WASHINGTON — US House members want to use the annual Pentagon policy bill to alter the White House's program to train and equip Syrian rebels — or end it.
When the chamber debates its 2016 national defense authorization act (NDAA) later this week, members could face debates and votes on a number of Syria-themed amendments. So far, nearly 10 amendments seeking to recast the controversial program have been submitted for consideration by the Rules Committee.
Several Democratic amendments, which might not make it out of Rules, target the train-and-equip program's funding. And one, from GOP Rep. Curtis Clawson of Florida, does the same.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, told reporters Tuesday that he agrees with other members that "there's a lot of room to be reason to be skeptical about some of the claims on this."
"To pull the plug completely and say 'No, we're not going to do that,' kind of leaves you in the position of having to answer the question of, 'Okay, what are you going to do?'
"In the bigger scheme of things, helping the Iraqis get back on their feet and recover their sovereign territory is the critical next most important step," he said. "Now, that does not eliminate [the Islamic State] because they have [a presence] inside Syria.
"Can you develop a capability inside Syria?" Thornberry asked rhetorically in describing his bill's Syria provision. "And that is what this is meant to address. ... In the meantime, we can do what we can do. And what we can do, to the extent that they'll let us, is to help the Iraqis recover some of their military capability and get their country back in order."
Clawson's would strip authorization for $600 million to ready vetted Syrian rebels for conflict against Syrian government forces and the Islamic State group.
Rep. Rick Nolan, D-Minn., has several focused on the Syria program, including one that would prohibit any funds being devoted to the program. Another from Nolan would prohibit authorization to give funds to any "recipients that engage in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, unless the secretary of defense determines that the assistance will directly benefit the needy people in Iraq or Syria," according to a Rules Committee summary.
Another Nolan amendment would ban US dollars from going to anyone in Syria whom the Pentagon "has reported as having previously misused provided training and equipment or lost provided equipment."
Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wisc., is pushing an amendment that "no funds shall be used to deploy US ground troops to Syria with an exemption for rescuing US armed forces in imminent danger."
Not all of the Syria funding amendments would kill it or slap on restrictions.
One, offered by Thornberry, would require the Defense Department "to submit reprogrammings to be able to use funds from the Syria Train and Equip Fund to execute the Syria Train and Equip program."
The HASC chairman's proposed amendment also would mandate that the Pentagon "submit a comprehensive strategy for Syria and Iraq (and an update with the reprogramming requests) and requires the SECDEF to submit a certification on support provided to the trained Syria opposition."
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif., and Ranking Member Eliot Engel, D-Calif., have offered an amendment that would require from the executive branch "a report to assess the effectiveness and operational requirements of establishing a no-fly zone in Syria."
And House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is pushing an amendment that essentially is an authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) for the operation against the Islamic State group. But Thornberry has told reporters he does not believe the NDAA is the proper vehicle to pass such a sweeping measure.
On a budget-related matter, conservative deficit hawk Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., and liberal Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., want to mandate a comptroller general report on "how funds authorized for overseas contingency operations [OCO] were ultimately used."
The duo is reaching across the aisle in an effort to shrink the OCO fund, used to fund ongoing US military operations. The fund was inflated by GOP leaders from $50.9 billion to $89 billion to appease defense hawks.
Mulvaney and Van Hollen object to using "off-budget" funds not for items related to the wars to buy things typically purchased using base-budget funds.
The Rules Committee is slated to consider those and a slew of other proposed NDAA amendments Wednesday at 3 p.m. (EDT).
Email: jbennett@defensenews.com
Twitter: @bennettjohnt
