[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 13269-13274]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

 AUTHORIZING THE LIMITED AND SPECIFIED USE OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED 
           FORCES AGAINST SYRIA--MOTION TO PROCEED--Continued

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 21.
  Under the previous order, the time until 12 noon will be equally 
divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with 
Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.
  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum 
calls, which I will suggest in just a few seconds, be equally divided 
between the majority and the minority.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, this week we have a very difficult set of 
questions to answer relating to Syria and the ongoing crisis there. But 
in particular we have a question to answer as it relates to what the 
United States should do. I rise this morning to express strong support 
for this authorization to degrade Bashar al-Asad's chemical weapons 
capability and deter the future use of these horrific weapons. I made 
this determination based upon the evidence and the national security 
interests of the United States, both our national security interests 
today as well as in the future.
  The resolution that is before the Senate right now does not allow for 
the deployment of U.S. combat troops on the ground in Syria. I will not 
support--nor do I think there will be much support in this Chamber--any 
measure that would involve U.S. boots on the ground in Syria and this 
resolution specifically speaks to this concern. I am quoting, in part, 
the resolution:

       The authority granted in section 2(a) does not authorize 
     the use of the United States Armed Forces on the ground in 
     Syria for the purpose of combat operations.

  It is important we make that point.
  As we have all seen, especially in the last few days, the situation 
in Syria is in flux, especially in the last 24 hours. The Russian 
Government put forth a proposal yesterday which would have 
international monitors take control of Syria's chemical weapons in 
order to avert a U.S. military strike. I am open to this diplomatic 
discussion--however not without caution and not without skepticism. 
Diplomatic solutions are always a preferred path and military strikes 
should always be the last resort.
  I think prior to this proposal we were at this point of a last 
resort. But the only reason this proposal is on the table is because of 
the credible threat of force that is being debated in Washington--but 
even more significantly being debated across the country. The 
authorization itself should still go forward because it will keep the 
pressure on the Syrian regime for a diplomatic solution.
  Let's take a couple of minutes on our own national security 
interests. In March of 2011, as reported by the U.S. State Department, 
multiple news sources, including CNN, reported--and I will submit for 
the Record a report from CNN--that the Syrian Government authorities 
had arrested 15 schoolchildren in the city of Daraa for spray-painting 
antigovernment slogans. These young people were reportedly tortured 
while in custody and authorities resorted to force when their parents 
and others in the community called for their release. Within 1 week the 
police had killed 55 demonstrators in connection with the early efforts 
to provide opposition to the Asad regime. The regime committed 
countless atrocities during the next 2 years of this conflict, 
culminating in the unspeakable use--the indiscriminate use of chemical 
weapons on August 21.
  I submit for the Record a report from CNN, dated March 1, 2012, and 
ask it be printed in the Record.
  This report is March of 2012, but it looks back in a retrospective 
fashion on what happened in those early days of the opposition coming 
together in 2011. I will read a pertinent part, part of what CNN said 
about what happened when these schoolchildren were demonstrating 
against the regime. They talked in this report about the young people, 
as I mentioned, not just protesting but spray-painting their beliefs 
against the regime. At the time, not a lot of people around the world 
were focused on what was happening in Syria. Let me quote in pertinent 
part what at one point one of the citizens on the street was saying, 
that the people in Daraa:

     . . . didn't want to go against the regime. People thought 
     that this [leader, Mr. Asad] was better than his dad. Nobody 
     wanted to go face-to-face with him.

  But then of course it was young people, in this case even 
schoolchildren, who led the way to take him on. I submit this for the 
record because this opposition started on the streets of Syria, in this 
case in Daraa, starting with young people, but it of course continued 
from there. We know that the regime itself has the largest chemical 
stockpile in the region, one of the largest in the world. We know Mr. 
Asad used these weapons against his own people, not only on August 21 
but on multiple occasions prior to that in a much more limited way. We 
also know he has the capacity, the will, and unfortunately the track 
record to use these weapons against innocent civilians.
  We also should remember we have troops and other military and 
diplomatic personnel in the region, in the Middle East. Even Syria's 
acquisition--

[[Page 13270]]

