State Department officials testified in front of a congressional committee on Wednesday, where they summarized how the administration intends to achieve a political solution in Syria.
Well received, it was not.
Testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Anne Patterson, the department’s Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs reiterated the administration’s desired endgame: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must cede power to a transitional government that in turn will draft a new constitution and set up elections. She claimed the new government would be comprised of “a number of opposition figures” already on the ground.
“What in the world makes us think that Russia would agree with that?” replied an incredulous Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), noting Russia’s recently-launched bombing campaign in Syria, in support of the Assad government.
Victoria Nuland, a top State Department’s top envoy on Eastern European affairs, responded that the Russians have agreed to a “general framework.”
Recapping discussions in Vienna last month between the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, Nuland claimed that all parties acknowledged: “we need a ceasefire, we need a transitional government, we need elections.”
“The area of dispute is at what stage in that process Assad departs the scene,” she said.
“Well I must say,” Rep. Connolly responded, “given what’s happening on the ground, that sounds like fantasy to me.”
Republican committee member, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) also reacted skeptically to the State Department’s oulook for Assad.
“More than four years ago this administration called for regime change,” Issa stated, claiming that the White House has done very little since to make a transition actually happen. “Isn’t it time we figure out what is possible in a Syria that allows the millions of Syrian Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, Christians, to return to their country?” Issa asked.
“We don’t believe it’s possible to have any sort of settlement, either a political settlement or military defeat of ISIL without the departure of Assad,” Patterson responded. “These two issues now are inextricably linked.”
Patterson also claimed during the proceedings that Assad’s ouster would ideally be surgical.
“It would be key that Syria’s institutions—the military, intelligence, police, civil service—will remain intact so you wouldn’t’ have a total collapse in state authority,” Patterson said. “The idea is just to remove Bashar Assad and his cronies from power.”
In defense of its long-time ally in Damascus, Russia commenced at the end of September a bombing campaign over Syria, targeting various rebel factions, including—according to US officials—groups aligned with the United States.
Moscow, however has sent mixed signals regarding how they view Assad’s future.
When asked on a radio show Tuesday if they believe Assad must remain in charge after the war, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said “absolutely not.”
The country’s Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov told Russian news outlets that same day that plans are underway to host a new round of peace talks next week with members of both the Syrian government and opposition groups.
