insecure, an all-time high. Many Syrians report waiting 6 hours
to purchase bread, if they can afford it at all.
You said in your written testimony that the Administration
has ensured that our sanctions against Syria are not impeding
essential assistance to the Syrian people. This is commendable,
and certainly, Assad and his allies have actively subverted
humanitarian aid. Still, most NGO's working on the ground say
our sanctions are actively hindering their ability to deliver
assistance to the Syrian people.
And so, my question is, what steps, if any, will you take
to reduce the humanitarian impact of our sanctions? For
instance, are you willing to whitelist certain Syrian
organizations and banks to allow NGO's to transfer money and
purchase supplies from them?
Mr. Rayburn. Congressman, we already do that any time--I
mean, there is a problem in the humanitarian community of over
compliance, where banks or other institutions over comply with
our guidance. We try to work with Treasury to clarify that.
OFAC has issued guidance over time explaining exactly what is
permissible and what is not under our Syria sanctions program.
So, I feel pretty confident that we are making headway there.
And when we get specific instances from a humanitarian NGO,
or something, where they are denied the ability to open a bank
account, or something like that, we can engage with the
business or the bank to clarify our policy to them. We are
willing to do that all the time.
Mr. Castro. I yield back, Chairman. Thank you.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Mr. Castro.
Mr. Trone.
Mr. Trone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to the
remarks that have already been made in how much myself and
certainly members have really appreciated your leadership on
this committee. It has just been spectacular for a long, long
period of time. And the key that has made this committee so
successful and so productive is your spirt of bipartisanship,
and that type of leadership is what we need throughout this
Congress.
I would also like to call out the tremendous work that you
have done in the Middle East area, and that has been so
important to our most important ally over there, Israel.
Your mentorship and friendship has also really meant a lot
to me. As a freshman member, it is just so wonderful to have
someone that can help you learn the ropes and give someone like
myself guidance. And so, I really, really want to thank--I
appreciate it--for your service.
Chairman Engel. Thank you, Mr. Trone. Thank you very much.
Mr. Trone. You are welcome. You are welcome. Thank you.
If the witness could talk about--and it has already been
touched upon already--the dire threats facing the refugees'
return from Syria, from neighboring States, Lebanon, Turkey,
that have hosted thousands of Syrian refugees since the
beginning of the civil war in 2011. And now, they are
increasingly calling for Syrians to return home.
Reports have emerged that Syrian refugees are being forced
to return from both of the neighboring States, including
hundreds at the end of late 2019, documented by Amnesty
International and by various Lebanese press reports of
evictions and forced returns of Syrians from Lebanon. And I
would like to know kind of what extent, if at all, is the U.S.
working to remind neighboring countries, such as Lebanon and
Turkey, of their obligations under international law.
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
I think, with respect to Turkey, we have a good
understanding with the government of Turkey, and we both share
the fundamental view that refugee returns have to be safe,
voluntary, and dignified. And I think we have a good
coordination with Turkish counterparts on that.
With respect to Lebanon, it has been more challenging. And
in my previous role as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Levant
Affairs, I and my colleagues have had to interact with Lebanese
counterparts from time to time to remind them that refugee
returns have to be those three characteristics--safe,
voluntary, and dignified. There are some Lebanese political
figures who would like to line-through the voluntary aspect,
but we have reminded them that that is not acceptable.
And by the same token, we have tried to continue to do our
part in marshaling international community support to help
alleviate the burden that the refugee hosting countries bear
because some of them are of very meager resources. Lebanon is
one. Lebanon is going through a very, very difficult economic
crisis. And Jordan is another one. And so, these are countries
that I think it is important for us to continue to have the
international community provide assistance, so that the refugee
burden can be alleviated, but not at the expense of removing
that voluntary aspect of refugee returns.
And then, again, and also trying to push for the single
greatest thing that could make refugee returns to Syria
possible, which is for Bashar al-Assad and his regime to end
their war against the Syrian people and go into a political
process to get to a political solution to the conflict.
Mr. Trone. Thank you.
And quickly, what do the armed U.S. partner forces in Syria
expect from the United States over the short term, the medium
and long term? What are they looking for us to do?
