releases: https://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-statements?ContentRecord_id=7ad7d573-2e1c-4b0d-bd37-b751471d5c1c
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-statements?ContentRecord_id=7ad7d573-2e1c-4b0d-bd37-b751471d5c1c | OPENING STATEMENT BY SASC CHAIRMAN JOHN McCAIN AT HEARING ON U.S. STRATEGY TO COUNTER ISIL & MIDDLE EAST POLICY | 2015-12-09 | 2015 | 2015-12 | Republican | House | AZ | John McCain | M000303 | www.mccain.senate.gov | legacy | Washington, D.C. U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, delivered the following opening statement today at a hearing on U.S. strategy to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and U.S. policy toward Iraq and Syria with Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Paul Selva: The Committee meets today to receive testimony on the ongoing efforts of the United States to combat ISIL, as well as U.S. policy toward Iraq, Syria, and the broader Middle East. We welcome our distinguished witnesses and thank them for their appearance today, as well as for their continued service to our nation. This morning our hearts are with the loved ones of the 224 people killed aboard a Russian airliner over Egypt, of the 43 people killed in bombings in Beirut, of the 130 people killed in Paris, and of the 14 people killed in San Bernardino. Each one of these atrocities committed or inspired by ISIL has occurred in just the one month and a half since the Secretary last appeared before this Committee. Whatever illusions anyone may have had that our national security was not at stake in the conflict in Iraq and Syria, or that ISIL was somehow contained, these attacks make it clear that ISILs threat against our homeland is real, direct, and growing that we are not winning this war and that time is not on our side. Americans have never been more worried about being attacked than at any time since the months that followed September 11, 2001. Todays hearing is essential to help the American people, and their elected representatives, understand what the Department of Defense is doing to protect our nation from this new terrorist threat. The Administration says it has a strategy to destroy ISIL, which it has called an indirect approach. This means that instead of taking the fight to ISIL more directly, the Administration seeks to build up local ground forces in Iraq and Syria, to support them with U.S. and coalition airpower, to enable our local partners to liberate their own lands, and to create conditions for lasting political settlements. Much of this is what many of us have been advocating for years, and to be sure, we are making some progress, as I recently saw on a visit to Iraq. The recent operation to retake Sinjar was important. Iraqi forces are closing in on Ramadi, though they still have not finished the job. And our counterterrorism operations are taking a lot of ISIL fighters off the battlefield in Iraq and Syria. All of this represents tactical progress. And it is a testament to our civilian and military leaders, as well as thousands of U.S. troops helping to take the fight to ISIL every day. However, significant challenges remain. The Iraqi government is weak and beholden to Iran. The training of Iraqi security forces has been slow, and the building of support for the Sunni tribal forces even slower. At the current pace, U.S. commanders estimate that ISIL will still control Mosul at the end of next year. In Syria, what the administration calls its strategy looks more like a hope. We will not destroy ISIL until Raqqa, the capital of the caliphate, falls. But there is still no ground force that is both willing and able to retake Raqqa, nor is there a realistic prospect of one emerging soon. The Syrian Kurds could take Raqqa but wont, and the Syrian Sunni Arabs want to but cant, partly due to our failure to support them. Whats worse, our military and diplomatic efforts are misaligned. Russia and Iran are doubling down on Bashar Assad. Russias air strikes are still overwhelmingly directed at coalition-supported groups, and more talks in Vienna will not convince Vladimir Putin to abandon his idea of Russias national interests in Syria. We need leverage to do that, but nothing we are doing, militarily or otherwise, is creating the necessary conditionsboth in Putins mind, as well as on the ground in Syriato achieve a favorable political settlement. As a result, the conflict will likely grind on, ISIL will grow stronger, and the refugees will keep coming. Meanwhile, ISIS is metastasizing across the regionin Afghanistan, Lebanon, Egypt, Yemen, and perhaps most worryingly in Libya. In short, the threat is growing and evolving faster than the administrations efforts to counter it. The broader shortcoming of the Administrations approach has to do with two assumptions it appears to be making. The first is that time is on our sidethat we can afford to play out their indirect approach for years, while ISIL continues to hold key terrain such as Raqqa and Mosul. Time has never been on our side in this conflict, and it certainly is not now after Sinai, Paris, and San Bernardino. The second assumption is that we should not put U.S. forces on the ground because that is what ISIL wants. It is true that ISIL seeks an apocalyptic conflict with the West, but another key pillar of ISILs ideology is the creation of the caliphate. So long as ISIL can claim to possess its caliphate, it projects an aura of success that is its most powerful tool of radicalization and recruitment. There are no local forces that are able and willing to destroy ISILs caliphate on the ground, and if we will not commit our own forces, then we are accepting the existence of the caliphate. On Sunday, President Obama once again resorted to the straw-man argument that his critics want to invade Iraq and Syria with 180,000 U.S. troops. No one is calling for that. What we do need in Iraq is several thousand additional U.S. troops to improve and accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, especially Sunni tribal fighters; embed with and advise Iraqi units closer to the fight; call in airstrikes from forward positions; and conduct counterterrorism operations. Once ISIL is destroyed in Iraq, we must keep a residual force there, as we should have done before. If we leave again, the threat will return, and we will have to intervene again. Iraqis must win the peace, but America has a major stake in their success, and a unique role to play in helping them. To do so we must be present. In Syria, the U.S. needs a coherent strategy to destroy ISIL and end the civil war as soon as possible. Our military efforts must create the conditions for this outcome. America must work with its coalition partners to establish and protect zones inside Syria where refugees can be safe; to deny the Assad regime the use of air power and barrel bombs; and to impose costs on Russia for targeting moderate opposition groups. Ultimately, to destroy ISIL in Syria, we will need a multinational ground forceprimarily made up of Sunni Arab and European forces but with a strong U.S. componentto do what no local force now can or will: retake Raqqa, destroy ISILs caliphate in Syria, and prepare for a long-term stabilization effort. Beyond Iraq and Syria, we need to seize the initiative and roll back ISILs regional expansion. This will require a greater forward presence of U.S. military and intelligence teams that can map its networks and destroy them, as part of a broader strategy to support countries in building just and inclusive governments. Finally, Mr. Secretary, we have known each other for many years. I know you to be a skilled and dedicated public servant. I think you are performing to the best of your abilities as Secretary of Defense, and I value our partnership on many issues. It is true that you have made four appearances before this Committee as Secretary. But when you were nominated for your position, you agreed to appear and testify upon request before this Committee. Since your last testimony, as I mentioned, we have seen ISIL launch or inspire attacks in the skies over Egypt, in Beirut, in Paris, and here at home in San Bernardino. We have also heard the Administration roll out additional actions that it claims are needed to address this threat. If we are truly at war against ISIL, as the President says, then we will continue to expect the Secretary of Defense to provide regular updates to the Senate Armed Services Committee on the progress of that war. This is your responsibility to us, so we can perform our responsibilities on behalf of those who elected us. ### | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |