Obama Wants $500 Million to Train and Equip Syrian Opposition

The sum comes out of the president’s new Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund.

National Journal
Kaveh Waddell
June 26, 2014, 12:05 p.m.

Pres­id­ent Obama has asked Con­gress for $500 mil­lion to train and equip mod­er­ate ele­ments of the Syr­i­an op­pos­i­tion.

The sum is part of a $1.5 bil­lion Re­gion­al Sta­bil­iz­a­tion Ini­ti­at­ive that would also es­tab­lish part­ner­ships with Syr­ia’s neigh­bors — Jordan, Le­ban­on, Tur­key, and Ir­aq — to off­set the threat of ex­trem­ism that has already over­flowed in­to Ir­aq. In ad­di­tion, it would help these coun­tries deal with the hun­dreds of thou­sands of refugees who have been dis­placed by the fight­ing in Syr­ia.

This ini­ti­at­ive draws from the Coun­terter­ror­ism Part­ner­ships Fund, a $5 bil­lion pro­gram the pres­id­ent an­nounced at West Point in May.

“These funds would help de­fend the Syr­i­an people, sta­bil­ize areas un­der op­pos­i­tion con­trol, fa­cil­it­ate the pro­vi­sion of es­sen­tial ser­vices, counter ter­ror­ist threats, and pro­mote con­di­tions for a ne­go­ti­ated set­tle­ment,” said Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Coun­cil spokes­wo­man Caitlin Hay­den in a state­ment on Thursday.

The U.S. already con­ducts secret CIA-run pro­grams to train the mod­er­ate op­pos­i­tion in Syr­ia, but this new ini­ti­at­ive would broaden its in­volve­ment in the coun­try.

This an­nounce­ment comes days after the pres­id­ent pledged to send up to 300 mil­it­ary ad­visers to Ir­aq to train and co­ordin­ate with Ir­aqi gov­ern­ment forces in their battle with IS­IS, a Sunni mil­it­ant group. The Syr­i­an op­pos­i­tion, like in­ef­fect­ive gov­ern­ment forces in Ir­aq, will likely prove dif­fi­cult part­ners in the fight against ex­trem­ism in the re­gion. But as the ap­pet­ite for mil­it­ary in­ter­ven­tion in the U.S. hits his­tor­ic lows, the pres­id­ent turns to stra­tegic part­ner­ships such as these in hopes that a loc­ally led coun­ter­of­fens­ive would be viewed as more le­git­im­ate and would be more likely to bring about last­ing sta­bil­ity.

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:
×