even Syria's very acquisition of chemical weapons threatens our 
national security. In 2003, the Congress of the United States--some 
people have forgotten about this--the Congress of the United States in 
2003 passed the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty 
Restoration Act of that year. This act explicitly states that Congress 
found--the U.S. Congress made a finding that ``Syria's acquisition''--
and I am underlining that word ``acquisition''--``of weapons of mass 
destruction threatens the security of the Middle East and the national 
security interests of the United States.''
  This Congress 10 years ago made a determination that the acquisition 
of chemical weapons was a threat to our national security. We are in a 
different world now. Syria not only acquired them but has now used them 
multiple times on its own people, the most recent being the horrific 
scenes that we all saw in some of the videos that are now part of the 
public record. So there is clear and convincing evidence of the direct 
involvement of the Asad regime, the forces of the Asad regime and 
senior officials, in the planning, execution, aftermath, and attempts 
to cover up the August 21 attack. This is graphically evident in the 13 
authenticated videos released by the Senate Intelligence Committee 
compiled by the Open Source Center showing the results of chemical 
weapons use in the Damascus suburbs on August 21. These videos were 
shown to the Intelligence Committee on Thursday and played on CNN on 
Saturday. So many Americans have seen them. If anyone would like more 
information about those, go to my Web site and I am certain many others 
as well.
  It is clear that the regime violated international law as it relates 
to chemical weapons. We know the regime committed a barrage of terror 
across the country with the sole aim of remaining in power. We have to 
ask ourselves, when a dictator or terrorist organization uses chemical 
weapons in violation of international law, should that regime or 
terrorist organization pay a price? I argue that they must pay a price.
  We simply can't condemn this crime against humanity; it is in the 
national security interest of the United States for the administration 
to have the authorization to act. The regime in Iran, the terrorist 
organization Hezbollah, and the regime in North Korea are watching very 
closely, so it is imperative that we take steps to address this threat.
  Let me talk about the regime in Iran and Hezbollah. What happens in 
Syria is of great consequence to our security interest as it relates to 
that regime in Hezbollah. When I say ``that regime,'' I am speaking 
about the Iran regime. Their support for Hezbollah, through Syria, has 
resulted in constant plotting against the United States and its allies. 
The Asad regime in Syria is the conduit of this relationship between 
Hezbollah and the Iranian regime itself.
  I support this authorization of targeted and strategic military 
action in order to hold the Syrian regime accountable and because it 
will diminish the ability of Iran and Hezbollah to conduct acts of 
terror. It will also protect American lives if we hold them 
accountable, as well as, of course, the Syrian people. Indeed, other 
than Al Qaeda, Hezbollah has killed more Americans than any other 
terrorist organization in the world, including 241 marines in 1983. 
Hezbollah has consistently partnered with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary 
Guard Corps to bolster Asad's campaign of repression and violence in 
Syria, which has further destabilized the region. The regime in Iran 
has provided funds, weapons, logistical support, tactical advice, and 
fighters to the Syrian Government forces. Just this year Iran's support 
to Asad has increased, with reported daily resupply flights to Syria.
  The Syrian regime possesses a stockpile of chemical weapons that we 
cannot allow to fall into the hands of terrorists. Iran and Hezbollah--
I think some people in Washington missed this--are not on the 
sidelines; they are already on the battlefield. I would argue that Iran 
and Hezbollah are on two battlefields. Certainly, they are on the 
battlefield in Syria but also the daily battlefield of terrorist acts 
plotting against the United States and other countries as well.
  Failure to bring action and failure to hold Syria accountable after 
such a horrific crime will only serve to embolden the Iranian regime, 
to embolden the terrorist organization Hezbollah and others, to expand 
terror across the world. Iran's status as the world's leading state 
sponsor of terrorism is well established, and its proxies have 
perpetuated attacks against the United States, Israel, and our allies.
  Emboldened by Iran's support, Hezbollah has conducted terrorist 
attacks since its inception in the early 1980s--including Western 
targets. Hezbollah has become more aggressive in the last few years and 
has executed attacks not only in the Middle East but on two other 
continents--South Asia and Europe. Just 2 years ago a plot was 
uncovered to blow up a restaurant in Georgetown--right here in 
Washington, DC--to kill the Saudi Ambassador to the United States, 
along with U.S. officials and average citizens who are American. When 
the Iranian-backed attacker was questioned, he referred to the 
potential killing of Americans as ``no big deal.''
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
the report by the Department of Justice entitled ``Two Men Charged in 
Alleged Plot to Assassinate Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the United 
States.''
  The list goes on. We know that in June of 1996 there was the bombing 
of Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia where 19 U.S. Air Force personnel were 
killed. That is another example of an Iran-backed terrorist activity. 
It goes back, as I mentioned, to 1983 when 241 marines were killed by a 
truck bombing in Beirut. There are also new reports on evidence that 
strongly suggests that an Iran-backed plot was underway to kill a U.S. 
Ambassador in 2011. Hezbollah has consistently partnered with Iran to 
do just that.
  The national security interest of the United States is even more 
significant than that. It is not simply the green light it would send 
to Iran and Hezbollah as it relates to terrorism. If we don't take the 
right action here, it would send a message and green light to Iran as 
it relates to their nuclear program. We know the Iranian regime is 
intent on developing nuclear weapons capability. I support a variety of 
measures to prevent Iran from acquiring that capability. Condemnation 
only of Syria would embolden Iran and undermine our efforts to prevent 
the Iranian regime from developing and possessing a nuclear weapon.
  Every Member of Congress will have to weigh the consequence of giving 
the green light to the use of chemical weapons and contemplate what it 
will mean for enemies, such as the Iranian regime and Hezbollah, who 
plot against the United States every day. I am like a lot of Members of 
Congress in that after receiving several intelligence briefings, I have 
more confidence than ever before that we have a significant national 
security imperative to authorize the President to act as it relates to 
Syria. I have no doubt that Mr. Asad used the chemical weapons against 
his people and it is evident that he crossed more than one redline. So 
I support this limited and proportional scope of authorization for the 
use of force.
  By the way, this authorization would probably be the most limited 
authorization in recent American history.
  I believe Congress must stand united on this issue, and we have to 
make sure we not only hold the regime accountable but make sure we are 
doing everything possible to send the right message.
  I have two more points before I conclude. One of the best rationales 
for the reason we are taking the steps I hope we will take was set 
forth in an op-ed printed in the New York Times last weekend by 
Nicholas Kristof, and it is dated September 7, 2013. The op-ed is 
entitled ``Pulling the Curtain Back on Syria,'' and I ask unanimous 
consent to have this op-ed printed in the Record.
  I think one of the most important lines in here--and, of course, I 
will not read the entire op-ed--is what Mr. Kristof wrote:


[[Page 13271]]

       In other words, while there are many injustices around the 
     world, from Darfur to eastern Congo, take it from one who has 
     covered most of them: Syria is today the world capital of 
     human suffering.

