Hagel, Kerry grilled over strategy for fighting ISIS

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Secretary of State John Kerry faced a grilling from lawmakers in both parties Thursday as they defended President Obama’s strategy for fighting the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Republicans and Democrats questioned the administration’s strategy of using airstrikes against ISIS while training and arming Iraqi and Kurdish forces to fight the terrorist group on the ground.

{mosads}Lawmakers wondered whether the plan could succeed without U.S. ground troops commanding forces, helping with logistics and intelligence and calling in airstrikes. They also expressed worries that the Syrian rebels the Obama administration is counting on to fight ISIS will be focused on their battle against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s forces.

“How can we expect a few thousand rebels to fight against ISIL and Assad at the same time?” Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), using another common acronym for ISIS, questioned Kerry.

The tough questions came a day after the House met Obama’s request to authorize a program to train and arm the Syrian rebels. The Senate was expected to approve the same measure later in the day.

When Congress returns after the midterm elections, it is possible lawmakers will try to fence in the administration’s efforts against ISIS.

Senate Democrats plan to take up legislation that would authorize strikes against the extremist Sunni group, but only for a year. The measure would also bar the use of ground troops.

Hagel and Kerry offered a defense of the administration’s strategy even as they acknowledged challenges.

For example, Kerry said the administration recognizes rebels will continue to fight Assad.

“The Syria opposition is not going to stop continuing to fight Assad. We recognize that reality,” he told the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Hagel defended the administration’s plan to give 5,000 Syrian rebels small arms to fight as many as 30,000 ISIS fighters.

“The goal is not to achieve numerical parity with ISIL, but to ensure that moderate Syrian forces are superior fighters trained by units,” Hagel said. “Our goal is to undercut ISIL’s recruitment and … force ISIL into a three-front battle.”

Several lawmakers attacked Obama’s statement from August that it was a fantasy to think Syrian rebel groups could defeat ISIS.

“Just five weeks ago the president said it was a fantasy that the Free Syrian Army could take up arms and lead the fight,” Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) told Kerry. “Now they’re a cornerstone of our strategy to defeat ISIS. What has changed to make the Free Syrian Army now a credible partner where before the president considered them a punchline?” 

Other lawmakers questioned how much support the United States would have from global partners, including Arab states seen as a key to the mission.

France on Thursday said it would join in U.S. airstrikes against ISIS positions in Iraq, a key victory for the administration’s diplomatic effort. But the administration has offered few details on what other countries will join the effort.

Hagel said more than 40 nations would work with the United States, including 30 that said they were ready to pledge military support — but did not outline who they were or what contributions they would make, to the frustration of some lawmakers.

“But a coalition of 40, who? What? How much? Which are the combat troops? How are they gonna get there? I would like to know those things,” said Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.). 

Hagel also said getting Sunni Arab countries on board was a “complicated dynamic on a good day. … There are many factions and factors that are flowing through this.”

Both officials acknowledged there were risks to the plan, but there were no better options. 

“We recognize this is difficult. We recognize there is no good option here,” Hagel said.

“We are aiming for success,” said Kerry.