[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 184 (Thursday, December 17, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8742-S8747]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PRESIDENTIAL STRATEGY TO DEFEAT ISIL
Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, 70 years ago, a group of American
leaders forged the rules-based international
[[Page S8743]]
order out of the ashes of World War II. Those who were there recall
that they were ``present at the creation.'' We may well look back at
2015 and realize we were present at the unravelling. We were present at
the unravelling.
At the beginning of this year, President Obama was still committed to
degrading and ultimately destroying ISIL. He had warned: If left
unchecked, ISIL could pose a growing threat beyond the Middle East,
including to the United States. In 2015, that is exactly what happened
in Paris and San Bernardino, and it will not be the last. I promise my
colleagues that under this administration, with the present policy and
lack of strategy, there will be other attacks on the United States of
America. I deeply regret having to say that, but I owe it to my
constituents and Americans whom I know and respect to tell them the
truth.
More than 1 year into the campaign against ISIL, it is impossible to
assert that ISIL is losing and that we are winning. And if you are not
winning in this kind of warfare, you are losing. Stalemate is not
success.
We asked the witnesses before the Senate Armed Services Committee the
following question: Is ISIS contained? It is not. ISIS is not
contained, contrary to the statements--bizarrely--made by the President
of the United States literally hours before the attack on San
Bernardino.
This year our Senate Armed Services Committee held several hearings
specifically focused on the threat of ISIL, including three hearings
specifically with Secretary of Defense Ash Carter. We heard about nine
lines of effort. We heard about three ``arrrghs.'' We never heard a
plausible theory of success, nor a strategy to achieve success. What do
I mean by that? There is no time line on when Mosul, the second largest
city in Iraq, will be taken. There is no strategy to take Raqqa. Raqqa
is the base of the caliphate. Raqqa is the place where the attacks are
being planned and orchestrated. We have news reports that they are
developing chemical weapons in Raqqa. This is the first time that a
terrorist organization has had a base, a caliphate, from which to
operate. What has happened? They are expanding globally.
By the way, they have lost some of their territory on the margin.
Hopefully, one of these days, Ramadi will fall to our forces, even
though there have only been a few hundred ISIL there for the last few
weeks.
The fact is that ISIL has expanded its control in Syria; it continues
to dominate Sunni Arab areas in both Iraq and Syria; it maintains
control of key cities such as Mosul, Fallujah, and Ramadi; and efforts
to retake these territories have stalled, at least to some degree.
Meanwhile, ISIL is expanding globally. On Tuesday, GEN John Campbell,
commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, told the Associated
Press that ISIL is seeking to establish a regional base in eastern
Afghanistan as it attracts more followers and foreign fighters.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that an article detailing
the AP interview titled ``U.S. general says the number of Afghan IS
loyalists growing,'' be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From The Associated Press, Dec. 15, 2015]
U.S. General Says the Number of Afghan IS Loyalists Growing
(By Lynne O'Donnell)
Kabul, Afghanistan.--Supporters of the Islamic State group
in Afghanistan are attempting to establish a regional base in
the eastern city of Jalalabad, the commander of U.S. and NATO
forces in Afghanistan, General John Campbell, said on
Tuesday.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Campbell said
that ``foreign fighters'' from Syria and Iraq had joined
Afghans who had declared loyalty to the group in the eastern
province of Nangarhar, bordering Pakistan.
He said there were also ``indications'' that the IS
supporters in Nangarhar were trying to consolidate links with
the group's leadership in Syria and Iraq.
The Islamic State group controls about a third of Iraq and
Syria. Fighters loyal to the group in Afghanistan include
disaffected Afghan and Pakistani Taliban who have fought
fierce battles with the Taliban in recent months.
Afghan officials have said that IS supporters control a
number of border districts in Nangarhar and have a presence
in some other southern provinces, including Zabul and Ghazni.
Until now, however, it was unclear whether loyalists in
Afghanistan had institutional links to the group's
leadership.
Many of those who had declared allegiance to IS were
``disenfranchised Taliban'' from both sides of the border,
Campbell said. But, he added, ``they've been reaching out.
I'm sure there are folks who have come from Syria and Iraq--I
couldn't tell you how many but there are indications of some
foreign fighters coming in there.
``But they don't have the capability right now to attack
Europe, or attack the homeland, the United States. But that's
what they want to do, they've said that's what they want to
do,'' he said.
During the summer months, Taliban and IS loyalists fought
fierce battles in the far eastern districts of Nangarhar,
with residents reporting a range of atrocities, including
arbitrary imprisonment, forced marriages for young women, and
beheadings.