  There are few journalists--there are few Americans--who have more 
credibility on the issue of what is happening to children and 
vulnerable populations around the world than Nicholas Kristof. For him 
to say the world capital of human suffering is in Syria is a powerful 
and compelling statement.
  That brings me back to where I started. I started walking through the 
early days of this opposition to a repressive regime against Mr. Asad, 
and the people who led the way and made a case against his regime in 
large measure were the children or young people. One of the harrowing 
and very disturbing elements of this entire crisis--this war that has 
raged on for more than 2 years now--is the impact it has had on 
children.
  I received a report today that came from Save the Children. They have 
enormous credibility not only on children's issues worldwide, but there 
are Save the Children personnel on the ground in Syria.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the document entitled 
``Briefing note: The children crisis in Syria'' be printed in the 
Record as well.
  That documents in great detail the human suffering of children and 
the impact this has had on millions of Syrian children. But, of course, 
maybe the most graphic and disturbing example of that was the footage 
that virtually every American has had an opportunity to view which 
shows the hundreds and hundreds of children who were killed instantly 
in this horrific chemical weapons attack. By one estimate, more than 
400--maybe as many as 426--children were killed.
  When we confront this issue, we cannot simply say: Oh, this is just 
another horrific situation around the world. When we consider what this 
regime did to schoolchildren--arrested them and by many accounts 
tortured them from the beginning of this opposition all the way through 
to the attack on August 21--and what will continue to happen to 
children in Syria and in places around the world, we are summoned by 
our conscience to act in some fashion and hold this regime accountable.
  I want to be open to this possibility that maybe there is a 
breakthrough, that we can remove this terrible threat from Syria and 
wipe out the chemical weapons threat by giving total and complete 
control of chemical weapons to an international force, but the burden 
of proof is on Syria and the Russian Federation. They have to deliver 
very specifically in a very short timeframe if they expect us to agree 
to this. We should be hopeful and consider this opportunity, but at the 
same time we cannot divorce ourselves from the reality of what 
happened, the consequence of not acting, and also the long-term and 
short-term national security interests of the United States, which I 
think are overwhelming and compelling in this instance.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess.

                      [From CNN.com, Mar. 1, 2012]

               Daraa: The Spark That Lit the Syrian Flame

                           (By Joe Sterling)

       Syria is burning--scorched for nearly a year by tenacious 
     political resistance, a merciless security crackdown and 
     cries for democracy.
       The spark that lit the flame began about a year ago in the 
     southern city of Daraa after the arrests of at least 15 
     children for painting anti-government graffiti on the walls 
     of a school.
       The community's blunt outrage over the children's arrests 
     and mistreatment, the government's humiliating and violent 
     reactions to their worries, and the people's refusal to be 
     cowed by security forces emboldened and helped spread the 
     Syrian opposition.


                     Fate of neighborhood uncertain

       Daraa soon became a rallying cry across the country for 
     what began as a rural and provincial-driven uprising.
       Syrians compare the dramatic dynamics in the rural city to 
     the moment Tunisian street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi torched 
     himself in December 2010. Bouazizi's act and death spawned 
     demonstrations that led to the grassroots ouster of Tunisian 
     President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and fueled other protests 
     across the Arab world.
       Mohamed Masalmeh--a Halifax, Nova Scotia-based Syrian 
     activist whose family hails from Daraa--said Daraa residents 
     broke the people's ``wall of fear'' by defying what he and 
     others call a police state and taking to the street.
       ``What people did in Daraa was unheard of,'' he said.
       Omar Almuqdad, a journalist from Daraa now living in 
     Turkey, said, ``They started protesting day after day.''
       ``It was the flame of the revolution.''


                      A slow burn into a firestorm

       Discontent in Syria has slow-burned for decades.
       A clampdown on a Muslim Brotherhood uprising by the current 
     president's predecessor and father--President Hafez Assad--
     killed thousands in Hama in 1982.
       When Bashar al-Assad took the presidency after his father 
     died in 2000, he gave lip service to reforms.
       But activists who emerged from the so-called Damascus 
     Spring after the death of Hafez and those in 2005 who urged 
     reforming what they said was an ``authoritarian, totalitarian 
     and cliquish regime'' found themselves in trouble with the 
     authorities.
       There was sectarian and ethnic unrest in the last decade, 
     too, with a Druze uprising flaring in 2000 and a Kurdish 
     rebellion erupting in 2004.
       When the Arab Spring unfolded last year, Syrians imbibed 
     the contagious revolutionary fervor spreading across the 
     Middle East.
       But the anger smoldered under the surface because of the 
     Goliath-sized, all-seeing and all-knowing security and spying 
     apparatus.
       Protests popped up in Syria as video images of public 
     defiance in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia swept the world--small 
     outpourings seen by observers as tests to build a Syrian 
     nerve to take to the streets.
       And then--Daraa.
       Remote Daraa sits just a few miles from the Jordanian 
     border. It has had its economic struggles, such as drought 
     and drops in subsidies and salaries. Nevertheless, it had 
     been a reliable bastion of support for the regime and its 
     Baath party.
       Tribal and predominantly Sunni, Daraa is like many small 
     towns. People know one another and the relationships are 
     close in the city and in the nearby villages and towns.
       When the schoolchildren were arrested in late February 
     2011, they were accused of scrawling graffiti on a school 
     that said ``the people want to topple the regime.'' Masalmeh, 
     the activist, said security went to a school, interrogated 
     students and rounded up suspects.
       It wasn't as if this vandalism was rare. Such graffiti was 
     becoming so common in the region that ID was needed to buy 
     spray cans.
       But these arrests struck a chord. Residents found out their 
     boys were being beaten and tortured in prison.
       The families of the boys approached authorities and asked 
     for their sons' release. Activists and observers say 
     authorities shunned and insulted the people. One official 
     reportedly said: ``Forget your children. If you really want 
     your children, you should make more children. If you don't 
     know how to make more children, we'll show you how to do 
     it.''
       ``At some point, the insult is so far below the belt. 
     People do respond to it. They just don't bow down anymore,'' 
     Amnesty International's Neil Sammonds said.


