BACKGROUND PRESS CALL
BY SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS
ON DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTHERN SYRIA
Via Teleconference
5:01 P.M. EDT
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Hi, this is [senior administration official]. I hope everyone is doing well today. There have been -- there’s been a lot of news regarding the call with President Erdoğan yesterday, and U.S. plans for Syria.
What I thought I would do is just make a couple of quick comments and then open up for questions.
Number one, Turkey appears to be set on undertaking an operation in Northern Syria. That’s something that the U.S. has been able to dissuade the Turks from doing for the past two years, but it appears that the Turks are intent on some sort of military operation, possibly combined with an effort to resettle refugees.
The President has made it very clear, publicly and privately, that the United States does not endorse or support any Turkish operation in Northern Syria. There will be no U.S. Armed Forces involvement or support of any operation that the Turks undertake. We also made it clear that if Turkey undertakes such an operation, that U.S. troops cannot be put into any danger.
The President, after learning of the intended Turkish operation -- although we have not seen any operation taking place as of now -- made it clear, and rightly made it clear as Commander-in-Chief, that our small number of troops in the relatively small 20- to 30-mile safety zone or border region in Northern Syria should not be danger. We have a small number -- you know, 50 to 100 special operators -- in the region, and they should not be put at risk of injury, death, or capture in the event that the Turks do come over the border and engage in a -- in combat with the local Kurdish forces.
So, as Commander-in-Chief, it was his obligation to remove that small number of troops who are there. There has been no announcement at present, and this does not constitute a withdraw from Syria. We’re talking about a small number of troops that will move to other bases within Syria.
That orderly withdrawal is taking place now, again, based on the information we have that the Turks are seriously considering or intend on a military operation in the region. And again, we’re not going to put our soldiers, sailors, airmen, or Marines at risk. But it’s a relatively small number of our troops, and they will be moving to more secure areas over the next several days.
There is certainly a concern -- and it’s a concern that the President has made clear to the Turks -- that such an operation could result in ISIS fighters, that were captured as a result of the United States defeat of the physical or territorial caliphate, being at risk of escape or somehow obtaining their freedom from those camps that are within the safety zone.
The President has made it very clear the United States position is, is that if Turkey does undertake an operation across the border, that it will become responsible for maintaining the captivity of those ISIS fighters. The United States also made it clear that if there’s any sort of a reconstitution of ISIS or any sort of ISIS activity in the zone of operations, that the Turks would bear full responsibility for dealing with that -- you know, the potential for such a reoccurrence of violence on the part of ISIS.
Also, Turkey would bear full responsibility for any humanitarian issues or injuries to the civilians in the region and would be -- as a military power engaged in offensive activities, would need to make sure that they did everything they could to protect the local populations.
With respect to the ISIS fighters, many of them are foreign fighters who are currently captive or prisoners, whether in the safety zone or in other camps around Syria. Some of those -- or many of those foreign fighters originated in Europe. The President has made it very clear in his conversations with European leaders and with -- and we’ve made it clear in our conversations with European capitals, that they -- the Turks, the Syrians, the Iraqis -- are responsible for the continued captivity of these ISIS terrorist fighters.
These fighters and their families are, under no circumstances, coming to the United States of America. And it’s been suggested by various players that we should make room for them at Guantanamo or some other place, but the President has said absolutely not. The U.S. taxpayer is not going to be responsible for the incarceration or detention of these ISIS fighters in the U.S. or on any U.S. base.
So with those thoughts, I'm going to open up to some questions.
There was a headline in the New York Times today that the President endorsed the Turkish operation in Northern Syria. There's nothing -- that could not be farther from the truth. That headline -- and the headline may have been written by somebody who did not write the article, but we made it very clear that we, in fact, did not endorse and do not endorse any Turkish operation in Northern Syria.
And at least at this time, there is not -- removal of the 50 to 100 U.S. soldiers from the safety zone where the Turks may incur is not the beginning of a formal pullout of Syria. Although -- look, the President has said this on numerous occasions, and the American people want American troops as soon as possible. And that remains our ultimate goal, is to get American troops from the Middle East and to let the parties in the region determine their own future. But this is not the time for any such move right now. We're moving 50 troops within Syria.
With that, I'll open up to any questions. And again, thank you all for being on the line.
Q Hi, it's Steve Herman from the Voice of America. As you've seen, there's been widespread concern and alarm from leading Republicans, as well as key Democratic lawmakers, about this essentially giving a green light to Turkey to massacre the Kurds, allies of the United States in the fight against ISIS.
We heard what you said about the assurances of what would happen to Turkey if they step over the line, but can you tell us how the United States is in a position to actually prevent a wholesale massacre of the Kurds from happening?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, listen, we have 50 special operators and Special Forces troops in the zone of operation. So, you know, the fact that we're removing them is, number one, not a green light. In fact, we've made it very clear to the Turks that we do not endorse the operation, we don’t support the operation, and we're not going to be involved in the operation.
So, for anyone to characterize the fact that the President is taking care to make sure that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines are safe as somehow being a green light for a massacre is irresponsible and doesn’t comport with the reality of the situation.