The IS loyalists have said they want to absorb Afghanistan
into a larger province of its ``caliphate'' called Khorasan.
Campbell said the group wants to establish a base in
Nangarhar's provincial capital, Jalalabad ``as the base of
the Khorasan province'' and ``work their way up into Kunar''
province immediately north.
The first credible reports of an IS presence in Afghanistan
emerged earlier this year in northern Helmand, though
recruiters believed to have had links to the leadership in
Syria were killed by U.S. drone strikes in February.
The presence in Nangarhar became clear in the summer, when
IS loyalists launched battles against the Taliban in the
border regions. For months, the Afghan forces--occupied with
fighting elsewhere--had let the two groups fight each other,
Campbell said. ``If the Taliban and ISIL want to kill each
other, let them do it,'' he said, using an alternative
acronym for the Islamic State group.
He said that control of the four districts--Achin, Nazyan,
Bati Kot and Spin Gar--had seesawed between the two groups.
The revelation in July that the Taliban's founder and
leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar had been dead for more than two
years has led to deep fissures in the leadership, and
infighting between rival Taliban factions that Campbell said
had left hundreds dead.
Campbell, who took control of U.S. and NATO forces in
Afghanistan in mid-2014, said splits among the Taliban, who
have been trying to overthrow the Afghan government since
their regime was driven from power in 2001 by the U.S.
invasion, could make the fight even harder in 2016.
``The prize really is Kandahar, that's their strategic
goal,'' he said, referring to the southern province from
where the Taliban emerged after Afghanistan's vicious civil
war ended in 1996.
Neighboring Helmand province, where most of the world's
opium is produced, is currently the scene of fierce battles
for control of strategically important districts, including
Marjah.
Taliban fighters took control of the northern city of
Kunduz in September, for just three days before the Afghan
military, backed by U.S. forces, pushed them out.
Campbell said he did not believe the Taliban had planned to
hold or govern Kunduz, but the psychological impact of the
city's fall had been enormous. Jalalabad, he said, ``is not
going to fall.''
Afghan forces, ``challenged in many areas, understand the
impact of Kunduz,'' he said. ``I think they will make the
right adjustments so that it (Jalalabad) doesn't become
another Kunduz.''
Mr. McCAIN. It says: ``Supporters of the Islamic State group in
Afghanistan are attempting to establish a regional base in the eastern
city of Jalalabad, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in
Afghanistan, General John Campbell, said on Tuesday.''
The Wall Street Journal reports that ISIL has expanded in Libya and
established a new base close to Europe, where it can generate oil
revenues and plot terror attacks.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Wall Street Journal
article entitled ``Islamic State Tightens Grip on Libyan Stronghold of
Sirte''--the hometown, by the way of Muammar Qadhafi--be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Wall Street Journal, Nov. 29, 2015]
Islamic State Tightens Grip on Libyan Stronghold of Sirte
(By Tamer El-Ghobashy and Hassan Morajea)
Misrata, Libya.--Even as foreign powers step up pressure
against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, the militant group
has expanded in Libya and established a new base close to
Europe where it can generate oil revenue and plot terror
attacks.
Since announcing its presence in February in Sirte, the
city on Libya's Mediterranean coast has become the first that
the militant group governs outside of Syria and Iraq. Its
presence there has grown over the past year from 200 eager
fighters to a roughly 5,000-strong contingent which includes
administrators and financiers, according to estimates by
Libyan intelligence officials, residents and activists in the
area.
[[Page S8744]]
The group has exploited the deep divisions in Libya, which
has two rival governments, to create this new stronghold of
violent religious extremism just across the Mediterranean Sea
from Italy. Along the way, they scored a string of
victories--defeating one of the strongest fighting forces in
the country and swiftly crushing a local popular revolt.
Libya's neighbors have become increasingly alarmed.
Tunisia closed its border with Libya for 15 days on
Wednesday, the day after Islamic State claimed responsibility
for a suicide bombing on a bus in the capital Tunis that
killed 12 presidential guards.
Tunisia is also building a security wall along a third of
that border to stem the flow of extremists between the
countries. Two previous attacks in Tunisia this year that
killed dozens of tourists were carried out by gunmen the
government said were trained by Islamic State in Libya, which
has recruited hundreds of Tunisians to its ranks.
This burgeoning operation in Libya shows how Islamic State
is able to grow and adapt even as it is targeted by Russian,
French and U.S.-led airstrikes in Syria as well as Kurdish
and Iraqi ground assaults in Iraq.