                             Protests grow

       On March 16, a female-led sit-in in Damascus demanded the 
     release of prisoners unfairly jailed. Some of the 
     participants were Daraans, with strong ties back to their 
     home province, and part of the educated, urbanite youth 
     living in Damascus.
       ``Police dragged protesters by the hair and beat them,'' 
     said Mohja Kahf, a novelist, professor and activist in 
     Arkansas with contacts across Syria. ``This built on the 
     gathering outrage over the Daraa children who are 
     prisoners.''
       A day later, a sit-in in Daraa, with some detained. The 
     next day, on March 18, a protest against the arrests of the 
     children, according to The Human Rights Watch.
       ``Security forces opened fire, killing at least four 
     protesters and within days, the protests grew into rallies 
     that gathered thousands of people,'' the group said.
       Activists regard these as the first deaths in the Syrian 
     uprising.
       People began rallying in other cities across Syria that 
     day--Jassem, Da'el, Sanamein and Inkhil. Kahf said the 
     government responded with live fire only in Daraa.
       But the more people demonstrated in Daraa, the tougher 
     security forces cracked down. And as the crackdown worsened, 
     the more resolute the protesters became.
       The people in Daraa ``didn't want to go against the 
     regime,'' Masalmeh said. ``People thought this guy--Bashar--
     was better than his dad. Nobody wanted to go face-to-face 
     with him.
       ``It's not like they fought with arms at that moment,'' he 
     said. ``They were just defiant. `All that we want is our 
     children.'''
       The youths were eventually freed, but YouTube videos and 
     demonstrations were already spreading.
       Al-Assad addressed the Daraa unrest in a March 30 speech 
     before lawmakers, blaming

[[Page 13272]]

     the unrest on sedition. ``They started in the governorate 
     (province) of Daraa,'' al-Assad said, adding ``the 
     conspirators took their plan to other governorates.''
       ``That speech had a catastrophic impact,'' the 
     International Crisis Group's Peter Harling said. ``People who 
     wanted to support the regime at the time were shocked by the 
     speech.''
       The dismissiveness of al-Assad and the lawmakers who 
     applauded his words awakened many Syrian people, says the 
     Human Rights Watch's Nadim Houry. Two days later, weekly 
     anti-government protests began across Syria.
       Calls for reforms soon morphed into calls for the removal 
     of the al-Assad regime.
       ``Courage is contagious,'' Houry said.
       The government launched a full-scale siege on Daraa April 
     25, with other towns such as Homs to follow.
       Mass arrests unfolded and tales of torture spread across 
     the country. The protest movement grew and solidified into an 
     opposition.
       Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center, 
     points out ``it's conceivable that if the events didn't 
     happen in Daraa,'' the uprising ``might not have occurred.''
       But the deep-seated political and economic reasons 
     underlining Syrian discontent was an omen. Protest in Syria 
     was ``going to happen'' at some point, Salem said.
       So, out of Daraa, a spark. And a year later, the uprisings 
     blaze on.
       ``The impact of small events on history can be huge,'' 
     Salem said.
                                  ____

       The following is an official release from the Department of 
     Justice on the alleged plot.

Two Men Charged in Alleged Plot To Assassinate Saudi Arabian Ambassador 
                          to the United States

       Washington.--Two individuals have been charged in New York 
     for their alleged participation in a plot directed by 
     elements of the Iranian government to murder the Saudi 
     Ambassador to the United States with explosives while the 
     Ambassador was in the United States.
       The charges were announced by Attorney General Eric Holder; 
     FBI Director Robert S. Mueller; Lisa Monaco, Assistant 
     Attorney General for National Security; and Preet Bharara, 
     U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
       A criminal complaint filed today in the Southern District 
     of New York charges Manssor Arbabsiar, a 56-year-old 
     naturalized U.S. citizen holding both Iranian and U.S. 
     passports, and Gholam Shakuri, an Iran-based member of Iran's 
     Qods Force, which is a special operations unit of the Iranian 
     Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) that is said to 
     sponsor and promote terrorist activities abroad.
       Both defendants are charged with conspiracy to murder a 
     foreign official; conspiracy to engage in foreign travel and 
     use of interstate and foreign commerce facilities in the 
     commission of murder-for-hire; conspiracy to use a weapon of 
     mass destruction (explosives); and conspiracy to commit an 
     act of international terrorism transcending national 
     boundaries. Arbabsiar is further charged with an additional 
     count of foreign travel and use of interstate and foreign 
     commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire.
       Shakuri remains at large. Arbabsiar was arrested on Sept. 
     29, 2011, at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport 
     and will make his initial appearance today before in federal 
     court in Manhattan. He faces a maximum potential sentence of 
     life in prison if convicted of all the charges.
       ``The criminal complaint unsealed today exposes a deadly 
     plot directed by factions of the Iranian government to 
     assassinate a foreign Ambassador on U.S. soil with 
     explosives,'' said Attorney General Holder. ``Through the 
     diligent and coordinated efforts of our law enforcement and 
     intelligence agencies, we were able to disrupt this plot 
     before anyone was harmed. We will continue to investigate 
     this matter vigorously and bring those who have violated any 
     laws to justice.''
       ``The investigation leading to today's charges illustrates 
     both the challenges and complexities of the international 
     threat environment, and our increased ability today to bring 
     together the intelligence and law enforcement resources 
     necessary to better identify and disrupt those threats, 
     regardless of their origin,'' said FBI Director Mueller.
       ``The disruption of this plot is a significant milestone 
     that stems from months of hard work by our law enforcement 
     and intelligence professionals,'' said Assistant Attorney 
     General Monaco. ``I applaud the many agents, analysts and 
     prosecutors who helped bring about today's case.''
       ``As alleged, these defendants were part of a well-funded 
     and pernicious plot that had, as its first priority, the 
     assassination of the Saudi Ambassador to the United States, 
     without care or concern for the mass casualties that would 
     result from their planned attack,'' said U.S. Attorney 
     Bharara. ``Today's charges should make crystal clear that we 
     will not let other countries use our soil as their 
     battleground.''


