[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 194 (Monday, November 16, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6687-S6688]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          MILITARY WITHDRAWAL

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, on a totally different matter, the last 
several days have brought renewed speculation about the prospect of 
rapidly withdrawing all U.S. military forces from Syria, Iraq, and 
Afghanistan.
  Here in Congress, a small minority in both parties seem to think it 
is in America's power to unilaterally remove conflicts by simply 
walking away from them.
  Let me say that again. A small minority in both parties seem to think 
it

[[Page S6688]]

is in America's power to unilaterally resolve conflicts by simply 
walking away from them.
  Of course all wars must end. The question is now how they end and 
whether the terms on which they end are favorable or unfavorable to the 
security and interests of the United States.
  And nothing about the circumstances we face today suggests that if we 
lose resolve, the terrorists will simply leave us alone.
  Over the last 4 years, the Trump administration has made tremendous 
headway in creating the conditions that will secure the enduring defeat 
of the terrorists. This President and his policies have strengthened 
America's hand in multiple Middle East conflicts while reducing the 
risks and costs to our country. The ISIS caliphate has been shattered, 
and millions have been liberated from their brutal rule. We have 
removed master terrorists like al-Baghdadi, Soleimani, and senior al-
Qaida and ISIS leaders from the battlefield.
  The Trump administration has brokered diplomatic successes that 
should help bring long-term stability and more economic opportunity to 
a troubled region. The Abraham Accords are a geostrategic game changer.
  The last 4 years have also brought increased skin in the game from 
our allies and our partners. Our friends in Europe and elsewhere have a 
shared interest in stopping safe havens for terror. Today, in Africa, 
our limited American presence supports a multinational initiative led 
by France to combat radical Islamic terrorists.
  Likewise, in places where American forces continue to play roles in 
ongoing conflicts across the broader Middle East, Secretaries Mattis 
and Esper worked hard and successfully to secure renewed contributions 
from European partners and to transition our posture more and more 
toward a supporting role.
  Our local partners are demonstrably shouldering the lion's share of 
the burden in the fight. In neither Afghanistan nor Iraq nor Syria are 
American combat forces playing a primary role.
  We have scored major battlefield successes by supporting and working 
with and through local partners, such as the Afghan National Security 
Forces, the elite Iraqi Counter Terrorism Service, and the local 
Kurdish and Arab fighters of the Syrian Democratic Forces.
  So the situation we face today is totally different than what we 
faced 10 years ago. We do not have hundreds of thousands of soldiers 
engaged in combat abroad.
  We do not have hundreds of thousands of soldiers engaged in combat 
abroad. We are not an occupying force.
  Today, our limited American military presence in the Middle East is 
supporting local forces and enabling multinational efforts.
  We are playing a limited--limited but important role in defending 
American national security and American interests against terrorists 
who would like nothing more than for the most powerful force for good 
in the world to simply pick up our ball and go home.
  They would love that. That is why, last year, 70 Senators--a 
bipartisan supermajority--voted for an amendment I authored that 
acknowledged the progress made in Syria and Afghanistan, identified the 
risks that remain, and cautioned that precipitous withdrawal would 
create vacuums that Iran, Russia, and the terrorists would be 
delighted--delighted--to fill.
  There is no American who does not wish the war in Afghanistan against 
terrorists and their enablers had already been conclusively won. But 
that does not change the actual choice before us now.
  A rapid withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan now would hurt our 
allies and delight--delight--the people who wish us harm. Violence 
affecting Afghans is still rampant. The Taliban is not abiding by the 
conditions of the so-called peace deal.
  The consequences of a premature American exit would likely be even 
worse than President Obama's withdrawal from Iraq back in 2011, which 
fueled--fueled--the rise of ISIS and a new round of global terrorism. 
It would be reminiscent of the humiliating American departure from 
Saigon in 1975.
  We would be abandoning our partners in Afghanistan, the brave Afghans 
who are fighting the terrorists and destroying the government's 
leverage in their talks with the Taliban that are designed to end the 
fighting.
  Our retreat would embolden the Taliban, especially the deadly Haqqani 
wing, and risk plunging Afghan women and girls back into what they 
experienced back in the 1990s. It would hand a weakened and scattered 
al-Qaida a big, big propaganda victory and a renewed safe haven for 
plotting attacks against America. And it would be welcome news to Iran, 
which has long provided arms and support to the Taliban and explicitly 
seeks our retreat from the Middle East.
  A disorganized retreat would jeopardize the track record of major 
successes this administration has worked hard to compile. A number of 
former officials and Ambassadors recently stated: ``The spectacle of 
U.S. troops abandoning facilities and equipment, leaving the field in 
Afghanistan to the Taliban and ISIS, would be broadcast around the 
world as a symbol of U.S. defeat and humiliation, and a victory for 
Islamist extremism.''
  President Trump deserves major credit--major credit--for reducing 
U.S. forces in Afghanistan to a sustainable level, scoring major 
victories against terrorists across the region, and ensuring the 
Afghans themselves are at the front of the fight.
  That same successful approach should continue until the conditions 
for the long-term defeat of ISIS and al-Qaida have been achieved.

                          ____________________