So, look, Turkey is a large country. It's got a big military. And if the Turks are going to -- and they're a NATO ally. So, you know, the United States is not in a position to -- and will not be in a position to fight Turkey over, you know, any actions that it takes with respect to Syria. So there's no green light. We're protecting our troops. And we've made it very clear, and the President has made it very clear, that, you know, there should be no untoward action with respect to the Kurds or anyone else. I mean, he also sent out a tweet today saying that if there is some sort of attack or massacre of the Kurdish people, that he is prepared, I think in his words he said, to "obliterate the Economy of Turkey."
So, you know, I think the United States has made its position on this issue clear. But the President's first priority and first obligation, if the Turks are going to move in, is to ensure the safety of our troops in the area. And those 50 troops will be redeployed within Syria to a place where they're not in danger of being caught in a crossfire.
Q This is Andrew Feinberg with Breakfast Media. Thanks for doing the call. I have two questions. The first is: Did the President ask for anything in return for us moving our troops away from this area? Or was he promised anything in return?
And the second question is: What happens when -- if and when Turkish forces come in and massacre our former allies, as the previous question suggested? We have obligations under the U.N. Convention to Prevent Genocide. Are we going to fulfill those obligations, or are we not going to if it happens because Turkey is a NATO ally?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay. Well, I've already answered the second question. And so, I guess you're presuming that Turkey is going to commit genocide against the Kurds. I mean, I don’t have any information that would suggest that. But the President has made it very clear. Again, I'll say it again, and, you know, the President made this clear in a tweet that he would "obliterate the economy of Turkey" if something of that nature occurs. So I think we've been very clear on that issue.
And with respect to the first question, I'm not going to get into the details of the call, but we were not asked to remove our troops. The President, when he learned of the potential Turkish invasion -- knowing that we have 50 special operations troops in the region and in the zone of operations -- made the decision to protect those troops and keep them out of a crossfire between, you know, look, heavily armed Kurdish forces, as well as heavily armed Turkish forces.
The last place we need is for light infantry special operators to be caught in between the engagements that could potentially occur in the region. So he made the decision. We weren’t asked to remove troops. The President made the decision on his own to remove the troops for their own safety from that zone of operations.
Q Hi, it's Demetri Sevastopulo of the Financial Times. I have two questions. Did President Trump specifically tell President Erdoğan not to go ahead with the incursion? And did he also personally tell him that Turkey would face economic obliteration if the Kurds were hurt?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So the President's tweet speaks for itself. So, you can take a look at that on your Twitter feed and on the --
With respect to the first question: The President made it very clear that this is not an action that the United States endorses or would any way be involved with. And I think there was a Defense Department statement out, as well, today that made it clear that our senior defense leaders explain to their Turkish counterparts what a very bad idea this was.
Q Hello, this is Toby Capion calling from EWTN. What protection remains for Christians and other vulnerable people in the area?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I don’t think there has been a President, certainly in my lifetime, that has been more attuned to the issue of religious freedom, especially religious freedom in the Middle East, than President Trump has been.
President Trump and Ambassador Brownback and Vice President Pence hosted a ministerial, at the recent U.N. General Assembly, on religious freedom, specifically focusing on, among other persecuted -- people persecuted for their religious beliefs, Christians in the Middle East. And so, it's an area of strong concern to us and it's an issue that we continue to track and monitor extraordinarily carefully.
The mission of the 50 Special Forces soldiers in the zone -- the 20-some-mile zone along the Turkish border -- was not to protect religious minorities or religious facilities; it was to create a zone of safety to satisfy the Turks with respect to their concerns regarding the PKK. So those soldiers were not there protecting any sort of Christian village or Christian minority.
Having said that, the United States has made it very clear its position on religious freedom in the Middle East -- in Syria, in Iraq, and other places. We've spent a lot of money. We've spent a lot of diplomatic efforts to ensure the protection of Christians there. Secretary Pompeo was just at the Vatican and there was an issue that was raised where -- the issue of religious freedom by Christians in the Middle East was something that was raised with the Pope as well. So it's an area where, I think, this administration has a tremendous record of support for religious freedom for Christians in the Middle East.
Q Hi, thanks so much for doing this. You said earlier that President Trump, quote, "made the decision on his own." We're receiving reports from Fox News that top leaders at the Pentagon were blindsided by this decision. So I'm wondering who did the President consult and who agreed with them that this was the right move? Thanks very much.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: And who asked that question? I'm sorry, I didn’t get your name.
Q Oh, sorry, my name is Hunter Walker with Yahoo! News. Sorry about that.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: All right. Thanks, Hunter. So I don’t know who would be blindsided at the Pentagon. That surprises me that anyone would say that because this is something that was, you know, discussed among senior leadership here at the White House, the State Department, and the Pentagon. Do I don't know how anyone could have been blindsided. So I don't know how to respond to that. That's just a surprising question.
I'm not going to get into each and every one of the people that the President discussed these issues with, but he discussed them with his senior advisors in the defense, diplomatic, and folks here and staff here at the White House. So I'm surprised that anyone would be blindsided.
Now, it's certainly an issue that there are folks that may not have a need to know what is going on with their senior leadership and the President, and decisions that are going to be made for national security. And so sometimes people that don’t have a need to know or that aren’t part of the decision chain may be a little disappointed because they weren’t part of it, and may call up friends in the press and tell them that they're blindsided or that they should have been involved. But those are -- look, I can't -- that's not something I can help those folks (inaudible).
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: All right, thanks again everyone for joining the call today. As a reminder, this was on background, attributed to a senior administration official. Thanks.
END 5:20 P.M. EDT
No comments:
Post a Comment