Mr. Rayburn. So, the main one you are talking about is the
Syrian Democratic Forces and other local partner forces in
northeast Syrian. And I think what they expect, and I think
what they can count on, is that the global coalition to defeat
ISIS is going to be maintained and that the campaign to defeat
ISIS by, with, and through local security partners will
continue, not just in Syria, but in Iraq, because it is a
problem that spans both countries.
Mr. Trone. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you.
Mr. Castro [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Trone.
Mr. Vargas.
Mr. Vargas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I also want to join my voice to all those other voices that
have congratulated you, Mr. Chairman. I have to say that I
learned of Eliot Engel when we adopted a Muslim family. My wife
and I adopted a Kosovar family, the
[audio interference], because of the ethnic cleansing that
was going on there. And they asked if I knew President Clinton
at the time, which I did, and Eliot Engel. I did not know Eliot
Engel, but I know Eliot Engel now and I know why he has a
street named after him and, also, stamps, because of your great
work there. And, of course, they have incredible respect for
you, as do I.
And I will miss you very much, and especially the work you
did in the Middle East, and, in particular, the work that you
did around peace in Israel.
I do want to ask--Mr. Rayburn, thank you for being here--I
do want to ask you a little bit more about the refugee issue.
Now I have been to the refugee camps in Lebanon, both in Beirut
and the Bekaa Valley. I have also been to the refugee camps in
Jordan, and I have been to the refugee camps in Egypt, where
there are Syrians.
I have to tell you, the conditions are not great, and some
situations better than others. But one of the things that I did
see, and asked about, was that a lot of the countries in the
Middle East really were not stepping up and doing their fair
share of putting money into these camps to help out. Now has
that changed?
Mr. Rayburn. The contributions from the international
community, like-minded countries, to the refugee problem has
remained pretty high. We have not seen it decrease. And this
year, the main forum of the Brussels Donors Conference, which
is co-hosted by the EU and the United Nations, we got another
set of good pledges. So, I think, so far--you know, fingers
crossed--the international community is continuing its level of
support.
Mr. Vargas. Well, what about the Gulf countries? I mean,
that is the criticism that I heard there, that a lot of the
wealthy countries in the Middle East had not put a lot of money
themselves, that they had sort of walked away, and instead,
allowed the rest of the world to shoulder most of the burden.
Mr. Rayburn. Congressman, I would have to get back to you
and check what the Gulf countries' contribution has been to
assistance for the refugee communities outside of Syria. I do
not have that in front of me right now.
Mr. Vargas. OK. And I would say, also, I mean, it has been
some time since the first time I went there. They have been in
these refugee camps now for a long time, and things do happen.
Children grow up there. They learn how to live like refugees,
which is difficult. I know that they cannot repatriate right
now, and you said, to repatriate, it would have to be safe and
dignified and--I do not want to put words in your mouth--you
said, safe, voluntary, and dignified. And I know they cannot do
that at the moment. And since they cannot, why do not we
receive more of these refugees ourselves? I mean, I think it is
a real scandal that we do not accept more of these Syrian
refugees. Why do not we?
Mr. Rayburn. So, Congressman----
Mr. Vargas. Mr. Rayburn, are you there?
Mr. Rayburn. I am here, Congressman.
Since the start of the conflict in 2011, the United States
has resettled more than 22,000 Syrian refugees. In Fiscal Year
2020, we resettled 481, and currently, there are 29,000 Syrian
nationals who are pending processing in our refugee admissions
program. So, I would say the refugee process continues, yes.
Mr. Vargas. Well, it certainly continues, but at a meager
pace. I mean, there are so many refugees that we see went to
Turkey. I mean, Turkey, in my understanding, has over 3.5
million refugees from Syria. And yet, we are looking at 400
this year? I mean that, to me, seems scandalous, that we are
not doing our fair share to receive these people who are in
dire need.
But I guess I would just end, and I want to thank you. I
know you have been working hard. This is not a criticism of
you, but it is a criticism of this administration that has not
been willing to welcome Muslim refugees into our country at the
level that we should be, because they are in dire straits.
