Rohrabacher Urges Policy Re-Set With Syrian, Russia

July 14, 2017

Washington, DC – John Hines, Senior OAN Political Correspondent

A stable, secure Syria is possible, if the United States is willing to rethink its policy toward Russia and its ally Bashar al Assad, says California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

“This cease-fire should be an example of what we can accomplish if we are working in cooperation with Russia. Over the last two years, what we have seen is this unrelenting hostility and to actually create a worse relationship rather than a cooperative relationship although we face the same enemy which is radical Islamic terrorism,” the Congressman observes.

Radical Islamic terrorism is the enemy after all, but it is exactly that enemy which would benefit with Assad gone, Rohrabacher believes.

“If you get rid of Assad, yeah, there’s a couple groups there that are sort of democratic, but you get rid of Assad and they are not the ones who are gonna end up in charge of that government, radical Islamic terrorist will be in charge of that government. And the Christians will be slaughtered by these people,” he says.

And those Christians have been safe in Syria for the past thirty years, so-too-has been neighboring Israel which has maintained a long-standing peace with both Bashar al Assad and his father, says Rohrabacher. All of which is good reason to think long and hard before further destabilizing the Assad regime.

“Assad and the Russians just the other day were able with their bombing to kill the head of ISL. I mean this is a great thing for America to have the head of this Radical Islamic Terrorist organization taken out of action–completely taken out of action–we should be working in cooperation when they do that, rather than trying to overthrow the government because ‘It’s a dictatorship’…well so are these other countries in the region who are our allies,” he opines.

The situation in Syria is complex. And it would appear, according to at least one GOP Congressman, that America may benefit by pursuing a policy that better reflects this complexity rather than evaluating Syria and its ally Russia in a narrow, simplistic dimension.

  • Corky

    I guess he is still cashing Russian checks.

  • Bailey

    I agree wholeheartedly.

  • Rob Poff

    Isn’t Hezbollah and Iran two of the key groups fighting for Assad? Seems like Assad isn’t such a clean a break from the radicals.

    • Bailey

      So you don’t want to stabilize the region? You want to do like Obama and Hilliary, destabilize, Iraq, Egypt, Libya and Styria and create another ISIS? Are you nuts?

  • Tado

    Grandstanding hypocrite!

  • Rocketman

    Agree totally with Rohrabacher. This is the only policy that makes sense in that screwed up part of the world. It ensures stability. Also, a majority of those loosely allied groups opposing Assad are as murderous and intolerant of the Christian minority as ISIS. We need to stop this nonsense of attempting nation building other countries in our own image and according to our own set of rules.

  • Sui-Juris

    Glad to see California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher getting on board with the idea that Russia is not the enemy, and that “regime change” is a failed foreign policy decision that creates more harm than good in the long term.

    Especially given that we will not be committed to long term occupation as government while creating the institutions of democracy. Institutions of democracy that necessarily break up the hold Islam has over the educational, political, economical, and judicial social authority.

    That can not be successfully imposed by outsiders. The idea of a separation between religion and the State must come from among the Muslims themselves. A secular Muslim State is not impossible.

  • Donald J. Olson

    I read somewhere that Qatar and Saudis wanted an LP gas pipe through Syria to sell in Europe, but Assad said no because it will ruin Russia’s current market dominance on the European LP market, and Russia is his ally. So the Saudis hired Obama to send U.S. military ‘advisers’ and to fortify the Syrian rebels hoping to get rid of Assad and install a cooperative Syrian leader. That’s why Russia has a proxy war with the U.S. in Syria. The Saudis were the largest financial contributor to Team Hilary who was paid to continue the initiative and get rid of Assad. However, it would send Russian economics back 30 years or worse, so the Russians had a vested interest in Trump’s victory. Obama and Hilary fortified the rebels in Egypt, in Libya, and in Syria … many of which were Sunni ex-military from Saddam Hussein’s national guard that were displaced by the new ruling class Shiite leaders in Iraq. That is why Putin said Obama created ISIS … and now look at Syria. Hilary would have committed troops to the Syrian overthrow and many more American soldiers would be dead. If Trump and Putin can cooperate in Syria … they can build a shared pipeline, one for Russia / Iran and one for U.S.A. / Saudi Arabia.

  • flashy0ne

    Let’s face the facts people — we have been working with and supporting governments which have NOT lived up to ‘our’ ideals for years — we even tried Cuba !! The objective should NOT BE perfection but rather success. There is certainly nothing wrong with promoting “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” but we must always be aware of ‘different strokes for different folks’. A return to a STABLE Syria would certainly beat the heck out of the present situation.