On Thursday, nearly two weeks after Islamic State's attacks
on Paris, French President Francois Hollande and Italian
Prime Minister Matteo Renzi met in the French capital where
both said Europe must turn its attention to the militants'
rise in Libya. Mr. Renzi said Libya risks becoming the ``next
emergency'' if it is not given priority.
In Libya, Islamic State has fended off challenges from
government-aligned militias and called for recruits who have
the technical know-how to put nearby oil facilities into
operation. Libyan officials said they are worried it is only
a matter of time before the radical fighters attempt to take
over more oil fields and refineries near Sirte to boost their
revenues--money that could fund attacks in the Middle East
and Europe.
Sirte is a gateway to several major oil fields and
refineries farther east on the same coast and Islamic State
has targeted those installations in the past year.
``They have made their intentions clear,'' said Ismail
Shoukry, head of military intelligence for the region that
includes Sirte. ``They want to take their fight to Rome.''
Islamic State is benefiting from a conflict that has
further weakened government control in Libya. For nearly a
year, the U.S. and European powers have pointed to the
Islamic State threat to press the rival governments to come
to a power-sharing agreement. Despite a United Nations-
brokered draft agreement for peace announced in October,
neither side has taken steps to implement it.
A new U.N. envoy, Martin Kobler, was appointed this month
to break the stalemate, part of efforts to find a political
solution to counter the extremists' expansion.
``We don't have a real state. We have a fragmented
government,'' said Fathi Ali Bashaagha, a politician from the
city of Misrata who participated in the U.N.-led
negotiations. ``Every day we delay on a political deal, it is
a golden opportunity for Islamic State to grow.''
Since early 2014, two rival factions have ruled Libya,
effectively dividing the country. In the east, an
internationally recognized government based in the town of
Tobruk has won the backing of regional powers Egypt and the
United Arab Emirates. In the west, an Islamist-leaning
government based in Tripoli has relied on Misrata fighting
forces for political legitimacy.
Islamic State militants have successfully taken on and
defeated myriad Libyan armed factions, including the powerful
militias from Misrata which were the driving force behind the
revolt that unseated longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi in
2011. Misrata, 150 miles west of Sirte, has recently come
under sporadic Islamic State attacks.
Members of Misrata's militias, who are loosely under the
control of the western government in Tripoli, say they lack
the support to mount an offensive against Islamic State.
Earlier this month, the Tripoli government forced the Misrata
militias into a humiliating prisoner swap with Islamic State.
``There will be no meaningful action without a political
agreement,'' said Abdullah al-Najjar, a field commander with
the Brigade 166, an elite Misrata militia that engaged in a
protracted fight with Islamic State on the outskirts of Sirte
earlier this year. ``You have to know you're going to war
with a government that is going to back you.''
This month, the U.S. launched an airstrike against Islamic
State in Libya, its first against the group outside of Syria
and Iraq. Officials said they believe the strike killed one
of the top deputies of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-
Baghdadi. The deputy, Abu Nabil al-Anbari, had been sent to
Libya last year to establish the group's presence there.
In recent weeks, a flood of foreign recruits and their
families have arrived in Sirte--another indication the group
is becoming increasingly comfortable in its North African
base, according to residents and activists from Sirte and
Libyan military officials.
Islamic State has called on recruits to travel to Libya
instead of trying to enter Syria, while commanders have
repatriated Libyan fighters from Syria and Iraq, Libyan
intelligence officials said.
``Sirte will be no less than Raqqa,'' is a mantra often
repeated by Islamic State leaders in the Libyan city during
sermons and radio broadcasts, several residents and an
activist from the city said. Raqqa is the group's self-
declared capital in Syria.
Like its mother organization in Syria, Islamic State has
appointed foreign ``emirs'' in Sirte to administer its brutal
brand of social control. Music, smoking and cellphone
networks have been banned while women are only allowed to
walk the streets in full cover. Morality police patrol in
vehicles marked with Islamic State's logo and courts
administering Islamic law, or Shariah, as well as prisons
have been set up.
With a population of about 700,000, Sirte was long known
for being Gadhafi's hometown and a stronghold of his
supporters.
Soon after Libya's uprising ended more than four decades of
Gadhafi's rule, he was killed in Sirte by fighters from
Misrata.
Earlier this month, Islamic State reopened schools in the
city, segregating students by gender and strictly enforcing
an Islamic State approved curriculum. On Fridays, the
traditional day of communal prayer, the group organizes
public lectures and residents are often herded into public
squares to witness executions and lashings of those who run
afoul of the strict rules.