                            The Alleged Plot

       The criminal complaint alleges that, from the spring of 
     2011 to October 2011, Arbabsiar and his Iran-based co-
     conspirators, including Shakuri of the Qods Force, have been 
     plotting the murder of the Saudi Ambassador to the United 
     States. In furtherance of this conspiracy, Arbabsiar 
     allegedly met on a number of occasions in Mexico with a DEA 
     confidential source (CS-1) who has posed as an associate of a 
     violent international drug trafficking cartel. According to 
     the complaint, Arbabsiar arranged to hire CS-1 and CS-1's 
     purported accomplices to murder the Ambassador, and Shakuri 
     and other Iran-based co-conspirators were aware of and 
     approved the plan. With Shakuri's approval, Arbabsiar has 
     allegedly caused approximately $100,000 to be wired into a 
     bank account in the United States as a down payment to CS-1 
     for the anticipated killing of the Ambassador, which was to 
     take place in the United States.
       According to the criminal complaint, the IRCG is an arm of 
     the Iranian military that is composed of a number of 
     branches, one of which is the Qods Force. The Qods Force 
     conducts sensitive covert operations abroad, including 
     terrorist attacks, assassinations and kidnappings, and is 
     believed to sponsor attacks against Coalition Forces in Iraq. 
     In October 2007, the U.S. Treasury Department designated the 
     Qods Force for providing material support to the Taliban and 
     other terrorist organizations.
       The complaint alleges that Arbabsiar met with CS-1 in 
     Mexico on May 24, 2011, where Arbabsiar inquired as to CS-1's 
     knowledge with respect to explosives and explained that he 
     was interested in, among other things, attacking an embassy 
     of Saudi Arabia. In response, CS-1 allegedly indicated that 
     he was knowledgeable with respect to C-4 explosives. In June 
     and July 2011, the complaint alleges, Arbabsiar returned to 
     Mexico and held additional meetings with CS-1, where 
     Arbabsiar explained that his associates in Iran had discussed 
     a number of violent missions for CS-1 and his associates to 
     perform, including the murder of the Ambassador.


               $1.5 Million Fee for Alleged Assassination

       In a July 14, 2011, meeting in Mexico, CS-1 allegedly told 
     Arbabsiar that he would need to use four men to carry out the 
     Ambassador's murder and that his price for carrying out the 
     murder was $1.5 million. Arbabsiar allegedly agreed and 
     stated that the murder of the Ambassador should be handled 
     first, before the execution of other attacks. Arbabsiar also 
     allegedly indicated he and his associates had $100,000 in 
     Iran to pay CS-1 as a first payment toward the assassination 
     and discussed the manner in which that payment would be made.
       During the same meeting, Arbabsiar allegedly described to 
     CS-1 his cousin in Iran, who he said had requested that 
     Arbabsiar find someone to carry out the Ambassador's 
     assassination. According to the complaint, Arbabsiar 
     indicated that his cousin was a ``big general'' in the 
     Iranian military; that he focuses on matters outside Iran and 
     that he had taken certain unspecified actions related to a 
     bombing in Iraq.
       In a July 17, 2011 meeting in Mexico, CS-1 noted to 
     Arbabsiar that one of his workers had already traveled to 
     Washington, D.C., to surveill the Ambassador. CS-1 also 
     raised the possibility of innocent bystander casualties. The 
     complaint alleges that Arbabsiar made it clear that the 
     assassination needed to go forward, despite mass casualties, 
     telling CS-1, ``They want that guy [the Ambassador] done 
     [killed], if the hundred go with him f**k 'em.'' CS-1 and 
     Arbabsiar allegedly discussed bombing a restaurant in the 
     United States that the Ambassador frequented. When CS-1 noted 
     that others could be killed in the attack, including U.S. 
     senators who dine at the restaurant, Arbabsiar allegedly 
     dismissed these concerns as ``no big deal.''
       On Aug. 1, and Aug. 9, 2011, with Shakuri's approval, 
     Arbabsiar allegedly caused two overseas wire transfers 
     totaling approximately $100,000 to be sent to an FBI 
     undercover account as a down payment for CS-1 to carry out 
     the assassination. Later, Arbabsiar allegedly explained to 
     CS-1 that he would provide the remainder of the $1.5 million 
     after the assassination. On Sept. 20, 2011, CS-1 allegedly 
     told Arbabsiar that the operation was ready and requested 
     that Arbabsiar either pay one half of the agreed upon price 
     ($1.5 million) for the murder or that Arbabsiar personally 
     travel to Mexico as collateral for the final payment of the 
     fee. According to the complaint, Arbabsiar agreed to travel 
     to Mexico to guarantee final payment for the murder.


