Bipartisan House group introduces bills to stall Syria, South Korea troop withdrawals

Bipartisan House group introduces bills to stall Syria, South Korea troop withdrawals
© Getty Images

A bipartisan group of eight House lawmakers on Wednesday introduced two bills to make it more difficult for the Trump administration to withdraw troops from Syria and South Korea. 

The bills, introduced by freshman Reps. Tom MalinowskiThomas (Tom) MalinowskiJan. 6 brings Democrats, Cheneys together — with GOP mostly absent In their own words: Lawmakers, staffers remember Jan. 6 insurrection Five areas where Biden faces pressure to do more on COVID-19 MORE (D-N.J.), and Van TaylorVan TaylorWHIP LIST: How House Democrats, Republicans say they'll vote on infrastructure bill Shakespeare gets a congressional hearing in this year's 'Will on the Hill' The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - Senate path uncertain after House approves Jan. 6 panel MORE (R-Texas), would limit the funds the administration may use to pull troops from the countries.

ADVERTISEMENT

Democrat Reps. Andy Kim (N.J.), Jimmy PanettaJames Varni PanettaNational progressive group labels six lawmakers 'progressive in name only' in new report Lobbying world Capitol Police dominate lawmakers in Congressional Football Game MORE (D-Calif.), and Max RoseMax RoseMax Rose launches another run for Congress Max Rose preparing for rematch with Nicole Malliotakis: report 'Blue wave' Democrats eye comebacks after losing reelection MORE (N.Y.), also back the bills, as do Republican Reps. Mike GallagherMichael (Mike) John GallagherAnti-Trump group targeting top Republicans on Jan. 6 anniversary Congress zooms in on cybersecurity after banner year of attacks Human rights groups sound alarm over Interpol election MORE (Wis.), Elise StefanikElise Marie StefanikHouse GOP campaign arm rakes in 0M in 2021 JD Vance raises more than million in second fundraising quarter for Ohio Senate bid US looks to ward off Ukraine conflict in talks with Russia MORE (N.Y.), and Will HurdWilliam Ballard HurdHillicon Valley — YouTube takes some heat Former GOP rep: Social media companies should be able to suspend Trump, others for 'boldfaced lies' Hillicon Valley — Presented by Ericsson — Tackling the misinformation 'crisis' MORE (Texas). Kim, Gallagher and Stefanik all serve on the House Armed Services Committee.

The first bill, titled the “Responsible Withdrawal From Syria Act,” prohibits the use of Pentagon funds to draw down active duty troop presence in Syria below 1,500.

“None of the funds made available to the Department of Defense (DoD) for fiscal year 2019 may be used” on such a withdrawal unless the Defense and State secretaries and the director of National Intelligence submit to Congress a report that addresses several questions, according to the bill.

The list of 15 questions includes queries on the current strength and of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the threat the group continues to pose to the U.S. and its allies, the risks involved with conducting counter-ISIS operations following a withdrawal, and the administration’s military and political strategy for meeting any remaining threat from the group.

The lawmakers also want to know and whether the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) — the group the U.S. has partnered with in fighting ISIS — will remain a viable fighting force in the absence of a U.S. military presence in Syria, the actions the administration plans to take to ensure the safety of Syrian nationals who provided support to the coalition and the commitments, if any, that Turkey has extended with respect to fighting ISIS and refraining from military action against the Kurds.

“While every effort should be made to reach lasting solutions through diplomacy, the reality remains that the United States must stand ready to protect our interests and the security of our allies in the Middle East,” Taylor said in a statement.

“We must also ensure that our actions don’t contribute to a resurgence of terrorism in the region or to the expanded influence of malign foreign actors like Iran or Russia in Syria.”

President Trump raised concerns among lawmakers and the intelligence community late last year when he announced that the U.S. would begin a military withdrawal from Syria after claiming victory over ISIS.

The decision, which led to the resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis and other officials, was criticized as too hasty, ill thought out and an opportunity for ISIS to regain losses and ramp up the fight against U.S.-allied Kurdish fighters.

Officials, lawmakers and international allies are also are worried that Turkey, who views the SDF as a terrorist organization, will move to retaliate against the group once U.S. forces leave the region.

The second bill, titled the “United States and Republic of Korea Alliance Support Act,” takes a similar route and would also halt the use FY-19 DoD dollars “to reduce the total number of Armed Forces serving on active duty in the Republic of Korea below 22,000,” pending several certifications to Congress.

Trump has signaled in the past that he wants to draw down troops in the Korean Peninsula, complaining that the cost of maintaining a military presence there is too high.

The Defense secretary and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff must “jointly certify to the relevant congressional committees that the Republic of Korea would be fully capable of defending itself and deterring a conflict on the Korean Peninsula that would threaten United States interests following such a reduction,” the bill states. 

The Defense secretary must also consult with U.S. allies, including South Korea and Japan, regarding such a reduction, and the secretary and the chairman must jointly certify to Congress that North Korea has “completed verifiable and irreversible nuclear disarmaments.” 

The bill’s release comes a day after Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats testified to Congress that the chances of full North Korean denuclearization appear unlikely.

“We currently assess that North Korea will seek to retain its WMD [weapons of mass destruction] capabilities and is unlikely to completely give up its nuclear weapons and production capability because its leaders ultimately view nuclear weapons as critical to regime survival,” Coats said.

The president and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un are expected to meet for a second summit next month to further discuss North Korea’s nuclear program.