The seeds of Islamic State's growth in Libya were planted
after Gadhafi's ouster. In the almost exclusively Sunni
Muslim Libya, the Sunni extremist group exploited tribal and
political rifts that lingered after the strongman's death,
particularly around Sirte.
Islamic State lured extremists from other groups under the
Islamic State umbrella.
By June, Brigade 166, one of western Libya's strongest
armed brigades, abandoned a months long battle with the
militants on Sirte's outskirts. In August, Islamic State
cemented their grip on the city, bringing the last holdout
district under their control, officials and residents said.
Islamic State crushed an armed uprising in August in three
days. It was sparked by local residents angered over the
group's killing of a young cleric who opposed the radicals.
Militants publicly crucified several people who participated
in the revolt and confiscated homes.
The brutality moved the internationally recognized
government in eastern Libya to plead for military
intervention by Arab nations and a lifting of a U.N. arms
embargo on Libya in effect since 2011. But the support never
came.
Unlike in Syria, the group has struggled to provide basic
services. Gas stations are dry and residents are expected to
smuggle in their own fuel--as long as it is not confiscated
by Islamic State.
Hospitals have been abandoned after Islamic State ordered
male and female staffers be segregated. The ill must travel
miles to other cities for treatment, a trip that is often
accompanied by difficult questioning and searches at Islamic
State checkpoints.
``No services, just punishment,'' said Omar, a 33-year-old
civil engineer who fled Sirte after taking part in the failed
uprising against Islamic State. ``Sirte has gone dark.''
Despite the challenges, Islamic State has big plans for
Sirte. A recent edition of their propaganda magazine, Dabiq,
featured an interview with Abu Mughirah al-Qahtani, who was
described as ``the delegated leader'' for Islamic State in
Libya. He vowed to use Libya's geographic position--and its
oil reserves--to disrupt Europe's security and economy.
About 85% of Libya's crude oil production in 2014 went to
Europe, with Italy being the largest recipient. About half
its natural gas production is exported to Italy.
``The control of Islamic State over this region will lead
to economic breakdowns,'' the leader of the Libyan operation
said, ``especially for Italy and the rest of the European
states.''
Mr. McCAIN. It states: ``Even as foreign powers step up pressure
against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, the militant group has
expanded in Libya and established a new base close to Europe where it
can generate oil revenue and plot terror attacks.''
Libya is an oil-rich country--a very oil-rich country. If you let
ISIS get control of Libya, my friends, they will have unlimited sources
of revenue.
The Wall Street Journal: ``Its presence there has grown over the past
year from 200 eager fighters to a roughly 5,000-strong contingent which
includes administrators and financiers, according to estimates by
Libyan intelligence officials, residents and activists in the area.''
By the way, during these debates, I will comment a little bit on it--
that those who are against any intervention cite Libya as the case for
not going in. Facts are a stubborn thing. The fact is, Muammer Qadhafi
was at the gates of Benghazi and was going to slaughter thousands of
people. We brought about his downfall and walked away. If we had walked
away from Japan and Germany after World War II, it would have
collapsed. If we had walked away from Korea, where we still have 38,000
troops, it would have collapsed. If we had walked away from Bosnia, it
would have collapsed.
I am telling you, my colleagues, we walked away. This President and
this administration did not do the things necessary after the fall of
Qadhafi to
[[Page S8745]]
build a democracy, and the people of Libya wanted it, and I can tell
you that for sure because I was there. One of the great tragedies of
the 21st century is our failure to act in a way to help the Libyan
people transition from all of those years of being under a brutal
leader.
By the way, he was also responsible for the deaths of Americans in a
bar in Berlin and an airliner being shot down. Yet we should have left
him in power? Sure we should have.
ISIL is operating in Lebanon, Yemen, and Egypt, and other radical
Islamic groups, such as Boko Haram in Nigeria and al-Shabaab in
Somolia, have pledged allegiance to ISIL. This appearance of success
only enhances ISIL's ability to radicalize, recruit, and grow.
There has been some progress. I was recently in Iraq, and the
operation to retake Sinjar was important. Iraqi forces, as I mentioned,
have closed in on Ramadi for weeks. They haven't finished the job. Our
counterterrorism operations are taking a lot of ISIL fighters off the
battlefield in Iraq and Syria. All of this represents tactical
progress, and it is a testament to our civilian and military leaders,
who are outstanding, as well as thousands of U.S. troops helping to
take the fight to ISIL every day. I would like to point out that
significant challenges remain.