                     Arrest and Alleged Confession

       On or about Sept. 28, 2011, Arbabsiar flew to Mexico. 
     Arbabsiar was refused entry into Mexico by Mexican 
     authorities and, according to Mexican law and international 
     agreements; he was placed on a return flight destined for his 
     last point of departure. On Sept. 29, 2011, Arbabsiar was 
     arrested by federal agents during a flight layover at JFK 
     International Airport in New York. Several hours after his 
     arrest, Arbabsiar was advised of his Miranda rights and he 
     agreed to waive those rights and speak with law enforcement 
     agents. During a series of Mirandized interviews, Arbabsiar 
     allegedly confessed to his participation in the murder plot.
       According to the complaint, Arbabsiar also admitted to 
     agents that, in connection with this plot, he was recruited, 
     funded and directed by men he understood to be senior 
     officials in Iran's Qods Force. He allegedly said

[[Page 13273]]

     these Iranian officials were aware of and approved of the use 
     of CS-1 in connection with the plot; as well as payments to 
     CS-1; the means by which the Ambassador would be killed in 
     the United States and the casualties that would likely 
     result.
       Arbabsiar allegedly told agents that his cousin, who he had 
     long understood to be a senior member of the Qods Force, had 
     approached him in the early spring of 2011 about recruiting 
     narco-traffickers to kidnap the Ambassador. Arbabsiar told 
     agents that he then met with the CS-1 in Mexico and discussed 
     assassinating the Ambassador. According to the complaint, 
     Arbabsiar said that, afterwards, he met several times in Iran 
     with Shakuri and another senior Qods Force official, where he 
     explained that the plan was to blow up a restaurant in the 
     United States frequented by the Ambassador and that numerous 
     bystanders could be killed, according to the complaint. The 
     plan was allegedly approved by these officials.
       In October 2011, according to the complaint, Arbabsiar made 
     phone calls at the direction of law enforcement to Shakuri in 
     Iran that were monitored. During these phone calls, Shakuri 
     allegedly confirmed that Arbabsiar should move forward with 
     the plot to murder the Ambassador and that he should 
     accomplish the task as quickly as possible, stating on Oct. 
     5, 2011, ``[j]ust do it quickly, it's late . . .'' The 
     complaint alleges that Shakuri also told Arbabsiar that he 
     would consult with his superiors about whether they would be 
     willing to pay CS-1 additional money.
       This investigation is being conducted by the FBI Houston 
     Division and DEA Houston Division, with assistance from the 
     FBI New York Joint Terrorism Task Force. The prosecution is 
     being handled by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Glen Kopp and 
     Edward Kim, of the Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit 
     of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of 
     New York, with assistance from the Counterterrorism Section 
     of the Justice Department's National Security Division, The 
     Office of International Affairs of the Justice Department's 
     Criminal Division and the U.S. State Department provided 
     substantial assistance. We thank the government of Mexico for 
     its close coordination and collaboration in this matter, and 
     for its role in ensuring that the defendant was safely 
     apprehended.
       The charges contained in a criminal complaint are mere 
     allegations and defendants are presumed innocent unless and 
     until proven guilty.
                                  ____


                [From the New York Times, Sept. 7, 2013]

                   Pulling the Curtain Back on Syria

                        (By Nicholas D. Kristof)