And last, I would say, of course, we have been talking
about the issue of Ambassador Jeffrey. I would highlight that,
back in 2016, he was one of the 50 Republicans
[audio interference] who signed that letter that Donald
Trump was ``not qualified to be President and Commander-in-
Chief''--that is a quote--and that he would put our country's
national security and well-being at risk. So, of course, he was
hiding things from the President because he was afraid the
President did not know what the hell he was doing.
Thank you again. And I do thank you for your service. I
know you are a very capable person. We have very many capable
persons in the Administration, and I appreciate it. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Mr. Vargas.
Mr. Costa.
Mr. Costa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I want to concur with my colleague, Congressman Vargas'
comments, not only on the refugees, not only Turkey, but Jordan
has done a great deal, but also his comments on Ambassador
Jeffrey as to the President's conduct on foreign policy, I
would say overall.
Special Envoy Rayburn, I want to redirect the questioning.
A lot has been discussed this morning about Turkey's
involvement in Syria and what their real intentions are and the
different alliances that they have played on. And I would like,
with your expertise, to have you make a comment with regards to
Turkey's regional ambitions, not only as it relates to Syria,
but I, along with many of my colleagues, have been very, very
upset and concerned with their interaction with Azerbaijan
acting as a proxy with Armenia, and where that has put Armenia
in a very precarious position at this point in time, given the
resolution that I think was forced on Armenia by Russia and
Turkey as it relates to Azerbaijan and the territory in dispute
with Artsakh.
What is Turkey's--I mean they have got tremendous problems
right now with not only the pandemic, but with their economy.
And Erdogan has taken this country in such a bad direction, in
my view, the jailing of journalists and such. It is not the
Turkey that we knew two decades ago, and frankly, I am not sure
that they are worthy of continuing to be a partner in NATO,
given their actions in recent years.
Could you care to comment, please?
Mr. Rayburn. Thank you, Congressman.
Turkey's involvement beyond Syria in places like Azerbaijan
and others is beyond my lane, and I cannot answer for what
Turkey thinks its interests are in those other crises or those
other places.
In Syria, with Turkey, we try to maintain as constructive a
dialog as possible. What Turkey does to protect the civilians
of northwest Syria who have been under incredible assault from
the Assad regime and the Russians for several years, this is
something that we support, as do other like-minded countries,
including many, many European countries.
And where there are tensions in places like the border zone
of northeast Syria, we work very hard to try to diffuse those
tensions and to make the atmosphere as constructive as
possible. We do not succeed in that all the time, and there
have been some real ups and downs, some real challenges. But I
would say right now there is a tense calm in northeast Syria,
and in northwest Syria I would say we need the Turks to
continue doing what they have been doing.
Mr. Costa. Well, what do you think their real goals are
toward the Kurds? You talked about northeast Syria.
Mr. Rayburn. That is difficult to say. I mean, I think we
could say what we believe is in the best interest of both,
which is for there to be a secure and peaceful border between
northeast Syria and Turkey, so that the communities on both
sides of the border can live in peace. And we try to apply our
diplomatic energy to diffusing tensions and trying to help both
sides point toward that kind of future.
Mr. Costa. But when you look at all the players in Syria, I
mean, you could make a case that there are four different
conflicts that are going on, and it just does not seem to me
that--notwithstanding all of your efforts, Mr. Rayburn, that it
is not clear. I mean, you opened your statement by indicating
that you thought that things were turning out in a way that
might provide positive outcomes for our intentions and our
allies, but that does not seem to be clear to me.
Mr. Rayburn. Well, I strongly believe that, and with my
background, I do not think I am an irrational optimist. I lived
through the whole Iraq conflict and that was a pretty
depressing one.
The Syria situation is pretty depressing, too, in
conditions on the ground.
Mr. Costa. Very depressing.
Mr. Rayburn. But I think we are on a different trajectory
now, and I think you will see that in the months to come. Our
leverage is going to grow month by month, and I think our
adversaries have hit their peak and they are waning now. That
is my personal judgment.