As a direct result of President Obama's decision to withdraw all U.S.
forces from Iraq and squander hard-won American influence, the Iraqi
Government is weak and beholden to Iran. I tell my colleagues, have no
doubt what the dominant influence in Iraq is today: It is the Iranians.
There was no more vivid example of this than when it was reported that
Iraqi Prime Minister al-Abadi turned down Secretary of Defense Ash
Carter's offer of new military assistance, including the use of Apache
helicopters and Special Operations forces to help recapture Ramadi.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that an article titled
``Iraq Declines Offer of U.S. Helicopters for Fight Against ISIS,
Pentagon Chief Says'' from the New York Times be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the New York Times, Dec. 16, 2015]
Iraq Declines Offer of U.S. Helicopters for Fight Against
ISIS, Pentagon Chief Says
(By Michael R. Gordon)
Baghdad.--Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq declined
to take up the Pentagon on its recent offer to speed up the
fight against Islamic State fighters in Ramadi with the help
of American attack helicopters, officials said on Wednesday.
``The prime minister did not make any specific requests in
connection with helicopters,'' Defense Secretary Ashton B.
Carter told reporters after he met with the Iraqi leader
here.
Mr. Carter made it clear that Mr. Abadi had not ruled out
the use of the Apache helicopters in future operations, which
are expected to be especially challenging as Iraqi forces
look toward the battle for Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city,
which was captured in June 2014 by the Islamic State, also
known as ISIS or ISIL.
Mr. Carter also insisted that neither Lt. Gen. Sean B.
MacFarland, the American military commander who is leading
the campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, nor
the Iraqi prime minister believed that the Apaches were
needed ``right now'' to win back Ramadi, the capital of
Iraq's Anbar Province, which is the site of protracted
fighting between Islamic State militants and Iraqi ground
troops.
But Mr. Carter told Congress just a week ago that the
United States had offered to have American-piloted Apaches
fight with Iraqi forces as the Iraqi Army sought to complete
its capture of the city. The United States, he noted, has
also offered to deploy American advisers with Iraqi brigades
on the battlefield instead of restricting them to bases
inside Iraq, another proposal the Iraqis have yet to accept.
``The United States is prepared to assist the Iraqi Army
with additional unique capabilities to help them finish the
job, including attack helicopters and accompanying advisers,
if circumstances dictate and if requested by Prime Minister
Abadi,'' Mr. Carter told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
The meeting between the American defense secretary and the
Iraqi prime minister underscored two factors shaping the
American-led campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq: the
Obama administration's reluctance to significantly expand the
role of American troops in Iraq, and the reluctance of Iraq's
Shiite-dominated government to accept highly visible forms of
American military support in the face of pressure from hard-
line Shiite politicians and the Iranians.
It also raised questions about the Obama administration's
plans to intensify its campaign against the Islamic State
militants. In recent weeks, the Pentagon has spoken of the
``accelerants'' it is planning to introduce to hasten the
demise of the Islamic State. The Iraqi government, however,
has yet to embrace two of the important ``accelerants''--the
Apaches and the deployment of American advisers in the field.
Mr. Carter disclosed the Apache offer to American lawmakers
after it had been conveyed privately to Mr. Abadi. Iraqi
officials said the public nature of Mr. Carter's statements,
which appear intended to reassure Congress that the Obama
administration was stepping up its efforts against the
Islamic State, put the prime minister, who has already been
weakened by a series of bruising struggles with his political
rivals, in a difficult spot.
``This is a very complex environment,'' General MacFarland
said, somewhat philosophically. ``It is kind of hard to
inflict support on somebody.''
According to United States officials, the Pentagon's offer
to support Iraqi forces with American Apaches was more
qualified than it first appeared. Military commanders would
have the authority to use the attack helicopters if Mr. Abadi
agreed to their use and the risks of using them were judged
to be acceptable.
The deployment of Apaches in riskier situations would
require further White House review, even if Mr. Abadi
approved, United States officials added.
American officials also said it would take weeks to deploy
the advisers who would accompany Iraqi brigades on the
battlefield even if Mr. Abadi were to agree to their
presence.
One important measure has been accepted in principle by Mr.
Abadi: a new American special operations task force, which is
to number fewer than 100. Seeking to reassure the prime
minister, Mr. Carter said the task force's operations would
require the approval of the Iraqi authorities. He suggested
that some of its missions would take place near the Iraqi
border with Syria, where they would receive less attention
than those carried out near the Iraqi capital.