       When I was a law student in 1982, I escaped torts by 
     backpacking through Syria and taking a public bus to Hama, 
     where the government had suppressed a rebellion by massacring 
     some 20,000 people.
       The center of Hama was pulverized into a vast field of 
     rubble interspersed with bits of clothing, yet on the fringe 
     of it stood, astonishingly, a tourism office. The two Syrian 
     officials inside, thrilled to see an apparent tourist, 
     weighed me down with leaflets about sightseeing in Hama and 
     its ancient water wheels. After a bit of small talk, I 
     pointed out the window at the moonscape and asked what had 
     happened.
       They peered out at the endless gravel pit.
       ``Huh?'' one said nervously. ``I don't see anything.''
       It feels to me a bit as if much of the world is reacting 
     the same way today. The scale of the slaughter may be five 
     times that of 1982, but few are interested in facing up to 
     what is unfolding today out our window in Hama, Homs, 
     Damascus and Aleppo.
       As one woman tweeted to me: ``We simply cannot stop every 
     injustice in the world by using military weapons.''
       Fair enough. But let's be clear that this is not ``every 
     injustice'': On top of the 100,000-plus already killed in 
     Syria, another 5,000 are being slaughtered monthly, according 
     to the United Nations. Remember the Boston Massacre of 1770 
     from our history books, in which five people were killed? 
     Syria loses that many people every 45 minutes on average, 
     around the clock.
       The rate of killing is accelerating. In the first year, 
     2011, there were fewer than 5,000 deaths. As of July 2012, 
     there were still ``only'' 10,000, and the number has since 
     soared tenfold.
       A year ago, by United Nations calculations, there were 
     230,000 Syrian refugees. Now there are two million.
       In other words, while there are many injustices around the 
     world, from Darfur to Eastern Congo, take it from one who has 
     covered most of them: Syria is today the world capital of 
     human suffering.
       Skeptics are right about the drawbacks of getting involved, 
     including the risk of retaliation. Yet let's acknowledge that 
     the alternative is, in effect, to acquiesce as the slaughter 
     in Syria reaches perhaps the hundreds of thousands or more.
       But what about the United Nations? How about a multilateral 
     solution involving the Arab League? How about peace talks? 
     What about an International Criminal Court prosecution?
       All this sounds fine in theory, but Russia blocks progress 
     in the United Nations. We've tried multilateral approaches, 
     and Syrian leaders won't negotiate a peace deal as long as 
     they feel they're winning on the ground. One risk of bringing 
     in the International Criminal Court is that President Bashar 
     al-Assad would be more wary of stepping down. The United 
     Nations can't stop the killing in Syria any more than in 
     Darfur or Kosovo. As President Assad himself noted in 2009, 
     ``There is no substitute for the United States.''
       So while neither intervention nor paralysis is appealing, 
     that's pretty much the menu. That's why I favor a limited 
     cruise missile strike against Syrian military targets (as 
     well as the arming of moderate rebels). As I see it, there 
     are several benefits: Such a strike may well deter Syria's 
     army from using chemical weapons again, probably can degrade 
     the ability of the army to use chemical munitions and bomb 
     civilian areas, can reinforce the global norm against 
     chemical weapons, and--a more remote prospect--may slightly 
     increase the pressure on the Assad regime to work out a peace 
     deal.
       If you're thinking, ``Those are incremental, speculative 
     and highly uncertain gains,'' well, you're right. Syria will 
     be bloody whatever we do.
       Mine is a minority view. After the Afghanistan and Iraq 
     wars, the West is bone weary and has little interest in 
     atrocities unfolding in Syria or anywhere else. Opposition to 
     missile strikes is one of the few issues that ordinary 
     Democrats and Republicans agree on.
       ``So we're bombing Syria because Syria is bombing Syria?'' 
     Sarah Palin wrote, in a rare comment that liberals might 
     endorse. Her suggestion: ``Let Allah sort it out.''
       More broadly, pollsters are detecting a rise in 
     isolationism. The proportion of Americans who say that ``the 
     U.S. should mind its own business internationally'' has been 
     at a historic high in recent years.
       A Pew survey this year asked voters to rate 19 government 
     expenses, and the top two choices for budget cuts were ``aid 
     to the world's needy'' and the State Department. (In fact, 
     0.5 percent of the budget goes to the world's needy, and, 
     until recently, the military had more musicians in its bands 
     than the State Department had diplomats.)
       When history looks back on this moment, will it view those 
     who opposed intervening as champions of peace? Or, when the 
     textbooks count the dead children, and the international 
     norms broken with impunity, will our descendants puzzle that 
     we took pride in retreating into passivity during this 
     slaughter?
       Isn't this a bit like the idealists who embraced the 
     Kellogg-Briand Pact that banned war 85 years ago? Sure, that 
     made people feel good. But it may also have encouraged the 
     appeasement that ultimately cost lives in World War II.
       O.K., so I've just added fuel to the battle for analogies. 
     For now, the one that has caught on is Iraq in 2003. But 
     considering that no one is contemplating boots on the ground, 
     a more relevant analogy in Iraq may be the 1998 Operation 
     Desert Fox bombing of Iraqi military sites by President Bill 
     Clinton. It lasted a few days, and some say it was a factor 
     in leading Iraq to give up W.M.D. programs; others disagree.
       That murkiness is not surprising. To me, the lessons of 
     history in this area are complex and conflicting, offering no 
     neat formula to reach peace or alleviate war. In most cases, 
     diplomacy works best. But not always. When Yugoslavia was 
     collapsing into civil war in the early 1990s, early efforts 
     at multilateral diplomacy delayed firm action and led to a 
     higher body count.
       Some military interventions, as in Sierra Leone, Bosnia and 
     Kosovo, have worked well. Others, such as Iraq in 2003, 
     worked very badly. Still others, such as Libya, had mixed 
     results. Afghanistan and Somalia were promising at first but 
     then evolved badly.
       So, having said that analogies aren't necessarily helpful, 
     let me leave you with a final provocation.
       If we were fighting against an incomparably harsher 
     dictator using chemical weapons on our own neighborhoods, and 
     dropping napalm-like substances on our children's schools, 
     would we regard other countries as ``pro-peace'' if they sat 
     on the fence as our dead piled up?
                                  ____


              Briefing Note: The Children Crisis in Syria

       The crisis in Syria is a humanitarian tragedy of a scale 
     that is almost impossible to imagine. The recent chemical 
     attack in Al Ghouta adds to an already too bleak picture; 
     even before the recent massacre, Syria was the most dangerous 
     place to be a civilian.i
       The lack of humanitarian access, and hence of witnesses, 
     makes the human price hard to quantify, but our teams in the 
     region responding to this humanitarian crisis report 
     increasingly dire conditions and the daily arrival of 
     thousands of exhausted and terrified refugees. These data 
     indicate the scale of the crisis:
       Altogether at least 100,000 people have been killedii, 
     including more than 7,000 childreniii of whom 1,700 are under 
     the age of 10.iv The fighting continues to take the lives of 
     an average of 5,000 people each month.v
       The UN estimates that today one third of Syrians have been 
     forced to abandon their homes.vi Two million are refugees and 
     another 4.5 million are internally displaced.

[[Page 13274]]

     Children account for more than half of those displaced.vii
       The UN estimates that 8.8 million (including 6.8 million in 
     Syria itselfviii) are urgently in need of assistance across 
     the region, predicting 10 million by end 2013.ix
       At least four million Syrians--half of them children--are 
     in need of emergency food assistance.x
       In Northern governorates, 80% of school facilities have 
     ceased to function,xi with as many as 3,900 schools damaged 
     or destroyed by the conflict throughout the country.xii
       Medical supplies are severely lacking throughout the 
     country and the World Health Organization has warned that 
     disease outbreaks are ``inevitable'' in the midst of summer 
     heat, with deteriorating access to water and sanitation.xiii
       In addition to pervasive insecurity, bureaucratic 
     restrictions imposed by the Government severely limit aid 
     agencies' ability to reach all civilians in need: between 
     January and July 2013 only 20 UN convoys crossed the conflict 
     lines into opposition-controlled areas.xiv The UN estimates 
     that 6.8 million--one in every three Syrians--are trapped in 
     conflict areas and in need of assistance.xv However, a recent 
     NGO assessment in northern Syria puts the figure much higher, 
     finding that 10.5 million people in these districts alone are 
     not getting enough essential supplies.xvi Despite the huge 
     efforts of humanitarian agencies, the volume of aid crossing 
     Syria's borders and conflict lines is still not enough and 
     millions are still receiving no assistance. Children are 
     dying as a result.xvii
       With price inflation--with basics such as wheat and flour 
     up as much as 100%xviii--the lack of food is reported by 
     Syrian parents as the second biggest source of stress, after 
     insecurity.xix Our teams have heard testimonies of mothers 
     forced to feed their infants with water mixed with sugar due 
     to a lack of baby milk. Other reports testify to the bleak 
     living conditions of those internally displaced in Northern 
     Syria, who have so little resources that they are forced to 
     eat herbs and collect stagnant rainwater to drink and wash.xx
       For the sake of the millions of children facing a future of 
     fear and hunger, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access is 
     needed to all areas of Syria by the most effective routes 
     possible. Save the Children calls on governments to:
       Build consensus across the international community, 
     including in the UN Security Council, to demand all parties 
     to the conflict fulfill their obligation to allow 
     humanitarian aid--including UN aid--to all areas where 
     children need it, across conflict lines and across Syria's 
     borders;
       Increase funding. Overall the UN is calling for over $5 
     billion to meet needs inside Syria and among refugees in 
     neighboring countries. Only 41%xxi of the appeal is funded. 
     Governments must increase support for humanitarian operations 
     throughout Syria by any possible channel, as well as scale up 
     support for refugees and host communities in neighboring 
     countries.


