SYRIAN CIVIL WAR; Congressional Record Vol. 164, No. 38

<!-- -->

SYRIAN CIVIL WAR

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today as Syria is about to enter its

eighth year of conflict. We have witnessed 7 years of displacement and

violence, 7 years of war crimes, and 7 years of Bashar al-Assad's

illegitimate grasp on power. To say that it is past time for Assad to

go or that it is past time for the conflict to be resolved dramatically

underestimates the horrible suffering and destruction the people of

Syria have experienced. In these 7 years, almost 500,000 Syrians have

been killed and more than 12 million have been displaced from their

homes.

This conflict has disproportionately affected children, as all

conflicts do. According to Save the Children, inside Syria, 7.5 million

children have lived their whole lives knowing nothing but war.

Emotional and psychological stress has manifested itself physically;

Syrian children now face an increase in heart disease, diabetes, and

depression. These children are growing up in refugee camps, with no end

in sight. This means the loss of their childhood and

\\\[\\\[\[Page\](https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-164/senate-section/page/S1335) \[S1335\](https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-164/senate-section/page/S1335)\\\]\\\]

of educational opportunities. I don't exaggerate when I say that

because of this war, an entire generation of Syrians will be both

displaced and disaffected in an already volatile region. Ignoring these

children ensures decades of instability to come.

In Eastern Ghouta this past week, we saw the most recent example of

the brutality of the Assad regime, aided and abetted by Russia and

Iran. While only just now making headlines, Eastern Ghouta has been

held under siege by the Syrian Government since 2013. This

neighborhood, which had supposedly been designated as a deescalation

zone, has been bombarded by Syrian Government forces armed with Russian

weapons. In just a few days, 500 civilians have been killed, and that

number is growing.

Years after the international community reached a consensus that

Assad had lost his legitimacy as the leader of Syria, he not only

remains in power but is more secure than ever. The United States has

not only failed to exert moral leadership in the face of Syrian

suffering but has also failed to show strategic leadership in the face

of a tangible threat to U.S. national security.

I have long called on both the Obama and Trump administrations,

warning that U.S. interests were not being represented in Syrian

negotiations, but this has never been more clearly illustrated than in

November of this past year, November of 2017, when a picture circulated

of Presidents Ruhani, Putin, and Erdogan shaking hands in Russia after

a round of negotiations to determine a potential resolution of the

Syrian conflict.

I have to ask, is it now U.S. policy to let these three dictate

policy in the Middle East--Ruhani, Putin, and Erdogan? The United

States was not there, nor were our European allies. The United States

is failing our own interests by ceding leadership in Syria to Iran and

Russia, whose national security interests often directly contradict our

own.

What do these bullying regimes want from Syria?

Let's start with Iran. Iran sees Syria as an investment in its

political infrastructure and its campaign for regional hegemony. It is

their \\\`\\\`land bridge'' from Tehran to Beirut, a weapons pipeline, a

training camp for Hezbollah. It is a practice ground for a future war

with Israel.

What about the Russians? The Russian Government, led by Mr. Putin,

has made clear that they believe all Syrian territory must return to

the Assad regime and to the Assad regime's control before political

reforms can be considered. Putin seeks a solution that shows that he is

the arbiter of events in the Middle East. Lately, foreign leaders--

including Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel, President Ruhani, and

King Salman of Saudi Arabia--fly to Moscow instead of Washington. They

see a Russia that seeks to write the rules of international order and

an America that sits back, too enmeshed in our own political strife to

lead.

This is not the America that I know and that most Americans know. The

America I know does not believe that where you are born should dictate

where you live or die or if you spend your childhood in a refugee camp.

The America I know does not stand by while enemy nations threaten to

expand their spheres of influence. The America I know sees the

complexity of our own foreign involvements, understanding, for

instance, that ISIS cannot be fully defeated without considering the

context of the Syrian civil war. The America I know supports its

allies, like Israel, that share a chaotic border with a nation at war

with itself.

In 1963, President John F. Kennedy spoke at the Fort Worth, TX,

Chamber of Commerce on the challenges posed by the Soviet regime.

He said:

This country, which desires only to be free, which desires

to be secure, which desired to live at peace for 18 years

under three different administrations, has borne more than

its share of the burden, has stood watch for more than its

number of years. I don't think we are fatigued or tired. We

would like to live as we once lived. But history will not

permit it. . . . The balance of power is still on the side of

freedom. We are still the keystone in the arch of freedom,

and I think we will continue to do as we have done in our

past, our duty.

So said President Kennedy. He spoke to the paradox of our country

then and now, what we continue to face. If we are to remain the

keystone in the arch of freedom, we cannot become fatigued by the

responsibility to fight tyranny.

These are the very issues that should receive public debate as part

of the congressional consideration of a new authorization for the use

of military force, known by the acronym AUMF. We undermine our own

credibility when we continue to send our men and women into conflicts

that Congress has not authorized. Secretary Tillerson, our Secretary of

State, has indicated that he sees a need for a long-term U.S. military

presence in Syria; yet many of us believe that there is no purely

military solution to this conflict. Where is the strategy? we ask. I

would like to see the administration put forward a plan that

encompasses all components of this conflict--military, political, and

humanitarian.

When we ask our men and women in uniform to put their lives on the

line to protect our homeland and fight terrorism, we need to be willing

to back them up by doing our jobs here in Washington. Just consider

Pennsylvania. Pennsylvanians have made a substantial sacrifice in the

past 17 years of war as 288 of our brave servicemembers have been

killed in action in those 17 years and as almost 2,000 have been

wounded in action in Afghanistan and Iraq.

We owe it to these men and women to have a robust, bipartisan debate

about this strategy and a vote on an AUMF. We should also vote on

legislation to cut off financing for ISIS or any other terrorist

organization in the world. I have a bipartisan bill, the Stop

Terrorists Operational Resources and Money Act, the so-called STORM

Act, with Senator Isakson. I have a bill, as well, with Senator Rubio,

the Preventing Destabilization of Iraq and Syria Act, to promote

humanitarian aid and sanction the Russian and Iranian actors who are

destabilizing this region--all of the components of a comprehensive

strategy.

Let's have a serious debate on this critical national security issue.

We are not always faced with situations in which our moral obligation

and our strategic priorities lead to the same conclusion, but this is

one of those rare moments.

May it be said of us years from now, just as President Kennedy said,

that we do our duty to continue to be the keystone in the arch of

freedom, including helping the Syrian people, especially her children,

be free of Assad's brutality and bombing.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

&nbsp;