``Everything we do, of course, is subject to the approval
of the sovereign Iraqi government,'' Mr. Carter said at the
start of his meeting with Mr. Abadi, which also included
Khaled al-Obeidi, Iraq's defense minister, and Lt. Gen. Taleb
Shegati al-Kenani, who heads Iraq's counterterrorism service.
``Our progress in Ramadi is a huge progress and added to it
the progress in Baiji,'' Mr. Abadi said in English, referring
to a town that is the site of a strategic oil refinery in
northern Iraq.
American military officials have painted a generally
positive picture of the Iraqi military's push to take Ramadi,
but Iraqi troops were involved in pitched fighting on Tuesday
as Islamic fighters counterattacked.
The city, which is believed to be occupied by several
hundred militants, has been surrounded by about 10,000 Iraqi
troops. Tens of thousands of civilians are believed to be
trapped in the town, and Islamic fighters have shot at some
who have tried to flee, according to American officials.
In their Tuesday counterattack, Islamic State militants
took a bridge northwest of the city that spans the Euphrates,
which the Iraqi Army had previously occupied. At the same
time, militants sent several car bombs and a small group of
fighters to attack the Anbar Operations Center, the Iraqi
command that is overseeing the Ramadi campaign from north of
the city.
Both attacks were beaten back as American airstrikes
enabled the Iraqi military to retake the bridge. Two Iraqi
soldiers were killed as were several dozen Islamic State
fighters, American officials said. By the end of Tuesday,
both sides were back where they had started. It was unclear
when Iraqi troops might break through the Islamic State's
belts of improvised explosive devices and other defenses and
push into the heart of the city.
Mr. McCAIN. I met with Prime Minister al-Abadi in Iraq. He is a good
man. He knows he needs this help, but because of the dominating
influence of Iran and Shia militias in Iraq, he turned it down anyway.
General McFarland, one of the greatest generals I have met--he is up
there in the category of David Petraeus--is leading the fight against
ISIL. He reacted with a very interesting comment. He said: ``This is a
very complex environment. It is kind of hard to inflict support on
somebody.'' What General McFarland is saying is that because of the
Iranian dominant influence, the Iraqis, as a body, are reluctant to
accept the help they need to retake the second largest city in Iraq.
The second largest city in Iraq, Mosul, is under ISIS control, and he
knows full well that Apache helicopters and Special Operations forces
could help him do that. But who is telling him not to? The Iranians.
When I was there, we met with the Prime Minister of Iraq, Mr. al-
Abadi, and he said: If you Americans come and you lose one pilot or one
plane, you will leave. That was the opinion of the Prime Minister of
Iraq, and one of the
[[Page S8746]]
reasons--along with the Iranian influence--is because there is no trust
or confidence of the United States in Iraq or in the region.
It comes as no surprise that the training of Iraqi security forces
has been slow. The building of support for the Sunni tribal forces has
been even slower. ISIL captured Mosul in June of 2014, and at the end
of 2015, ISIL still controls the second largest city in Iraq. How do
you think the families of those brave Americans who have sacrificed
themselves and those individuals who are still at Walter Reed feel
after the sacrifices they made and the victories they won? Now, of
course, we see all of that is gone--just a glimmering--thanks to the
President of the United States withdrawing all of our troops in the
mistaken belief that if you pull out of wars, wars end. They don't end.
It is hard to talk to the Gold Star Mothers.
Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports that ISIL is still making $1.5
million a day in oil sales. Worse, Reuters reports that ISIL has made
more than $500 million trading oil, with significant volumes sold to--
guess who. Guess who ISIL is selling oil to. The government of Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad. It is hard to make some of this stuff up,
and it gets a little complicated.
We are now making nice--and I will talk a little bit more about it
later--with Bashar al-Assad and their stewards, the Russians and the
Iranians. Meanwhile, Bashar al-Assad is buying oil from--at least $1.5
million a day--from ISIL.
Even as an Oval Office speech and a Pentagon photo op failed to
reassure the American people, this administration has doubled down on
its indecisive approach to ISIL, using limited means and indirect ways
to achieve aspirational ends on a nonexistent timeline. The
administration now admits we are at war with ISIL--wonderful--but
proceeds at every turn to minimize any American role in fighting and
winning that war. America has never waged anything we have called to
war and then so profoundly limited our role in the hope that some other
force will emerge to win it for us. The administration says we cannot
``Americanize'' the conflict.
I also want to point out that the President has a unique and really
dishonest approach to those of us who have said for a long time that we
have to have more involvement and predicted what would happen.
