Press Releases
Chairman Rogers Speaks at IISS Regional Security Summit
Washington, DC,
December 7, 2012
|
Susan Phalen
In Case You Missed It Chairman Mike Rogers--“I will tell you this, from the intelligence that we know and read and participate in, the work of our military and intelligence services. Those dangerous days of desperation are starting to take hold in the Assad regime. That is the most dangerous time, I think, for civilians and opposition groups all across Syria. Why that concerns us is that this is more than a civil war. I could not disagree more. It is now a regional conflict, and we see 30,000-plus civilians killed. We have some 500,000-plus refugees, some three million Syrians displaced from their homes. We have military equipment finding its way to Syria from multiple places that I would argue in some ways are not coordinated, to the detriment of the effort of unseating Assad.” Dr. John Chipman Thank you very much indeed. We are really privileged to have with us also here today Mike Rogers, from the United States, who is the Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the US House of Representatives, and therefore has access to a great deal of the privileged information that the United States has gathered from its perspective, and with its capacities, on the situation in Syria. We would welcome your thoughts on the political situation, on America's approach to the Syrian problem, but perhaps you might begin giving us a sense of what your intelligence appreciation is of the current situation in Syria.
Thank you, Dr Chipman, and thank you for the opportunity to be here. I am joined by my colleagues, a very senior delegation from the United States Congress, who believe this issue is important enough, even despite our problems at home, to be here to try to help at least push along some resolution to the Syrian conflict. To the distinguished diplomats, I am honoured to join the stage with you today. I will tell you this: there is a debate in Washington now about what level of intervention happens in Syria, amongst policymakers in Congress and the Administration. Some would argue that the weight of taking a proxy state that has been on the terror list since 1979, Syria, away from Iran is enough. If you look at the humanitarian wave of tragedy that is large and building, I think the time is now for us, and we hope after Marrakech that we have a much better coalesced effort to take down Assad. I will tell you this, from the intelligence that we know and read and participate in, the work of our military and intelligence services. Those dangerous days of desperation are starting to take hold in the Assad regime. That is the most dangerous time, I think, for civilians and opposition groups all across Syria. Why that concerns us is that this is more than a civil war. I could not disagree more. It is now a regional conflict, and we see 30,000-plus civilians killed. We have some 500,000-plus refugees, some three million Syrians displaced from their homes. We have military equipment finding its way to Syria from multiple places that I would argue in some ways are not coordinated, to the detriment of the effort of unseating Assad. You have another cancer that is growing, which is very, very concerning, and I was glad to hear Mr Sabbagh talk about the urgency of action now by a unified coalition of countries. You have the Al-Nusra Front, which is gaining strength and support across Syria, and I will tell you a very disturbing trend. Opposition groups, who are eager to displace this regime, find it necessary to rely on Al-Nusra Front fighters. Why? Because they are well-financed, they are well-armed, they are committed to the fight, and they are eager to join in, given the right opportunities. We have seen what would be normally secular commanders adopt more extremist views in order to attract the Al-Nusra Front to their elements, to win the fight. That is dangerous for a number of reasons, as we see the Assad regime enter the last phase of desperation in holding on. Given the opportunity, the Al-Nusra front will take its fight beyond the Levant. We all know that. That is dangerous to the region; I argue that it is dangerous to the national security of all the countries here, engaged in this dialogue, and it is certainly dangerous for the world at its endpoint. Why? Because there is always a void, a vacuum, after the fall of a regime like this. We have, unfortunately, lots of great experience in the last decade or so. What that avails to the people who have integrated themselves into some of these fighting units, and these fighting units have then endeared themselves to the Al-Nusra Front and their extremist elements, is that the weapons systems around Syria are terrifying in the hands of those who would use them for political gain. If you look at what happened in Libya, and those weapons spreading from Mali to Somali – some would argue to Sinai, some would argue even in Syria – the trouble that lies in wait, without an organised, transparent, coordinated coalition force on this, is indeed troubling. If that were not bad enough, you add the element – and you have all seen the recent public reports – of the possibility that Assad has at least assembled, as part of his arsenal, for use, chemical weapons. If we think that the refugee problem and the staggering number of deaths and displacements and distress is bad now, imagine that possibility of mustard or sarin gas being released on his own people. A terrifying prospect indeed, and it should terrify all of us, to the point where we need to take that next, very important step. There is a debate on this as well: do you wait until there is use for a reaction, or do we try to make sure that there is no option for use? That is a debate we all have to have. It is a debate I think all the coalition partners need to have, but we need to be honest about where we are in this discussion. All of those factors are at play, and that one last piece that I argue, and I think many of my colleagues would argue, and to a large degree President Obama's Administration would argue, is that a lack of transparency and coming together on one plan to make sure that we fill this void immediately when Assad goes away. It is a dire picture – I paint a dire picture because I think it is [inaudible – off mic]. I think there is a real opportunity here, as the United States has stepped up some $200 million to the effort, as our Arab League partners have stepped up, as our Turkish friends have stepped up. If we can coordinate this in a relatively quick manner, I think we can prevent the use of nuclear weapons. I think we can give Syria back to the people to whom I think it belongs.
Congressman Rogers, you heard Mr. Sabbagh say earlier that their hope is to establish a credible military council for the coalition, through which all military aid at present being sent to the opposition could be channeled. If there were such a credible military council established, would you advocate for the United States joining in the delivery of lethal weaponry to the opposition? Mike Rogers
I think you are on the record as saying that the United States perhaps has not done quite enough to prepare for a post-Assad Syria. At present, what would you recommend the practical steps to be taken for a post-Assad Syria, from the US perspective?
I think there are two different issues here, and I have said that. Firstly, I think the diplomatic efforts are well underway to try to put coalitions together. I am concerned, given our experience in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya, that it takes intensive planning with our coalition partners – we obviously cannot do this by ourselves – to have real and concrete plans to secure chemical weapons that we all know and agree are there, to secure sophisticated conventional weapons that have fallen into the hands of those who would wish to do harm to other nations. That would be absolutely devastating. I argue we are a little bit behind, based on my belief that, again, we are entering the phase of desperation in the Assad regime.
Finally, before I open it up to questions – and I shall, I promise you all – you also heard Mr Sabbagh call on Russia and Iran to cease their cooperation with the Assad regime. What is the appreciation that your Intelligence Committee has as to the extent, depth and nature of Iranian involvement now in the Syrian situation? How would you characterise it?
Extensive. One thing we know, with Iran and its long and troubled history of using proxies and proxy states to engage in acts of terror around the world, is that they have developed an expertise for doing it. I believe, knowing all the things that I see and that we talk about with our intelligence services, that they are actively, until this day, engaged in activities that we would all find troublesome to the peaceful outcome of this conflict. Contact: Susan Phalen at Susan.Phalen@mail.house.gov **For regular updates, join the HPSCI Facebook page at House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence or go to the HPSCI website at - / |