[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 177 (Wednesday, November 6, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6430-S6431]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                            Turkey and Syria

  Mr. President, I want to move to the grave question of Syria and what 
has happened over just the last couple of weeks. I know this is a 
position held by Senators in both parties, but I oppose President 
Trump's recent decision to withdraw U.S. Armed Forces from Syria.
  Following a phone call with Turkish President Erdogan on October 6, 
President Trump announced that the United States would be withdrawing 
U.S. troops from northern Syria. This cleared the way for the Turkish 
Armed Forces to proceed with an operation--an effort to target Kurdish 
and Islamic State, or ISIS, fighters in northern Syria. The President's 
decision is already impacting U.S. national security, as many analysts 
have predicted.
  We have abandoned our Kurdish allies, who have been instrumental in 
not only retaking territory from ISIS but also in detaining ISIS 
combatants. We learned last week that they made the most important 
contribution of critical intelligence, helping U.S. forces locate and 
eliminate ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
  That leads me to the role that Russia plays, especially in the 
aftermath of the decision the President made about our troops in 
northern Syria. Following an initial U.S.-brokered ceasefire, Turkish 
and Russian authorities have agreed to a more permanent status, sharing 
control of Syria's northern border. Turkish and Russian forces are not 
only occupying Kurdish-held areas but also further expanding Russia's 
role in Syria and committing war crimes against Kurdish civilians, 
according to the United Nations.
  Russia has already occupied U.S. military camps in the region, and 
Turkish President Erdogan's deepening relationship with Vladimir Putin, 
as evidenced by Turkey's S-400 missile system, only undercuts U.S. 
influence in Syria, all but guaranteeing that U.S. interests will not 
be represented in a future Syrian political settlement.
  President Trump's decision serves to benefit Vladimir Putin. Prior to 
the withdrawal, the United States was Russia's only military equal in 
Syria, but Russia is now the primary--and, according to some analysts, 
the sole--power broker in Syria.
  In the vacuum left by the United States, Putin will be able to return 
control of the country to Bashar al-Assad. Also, he will be able to 
exercise increased control over Turkey, a NATO ally, and also return to 
its Cold War-era dominance--the Russians, that is--in the Middle East.
  I am holding an article, which, from a distance, you can't see the 
headline. It is from the Washington Post, dated October 16 of this 
year. It says that in Ukraine and Syria, Trump's moves are helping 
Putin. It was written by Anne Gearan. Anne Gearan is a respected 
reporter on national security issues and foreign policy. This article--
and I will not go through all of it--catalogs how the Trump 
administration has allowed Russia to assert dominance globally. I 
mentioned the headline, but here is some of the text of the article. 
The first few paragraphs of the article by Anne Gearan say as follows:

       Whether by chance or by design, the foreign policy crises 
     involving Syria and Ukraine that have enveloped the White 
     House have a common element. In each case, President Trump 
     has taken action that has had the effect of helping the 
     authoritarian leader of Russia.
       Russian forces are now operating between the Turkish and 
     Syrian militaries, helping to fulfill Moscow's main aim of 
     shoring up its alliance with Syria and the Russian military 
     port housed there--an outcome Russian President Vladimir 
     Putin has sought for years.
       Trump's actions in Syria and Ukraine add to the list of 
     policy moves and public statements that have boosted Russia 
     during his presidency, whether that was their central purpose 
     or not, confounding critics who have warned that he has 
     taken--

  She is referring to our President here--

     too soft a stance toward a nation led by a strongman hostile 
     to the United States.

  Anne Gearan goes on to describe the long list of President Trump's 
actions that demonstrate the strange deference to Russia, which has 
ultimately compromised the furtherance of U.S. national security 
interests in Syria and beyond.
  I also want to make reference to another recent news article. The 
headline at the top of this New York Times article, dated Sunday, 
October 13 of this

[[Page S6431]]

year, reads: ``12 Hours. 4 Syrian Hospitals Bombed.'' It reads: ``12 
Hours. 4 Syrian Hospitals Bombed.''
  The next page, which is full of more detail and an illustration, 
gives you their conclusion: ``Evidence Reveals One Culprit: Russia.'' 
In pertinent part, here is what this article says: ``The Russian Air 
Force has repeatedly bombed hospitals in Syria in order to crush the 
last pockets of resistance to President Bashar al-Assad.''
  The New York Times published evidence that the Russians bombed four 
Syrian hospitals in a 12-hour period in May of this year. During the 
assault, the Kafr Nabl Surgical Hospital in Idlib Province was struck 
four times in 30 minutes. This is a hospital. Dozens of hospitals and 
clinics in Idlib have been struck since, and Syrian medical workers 
live in constant fear of the next strike.
  I don't think I even have to say what I am about to say, but it bears 
repeating for the record. Such atrocities go beyond the pale of 
violating the Geneva Conventions and the laws of war. They demonstrate 
just how ruthless and brutal Putin and his regime have been and the 
lengths to which they will go to assert Russia's influence in the 
Middle East.
  Under this administration, we have seen U.S. leadership erode and 
multilateral institutions deteriorate to the point where the United 
Nations is powerless in holding Russia accountable for these 
atrocities. As to holding Mr. Putin accountable, this administration 
has made us less safe.
  Let me move to the Kurds. The Syrian Democratic Forces, led by the 
Kurdish YPG, have been steadfast U.S. partners in counterterrorism 
operations, as well as in other ways in the Middle East.
  As the United States provided training, intelligence, and aerial 
support, some 11,000 Kurdish fighters died in the fight against ISIS--
11,000 Kurdish fighters. Without their courage, sacrifice, partnership, 
and protection, the United States would have either lost the fight 
against ISIS--and the coalition would have lost--or won it at a major 
cost to the lives of U.S. servicemembers and their families.
  The Trump administration has abandoned the Kurds. Since the President 
radically departed from a longstanding strategy in the fight against 
ISIS, we have seen mass displacement. We have also seen, of course, 
Russian incursion and the initial signs of an ISIS resurgence in the 
region.
  According to the United Nations, 160,000 people have been displaced, 
including 70,000 children. Kurdish authorities state that at least 785 
persons affiliated with ISIS have escaped.
  I ask a couple of basic questions: How exactly does allowing the 
conditions for humanitarian catastrophe and the escape of sworn enemies 
of the United States make America safe? How does unilaterally making 
decisions without consulting U.S. national security leaders and 
experts, or also our allies who have joined us in the global coalition 
to fight ISIS, build credibility for U.S. leadership around the world? 
How do we expect to protect the interests of our ally Israel from 
threats along the Syrian border? And, finally, how do we justify such a 
rapid departure in U.S. policy to promote and protect democracy in the 
Middle East?