  • chesty52

    Let’s not forget….Syria became an unstable state and fell into civil war when the US and our European allies aligned with the rebels and emboldened them diplomatically and, in time, militarily. And before you jump on me, I am not into a game of blame the US. I am simply stating the facts. Secondly, the alleged brutal, dictatorial Assad regime is the same regime that provided military forces in support of US/coalition military operations in 1990-91 to drive Iraqi forces from Kuwait. We MUST reverse course and help to stabilize the Middle East. We cannot and will not do this without the support of Russia, Iran, Turkey, and Syria. Does that mean we give away the farm? Absolutely not. But without those nations’ active support, the area will remain unstable and we, the United States, will not be able to disengage from Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Syria. That’s a fact. We will be bled white and eventually leave with our tail between our legs. So, let’s wake-up and recognize that the correlation of forces (yep, that is a term that was extensively used by the Soviets) is not in our favor and force of arms will not change that dynamic. I am a retired US Marine veteran of Vietnam, DESERT SHIELD/STORM, and Somalia. This is not my first rodeo.

    • Jack Green

      Well said!!

    • All American

      Thank you for your Service chesty52🇺🇸

  • Frank2525

    I met the Representative years ago in Aurora, Colorado when he came to be present, when Frontier paid off their loan to US Government. At the time I was Secretary to United Veterans Committee of Colorado , and got VIP treatment, by DIA Personnel, so was able to talk to him with Representative Bob Beauprez, and Representative Diana DeGette. Very easy person to talk to, and straight forward. I was impressed, and have kept track of him and his press releases since, and this is most reasonable solution I have seen for that part of the world. We have experienced the problems when leaders (no matter how different from USA) are removed or killed, and who moved in to take their place.
    ——– When Radical Muslims (Terrorist) took over Europe, Middle East, Africa starting in 6th Century , it took 7 Crusades to remove them, and force them back into minority status. That covered several centuries. Are we about to experience that again, by allowing that cancer to spread? For sake of my children, grand-children and one great grand-child, I certainly hope not.

  • Josh R

    You are so right,those who lived in middle east know that.Finally someone in Washington gets it right.

  • Jack Green

    I saw the interview with the Congressman and totally agree. Only thing is Demos will accuse him of lying with the Russians…just sayin’. I can remember Tito in Yugoslavia ruled with authority, but he held his country together. See what happened after he passed? Another thing I’m confused about…….Communists were always considered leftists….now the leftists act so terrified of the leftist Russians…….what gives? Old and confused I reckon.

  • longlance

    Mr. Rohrabacher is 100% correct. US “regime change” capers have been a total disaster.

  • Ty

    Only Assad is the enemy of our enemy. Only Assad protects Christian and other religious minorities in Syria. Russia is fighting Islamists who would kill all non muslims. The US, since Bill Clinton has been supporting islamists, in overthrowing secular governments. Whenever President Trump talks of cooperating with Russia to stop islamists, the MSM has a fit and screams “collusion”. The MSM wants a war with Russia if that’s the only way to ensure success of the islamists.

    • longlance

      Since Jimmy Carter, actually.

      • Ty

        You are correct.

    • Barak

      Better the enemy you know, then the enemy you don’t. Assad has provided a modicum of stability in the region.

  • Section Ate

    Rep. Dana Tyrone Rohrabacher (R-CA48) presents a very plausible argument. Just look at what happened in Iraq. The U.S. should’ve been out of the business of destabilizing nation-states just to prop up someone it thinks would be a “Yes Man.”

    And while at it, leave Cuba alone, too!

    • ellsworth2

      You can’t fix somebody else’s country. How would you feel if some other country’s army rolled in to install a government of their choosing and killed a load of people in the process?

  • LuciusAnnaeusSeneca

    “The situation in Syria is complex. And it would appear, according to at
    least one GOP Congressman, that America may benefit by pursuing a policy
    that better reflects this complexity rather than evaluating Syria and
    its ally Russia in a narrow, simplistic dimension.:

    Bingo! At last, someone knowledgeable of the situation who doesn’t try to push the Saudi and big oil agendas. Rohrabacher rightly indicates the need for an informed, prudent approach to the situation in Syria. The lives of the country’s Christians and other minorities depend on the survival of the Assad regime.

    Syrian Christians, which include over a dozen denominations of mainly Eastern Churches, constituted up to 20 per cent of the Syrian population before the current civil war. But other minorities are also at risk, including Assad’s Alawite or Nusayri sectarian group, Syria’s Druze, and Kurds. The latter include many Yazidis who have fled Iraq and ISIS persecution.

    All these groups would face persecution and death if the Islamists took over. And the Islamists are rooted in Syria’s Sunni Arab population, which has been trying hard since the 1980s to unseat the Assad family. In the current situation, those who are not Sunni Arabs support the Assad regime, which has protected its minorities for almost half a century from radical Islamists.

  • Karim

    As a Syrian, I completely agree with what Rohrabacher said. I do not support Assad’s government, however I much rather have them rule my country than a government that is fueled by Radical Islam.