Unfortunately, we have been wrong by saying, yes, the ``popoffs''--as
he called us in a speech from the Philippines--want to send hundreds of
thousands of troops. That is a total falsehood. I will repeat again
what we have been asking for for years, and that is another 5,000 or so
Americans on the ground in Iraq and a multinational force led by the
Sunni Arab countries with European participation--I would hope that
people like the French would join in a--about 10,000 of 100,000-person
force to go to Raqqa and take them out. As long as Raqqa exists, they
will be able to export this evil throughout the world, including to the
United States of America. There is no plan by this administration to
retake Raqqa. There is no strategy, and that is, indeed, shameful.
The war against ISIL was Americanized when ISIL inspired terrorists
who murdered 14 Americans on our own soil in San Bernardino. This
attack should be a wake-up call and we need a strategy, as I mentioned.
In Syria, there is no plausible strategy to achieve this goal on
anywhere near an acceptable time line. We were briefed that it would be
a year before they retake Mosul. There is no time limit on how they
could even approach regaining Raqqa. There is no ground force that is
both willing and able to retake Raqqa, nor is there a realistic
prospect of one emerging anytime soon. The Syrian Kurds could take
Raqqa but won't, and the Syrian Sunni Arabs want to but can't, partly
due to our failure to support them.
Meanwhile, the administration has continued its inaction and
indifference and has allowed Bashar al-Assad to slaughter a quarter of
a million people. Have no doubt who is responsible for these millions
of refugees; his name is Bashar al-Assad, the godfather of ISIS. He is
the one who has barrel-bombed thousands and thousands of his people.
Bashar al-Assad used poison gas and crossed the redline, we might
recall. It is Bashar al-Assad who continues the butcher of his own
people.
I will get to what Secretary Kerry has had to say in a minute.
The administration continues its policy of inaction and indifference.
It has allowed Vladimir Putin to intervene militarily and protect this
murderous regime.
My friends, the last time the Russians had influence in the region
was when Anwar Sadat threw them out in 1973. Now they are back. Now
they are major players in the Middle East. This is the headline from
the Associated Press yesterday: ``Russian Airstrikes Restore Syrian
Military Balance of Power.'' The airstrikes of the Russians have taken
out significant capabilities of the moderate resistance--not ISIS but
the moderates whom we had trained and equipped and we refused to
protect.
I quote from the Associated Press story, ``Russian Air Strikes
Restore Syrian Military Balance of Power.''
Weeks of Russian airstrikes in Syria appear to have
restored enough momentum to the government side to convince
President Bashar Assad's foes and the world community that
even if he doesn't win the war he cannot quickly be removed
by force. That realization combined with the growing sense
that the world's No. 1 priority is the destruction of the
Islamic State group, has led many to acknowledge that however
unpalatable his conduct of the war, Assad will have to be
tolerated for at least sometime further.
Let's get this straight. Assad will be tolerated to continue to
barrel bomb and slaughter innocent people. ``However unpalatable his
conduct of the war. . . . '' This kind of Orwellian understatement not
only obscures the truth, but it cripples the conscience. My friends, it
cripples the conscience.
Bashar Assad's conduct of the war, the barrel bombs, chemical
weapons, slaughtering women and children, not only killed one-quarter
of a million people, it is what gave rise to ISIL to start with, and it
is what fuels them still.
Secretary Kerry seems not to understand that fact. While in Moscow
searching for ``common ground'' with Russia on Syria and Ukraine,
Secretary Kerry said--and I am not making this up; I am telling my
colleagues, I am not making this up--``Russia has been a significant
contributor to the progress'' the world has made on Syria.
Was Russia making progress when it bombed U.S.-backed Syrian forces
fighting the Assad regime or was that when it took a brief pause from
bombing Syrian moderates to indiscriminately drop dumb bombs in ISIL's
territory in eastern Syria, killing untold numbers of civilians? Is
that the Russian ``significant'' contributions?
Secretary Kerry then said: ``The United States and our partners are
not seeking so-called regime change.'' The focus now is ``not on our
differences about what can or cannot be done immediately about
Assad''--i.e., Dear Mr. Assad, here is a blank check. Here is your
card. Do whatever you want to. Do whatever you want to. Continue your
barrel bombing, continue your torture, and continue the war crimes that
you have committed. You have only killed 250,000 of your own people.
Drive some more into exile and murder more.
At the beginning of this year, this administration still believed
that Assad must go, but now, as one official said, ``the meaning of
`Assad has to go' has evolved.''