                                ENDNOTES

       i. See Action on Armed Violence: ``Civilians killed in 2011 
     vs 2012.'' http://aoav.org.uk/2013/aoav-find-global-increase-
in-civilian-casualties-of-explosive-weapons/#jp-carousel-285 
     last viewed 22 April 2013.
       ii. Al Jazeera: UN: Syria death toll rises above 100,000; 
     http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/
2013725142157450141.html last viewed 28 August 2013.
       iii. OHCHR, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child 
     appalled by killing of Syrian children in alleged chemical 
     attack, 26 August 2013; http://www.ohchr.org/SP/NewsEvents/
Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?
NewsID=13660&LangID=E last viewed 28 August 2013.
       iv. Updated Statistical Analysis of Documentation of 
     Killings in the Syrian Arab Republic Commissioned by the 
     Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, 13 June 
     2013, available at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/
SY/HRDAG-Updated-SY-report.pdf
       v. France 24: UN says 5,000 dying each month in the Syrian 
     conflict: http://www.france24.com/en/20130716-un-says-5000-
people-dying-month-syrian-conflict.
       vi. The Telegraph: ``One third of Syrians have fled their 
     homes, reports United Nations'' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10280869/One-third-of-
Syrians-have-fled-their-homes-
reports-United-Nations.html
       vii. Global News, ``1 million children have fled Syria as 
     refugees: UNICEF'' http://globalnews.ca/news/797520/one-
     million-
     children-have-fled-syria-as-refugees-unicef/
       viii. OCHA (2013) ``Syrian Arab Republic: Humanitarian 
     Dashboard (as of 11 July 2013),'' http://reliefweb.int/sites/
reliefweb.int/files/resources/syria.pdf, last checked 16th 
     August 2013.
       ix. The Guardian: ``Half of Syrian population will need aid 
     by end of year'': http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/
19/half-syrian-population-aid-year
       x. OCHA (2013) ``Syrian Arab Republic: Humanitarian 
     Dashboard'' (as of 11 July 2013), http://reliefweb.int/sites/
reliefweb.int/files/2resources/syria.pdf, last checked 16th 
     August 2013.
       xi. Assessment Working Group for Northern Syria (2013) 
     ``Joint Regional Assessment of Northern Syria--II 2013, Final 
     Report 2013,'' p. 20, http://reliefweb.int/sites/
reliefweb.int/files/resources/JRANS%2011%20-
%20Final%20Report_0.pdf, last viewed 28th August 2013.
       xii. UNICEF (2013) ``UN Emergency Directors shocked by 
     appalling plight of people in Syria,'' http://www.unicef.org/
media/media_67620.html
       xiii. World Health Organisation (2013) ``WHO warns of 
     increased risk of disease epidemics in Syria and in 
     neighboring countries as summer approaches,'' http://
reliefweb.int/report/syrian-arab-republic/who-warns-
increased-risk-disease-epidemics-syria-and-neighbouring
       xiv. OCHA, UN-led relief convoys into hot-spot areas 
     (January to 10 July 2013), updated with field information; 
     http://syria.humanitarianresponse.info/sites/
     syria.humanitarianresponse.info/files/syria_UN _led_relief 
     _convoys _into_hot _spot_areas _january_to _10_july _2013 
     _en.pdf, last viewed 28 August 2013.
       xv. BBC, Syria crisis: UN launches largest ever aid appeal, 
     http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22813207, last 
     viewed 28 August 2018.
       xvi. Assessment Working Group for Northern Syria (2013) 
     ``Joint Regional Assessment of Northern Syria--II 2013, Final 
     Report 2013,'' p. 36, http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb. 
     int/files/resources/JRANS%2011%20-%20Final %20Report_0.pdf, 
     last viewed 28th August 2013.
       xvii. Col, A/HRC/23/58, p. 16.
       xviii. FAO GIEW Country Brief, Syrian Arab Republic, http:/
     /www.fao.org/giews/countrybrief/country.jsp?code=SYR, last 
     checked 3rd September 2013, and Syria Needs Assessment 
     Project (2013) ``Regional Analysis Syria: Part 1--Syria, July 
     2013,'' p. 16.
       xix. DRAFT Child Protection Working Group assessment, 
     Syria--publication pending
       xx. Global Post: In north Syria, eating herbs to survive; 
     http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/130402/north-
syria-eating-herbs-survive-0
       xxi. OCHA, Financial Tracking services, Syrian Arab 
     Republic Civil Unrest, 2013 Humanitarian Funding: Actual 
     http://fts.
unocha.org/pageloader.aspx?page=emerg-
     emergencyCountryDetails&cc=syr

                          ____________________