Mr. Costa. Well, my time has expired, but I hope that your
note of optimism is warranted, because it still does not seem
to be clear to me that that is deserved. But we will continue
to work on all of the above and hope for the best.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Mr. Costa.
Mr. Al Green of Texas.
Mr. Green of Texas. Thank you very much, Mr. Castro, Mr.
Chairman, for your friendship and the many things you have
done.
I also am an interloper today. So, I have to thank the
chairperson, Mr. Engel, for allowing me to have this
opportunity.
I thank Mr. McCaul for his friendship, not only here, but
also on Homeland Security.
Ms. Pelosi, the Speaker, helped us with this issue related
to Austin Tice, as did Mr. Hoyer. So, I thank them as well.
I have been on this 8-year mission, a mission of mercy,
along with the Tice family, to secure the return of Austin. And
as is known by the people who are here, H.Res. 17 passed the
House recently, bipartisan, bicameral support. It received
little attention in the press, which is the predicate for my
question.
Has this been called to the attention of the President,
H.Res. 17, which would have Mr. Tice and Mr. Kamalmaz returned
home? Do you know whether it has been called to the attention,
Mr. Rayburn, of the President?
Mr. Rayburn. I do not personally know that, Congressman.
But, knowing the attention that the President has given to the
Austin Tice issue, as well as other unjustly detained or
missing Americans, I cannot imagine that it wasn't brought to
the White House's attention. And I know my counterpart,
Ambassador Roger Carstens, who works on hostage affairs, he is
very well-informed about that House resolution. And so, I am
pretty confident this has been reported, made available up the
chain.
Mr. Green of Texas. Thank you.
Moving to another question, UNSCR 2254, does it preclude a
negotiated return of Mr. Tice and Mr. Kamalmaz?
Mr. Rayburn. No, not at all.
Mr. Green of Texas. And this resolution has passed, and if
the President is aware of it, and we can have a negotiated
return of these two persons--and by the way, I would want all
persons returned as well; I just happen to be familiar with
these two. And I would hope that the family members who heard
me make my earlier comments would understand that I want their
relatives returned home, too. It is important. They have missed
them.
But, given that we have done this, is there anything that
you can share with reference to a negotiated return of our
friends, of these Americans?
Mr. Rayburn. For a fuller accounting of that, of that
engagement, I would defer to Ambassador Carstens. What I can
say is that we strongly believe that the Syrian government has
information about the status/whereabouts of these missing
Americans, including Austin Tice, that they have not shared.
And we believe that they have it within their means to effect a
return of Austin Tice and, certainly, a disclosure of his and
other missing Americans' status. And they, so far, have been
unwilling to share that information, and they have been pressed
by our side to do so.
Mr. Green of Texas. My final question is something that I
did not really come to ask, but I rarely get this opportunity,
so I will. Tartus and Sevastopol are pretty important to the
U.S.--or to Russia. Russia is a cold water country. Tartus
gives Russia a place for its Black Sea fleet to be dispersed.
Oh, pardon me, Sevastopol does. Tartus gives it access to the
Mediterranean. How likely is it that Russia will leave Syria,
given that Tartus is fairly important to its global designs?
Mr. Rayburn. That is a good question, Mr. Green. We have
not held out as a condition for the political solution to the
conflict that the longstanding Russian military relationship
with the government of Syria has to end. We have not held that
out. In fact, the language that we have used is that military
forces, foreign military forces, that are present in Syria that
were not there before 2011 should leave as part of the
political resolution to the conflict. So, the Russians had a
naval presence there for many decades before 2011, and we have
not tried to press for their preexisting relationship to end.
Also, the relationship that the Syrian government would
have in its international relations, in its military relations,
that is for the future Syrian government that will result from
the political solution and the transition, the political
transition process, that is envisioned under 2254, that is for
the Syrian people to decide in the future. So, we rely on them
to do that.
Mr. Green of Texas. Mr. Chairman, you were more than
generous. Thank you so much. I yield back.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Mr. Green.
Thank you, Mr. Rayburn, for your testimony.
To the members, thank you for your comments and your
questions.
And as a reminder, any extraneous material can be submitted
for the record.
With that, we are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:08 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]