I repeat, the administration official said ``the meaning of `Assad
has to go' has evolved.'' This kind of Orwellian double-speak has
become all too common in the administration and is exactly why our
allies and partners around the world are losing confidence in American
leadership.
A very seminal event happened the day before yesterday, my friends,
that will be the best indicator of what I am saying. Thirty-four Muslim
nations formed an alliance to fight terrorism; i.e., ISIL, and the
United States of America didn't even know about it. They didn't even
tell the United States of America that they were forming their own
organization with their own strategy, their own tactics, to fight
against ISIS? My friends, that is an incredible statement about the
total loss of American influence and prestige in the region.
I have had more than one leader in the Middle East tell me:
``Sometimes we think that it is better to be America's enemy than its
friend.''
[[Page S8747]]
So why has the meaning of ``Assad has to go'' evolved? Because this
administration was overpowered, outplayed, and outmatched. This
administration consoled themselves with the mantra of ``there is no
military solution'' rather than facing the reality that there is a
clear military dimension to a political solution in Syria. That is what
Russia and Iran have demonstrated. They have changed the military
faction on the ground and created the terms for a political settlement
much more favorable to their interests. I believe as a result the
conflict will grind on, ISIS will grow stronger, and the refugees will
keep coming.
Unfortunately, America's troubles in 2015 were not contained in Iraq
and Syria. Despite conditions on the ground, President Obama elected to
withdraw roughly half of the U.S. forces from Afghanistan by the end of
next year.
Do you know the President of the United States, even when he
announces a buildup, announces a withdrawal. So he sends the message to
any potential enemy or any enemy we are engaged with: We are going to
build up now, but don't worry, we are going to pull out. We will
withdraw.
So what happens? Here we are. The Pentagon says violence is on the
rise in Afghanistan. The AP report says ``Violence in Afghanistan is on
the rise, according to a new Pentagon report to Congress that says the
Taliban was emboldened by the reduced U.S. military role and can be
expected to build momentum from their 2015 attack strategy.''
It is inevitable, I say to my colleagues, there will be greater
violence in Afghanistan, an increase in Taliban activity, and--I am
sorry to say--ISIS, who is already establishing a foothold there, will
increase their presence. Meanwhile, the Iranians, in their attempt at
hegemony, will provide weapons to the Taliban.
This Senator will save the rest of my comments about what is going on
with the Iran nuclear deal, about what the Iranians have already
violated, and what continues with the Russian occupation of Ukraine.
Our much respected leader in Europe, General Breedlove, has said that
he expects increased military activity by Vladimir Putin in eastern
Ukraine. He still has the ambition of establishing a land bridge all
the way across eastern Ukraine to Crimea so he doesn't have to continue
to supply by air and sea. We seem to have forgotten that over 8,000
people have died since Russia's invasion, including 298 innocent people
aboard Malaysia's Flight 17, murdered by Vladimir Putin's loyal
supporters with weapons that were sent to Ukraine by Putin--not to
mention the murder of Boris Nemtsov, one of the great leaders of the
opposition, in the shadow of the Kremlin. The destabilization
continues, even in countries as far away as Sweden. I will not go into
that because the Defense authorization bill calls for the provision of
defensive weapons to Ukraine.
One of the more shameful chapters--although they have written more
shameful chapters--but one that is really shameful is our failure to
provide defensive weapons to Ukraine. There are Russian-supplied tanks
in eastern Ukraine. All of us have seen the pictures of them. They have
slaughtered many Ukrainians, and we refuse to give the Javelin, the
most effective anti-tank weapon we have, to Ukrainians. It is beyond
shameful.
So I will not talk about China, which has reclaimed 400 acres earlier
and now has reclaimed more than 3,000 acres in the South China Sea, and
our one foray within the 12-mile limit, the Secretary of Defense failed
to acknowledge before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
So, my colleagues, we depart on this holiday season, hopefully sooner
rather than later, with a world in turmoil, with a world that because
of a failure of American leadership now poses direct threats, as we
just found in San Bernardino, to the United States of America.
We saw too many dark days in 2015. It didn't have to be this way. It
is still within our power to choose better courses. We must never be
disheartened or resigned to a world where suffering and evil are always
on the ascent. On the contrary, it is in our character as Americans to
face adversity with hope and optimism. We must see plainly and fully
the threats to our values in order to defeat them.
As Churchill said, we recover our ``moral health and martial vigor,
we rise again and take our stand for freedom.''
I have no doubt America can succeed and will succeed.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
____________________