Congress: Vote 'No' On Arming Syrian Militias
Here is our analysis on supporting Syrian rebel groups that we shared with Congress today. You can take action to ask for a no vote here.
Arms transferred to “moderate” rebel groups have wound up with ISIS
It has been documented that ISIS has captured U.S.-manufactured weapons in both Syria and Iraq — and they are using them on the battlefield.[i] Advocates for arming the rebels hold out hope that improved “transparency and accountability measures” will ensure U.S. weapons and other support are not misused. But it’s quite naïve to think bureaucratic rules will hold sway over the fighters once they return to the heat of battle.
In fact, “moderate” rebels have acknowledged sharing weapons with al-Qaeda-linked forces to gain ground against Assad.[ii] As Mark Kukis pointed out in Time: “By definition rebel groups do not answer to authority. They tend to take whatever arms, training and funding they can get from friendly governments and pursue their own agenda.”[iii] In Afghanistan with tens of thousands of US troops, weapons have fallen into the hands of the Taliban. This type of transfer is likely to be rampant with far fewer U.S. minders.
U.S.-backed forces have fought with or even defected to al-Qaeda and ISIS
By far, the number one objective of the Syrian rebels is to fight against the Assad regime. The fighters have local city-based, and ideological loyalties that will trump financial support. Therefore “moderates” are willing to fight alongside the al-Nusra Front (the al Qaeda affiliate).[iv] Earlier this year Jamal Maarouf, the leader of the “moderate” Syrian Revolutionary Front said “’I am not fighting against al-Qaeda… it’s not our problem”.[v]
There have also been reports of rebel fighters, including command leadership, defecting to al-Nusra (i.e. al-Qaeda).[vi] Entire units have reportedly defected to ISIS.[vii] The amendment before Congress can prescribe funding for jihadist groups like al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham but, once fighters are on the battlefield, aspirations expressed in D.C. or in training in Saudi Arabia won’t control the fighters’ behavior.
The initial $500 million would grow to cover more fighters. The plan would also likely necessitate U.S. air cover with its associated costs.
The initial $500 million is very likely to grow. Many supporters of arming the “moderate” rebels are calling for a much wider program since the initial 2300-3000 fighters is a relatively small force.[viii] Some supporters foresee a program of several billion a year for arms and training and another up to $22 billion a year for U.S. air support.[ix] With airstrikes come at least some U.S. boots on the ground in Syria for targeting etc. [x] All these costs could, combined with the effort in Iraq, do harm to the U.S. economy.
The U.S. could be dragged into an unlawful[xi], preventative war in Syria
All of this adds up to a “preventative war” in Syria to combat a force that is still not an imminent threat to Americans at home. [xii] A military campaign including airstrikes would undermine the international norm against using military force inside other states.[xiii] This is problematic given that the preventive war is being driven by what some counterterrorism experts describe as threat inflation[xiv] or “members of the cabinet and top military officers … describing the threat in lurid terms that are not justified.”[xv]
We would be supporting Syrian militias with serious human rights problems – including their own beheadings
The militias that we would be supporting have their own serious human rights violations including beheadings.[xvi] Amnesty International worried that “it would be reckless for the US or others to provide military aid to any party in the conflict. Islamic State has committed serious war crimes, but other militias supported by the Iraqi government have also attacked civilian populations in revenge and the Iraqi military itself has shelled residential communities.”[xvii]
[i] Islamic State may have taken anti-tank weapons from Syrian rebels, WaPo,, 9/7/14
[ii] ‘I am not fighting against al-Qa’ida… it’s not our problem’, Independent 4/2/14
[iii] It’s a Huge Mistake to Back Rebel Groups, Time, 9/12/14
[iv] U.S. Pins Hope on Syrian Rebels With Loyalty All Over the Map, NYT, 9/11/14
[v] ‘I am not fighting against al-Qa’ida… it’s not our problem’. Independent, 4/2/14
[vi] Free Syrian Army rebels defect to Jabhat al-Nusra. Guardian, 5/8/13
[vii] Hundreds of Syria rebels pledge loyalty to Qaeda groups, Reuters 9/20/13
[viii] MH17 affects the calculus on aiding Syria’s rebels LA Daily News, 7/29/14
[ix] How to Turn Syria’s Opposition Into a Real Fighting Force Foreign Affairs , Sep. 2014
[x] Syria airstrikes need boots on the ground, USA Today, 9/12/14
[xi] WH Has No International Legal Justification for Hitting ISIS, Daily Beast, 9/15/14
[xii] Struggling to Gauge ISIS Threat, New
[xiii] We don’t need another dumb war, Foreign Policy, 9/11/14
[xiv] Threat Inflation And The Case For War, Ctd, The Dish, 9/12/14
[xv] Struggling to Gauge ISIS Threat, New York Times, 9/10/14
[xvi] American Fighting for ISIS Is Killed in Syria New York Times, 8/26/14
