House Intel Chair Slams U.S. Outreach to Syria’s Islamist Rebels

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-MI, speaks during a press conference to release the Committee's report on the security threat posed by Chinese telecommunications companies Huawei and ZTE October 8, 2012 in the House Visitors Center of the US Capitol in Washington, DC. 
National Journal
Sara Sorcher
See more stories about...
Sara Sorcher
Dec. 5, 2013, 3:27 p.m.

House In­tel­li­gence Chair­man Mike Ro­gers slammed the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion’s out­reach to Syr­ia’s Is­lam­ist rebels to en­cour­age them to sup­port a peace con­fer­ence early next year, just one day after seni­or of­fi­cials in­dic­ated re­li­gious fight­ers may play a key role in reach­ing a dip­lo­mat­ic solu­tion to end the bloody con­flict.

“You should draw lines around or­gan­iz­a­tions that would cut the heads off of chil­dren to prove their polit­ic­al point,” the Michigan Re­pub­lic­an told Na­tion­al Journ­al Daily. “When you don’t have a course of ac­tion that helps change the bat­tle­field, for a dip­lo­mat­ic solu­tion, you end up go­ing to the parties who are “¦ rad­ic­al Is­lam­ists. That’s not a very good way to con­duct dip­lomacy.”

Is­lam­ic mil­it­ants, Ro­gers said, “want a safe haven in east­ern Syr­ia and — we know this with a high de­gree of con­fid­ence — to con­duct op­er­a­tions ex­tern­al to Syr­ia. You don’t ne­go­ti­ate with ter­ror­ist groups that have that kind of mind-set.”

The Wall Street Journ­al re­por­ted this week that the U.S. and its al­lies are hold­ing dir­ect talks with Is­lam­ist mil­it­ant fac­tions in Syr­ia, as sec­u­lar groups Wash­ing­ton backed in the war against strong­man Bashar al-As­sad con­tin­ue to lose ground to re­li­gious fight­ers and the re­gime. The primary tar­get of this West­ern and Saudi out­reach is the Is­lam­ic Front, a new rebel co­ali­tion of re­li­gious mi­li­tias ex­clud­ing the main al-Qaida-linked groups in the coun­try.

Ro­gers’ com­ments come one day after De­fense Sec­ret­ary Chuck Hagel said “all parties” must be rep­res­en­ted to reach a dip­lo­mat­ic solu­tion in the war-torn coun­try. “This can’t be achieved by just [lim­it­ing ourselves to] nar­row strips of in­terest,” he said Wed­nes­day.

Sep­ar­ately, just days be­fore nuc­le­ar ne­go­ti­ations are set to re­sume in Vi­enna, Ro­gers slammed the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion’s re­cent deal with Ir­an, say­ing talks are doomed to fall short of ul­ti­mately dis­mant­ling that coun­try’s nuc­le­ar pro­gram. Con­sidered a ma­jor dip­lo­mat­ic break­through to re­solve the dec­ade-long dis­pute, the deal, reached late last month, was hailed by U.S. of­fi­cials as a first step to­ward a last­ing, com­pre­hens­ive agree­ment on Ir­an’s nuc­le­ar pro­gram — though Is­rael and Ir­an hawks in Con­gress have un­leashed a bar­rage of scath­ing cri­ti­cism be­cause the deal could en­able Ir­an to keep en­rich­ing some urani­um. “No, I don’t be­lieve that there will be any dis­mant­ling for their pro­gram,” Ro­gers said, “and I do not be­lieve it’s in the world’s in­terest to al­low Ir­an to have the cap­ab­il­ity to en­rich and pro­cess urani­um.”

“It’s a ter­rible deal,” he con­tin­ued. “That’s why bi­par­tis­an mem­bers of the House and Sen­ate op­pose it, why our Ar­ab League part­ners op­pose it, why Is­rael op­poses it, why some in European par­lia­ments have said, ‘This is not a good deal.’ When you have lost your friends, you’ve lost your Con­gress, and you’ve lost Is­rael, maybe you should re­think your strategy,” he said of the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion.

Key points with­in the Nov. 24 deal in­clude keep­ing Ir­an’s urani­um en­rich­ment be­low 5 per­cent (far be­low weapons-grade levels) and neut­ral­iz­ing its stock­pile of 20-per­cent-en­riched urani­um in ex­change for some $7 bil­lion in sanc­tions re­lief. “They’re go­ing to ox­id­ize that 20 [per­cent-en­riched] urani­um — which can be un-ox­id­ized and re­con­ver­ted to fuel in 30 days,” Ro­gers wor­ried.

The best idea for a nuc­le­ar deal, Ro­gers said, is the United Ar­ab Emir­ates’ pro­gram. “It al­lows a peace­ful pro­gram and all the en­rich­ment and pro­cessing to take place out­side the coun­try; “¦ the fuel is brought in­to their fa­cil­ity, the waste product is taken out of the fa­cil­ity,” Ro­gers said. “That’s the gold stand­ard for a peace­ful nuc­le­ar pro­gram.”

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
4 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
5 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×