House Committee on Foreign Affairs debates U.S. leverage over Syria after Caesar Act repeal

During a House Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing, lawmakers and witnesses discussed how the United States can maintain pressure on Syria after the Caesar Act’s repeal, focusing on the potential role of a state-sponsor-of-terrorism designation and the need to implement a recent January agreement.

Speaker 1 (unidentified) opened the exchange by recounting prior negotiations to update Caesar-era sanctions and noting that "the Caesar Act was repealed as part of last year's NDAA." He asked whether the compromise struck in those negotiations would allow an interim Syrian government to expand its economy while keeping pressure if benchmarks are missed.

Speaker 2 (unidentified) responded that lifting the Caesar sanctions was “the rational thing to do” under current circumstances but added that other parts of the original Caesar package remain important "levers" over Syrian behavior. He urged that if agreed benchmarks are not met, Congress and the administration should consider revisiting sanctions: "if those benchmarks are not met, it is worth revisiting them." Speaker 2 also described a state-sponsor designation as "tremendous leverage" and emphasized rapid implementation of an agreement referenced as occurring around Jan. 29–30, saying that timely enforcement is critical for minority protections and for areas where U.S. forces are present.

Speaker 1 raised concerns about the Syrian leader referred to in the transcript as 'al Sharad,' noting his outreach to Washington and reported visits to the White House while also growing closer to Russia and having "past terrorist ties." Speaker 1 asked Speaker 3 (unidentified) whether he viewed that leader as an honest broker.

Speaker 3 said he was "wary" but recounted prior cooperation during the first Trump administration in efforts to defeat ISIS, remove Iranian influence and pursue a reconciled Syria. He described operations in Idlib and credited those efforts with helping to prevent the outward migration of roughly "3,000,000 internally displaced people who would have destabilized Turkey." He added that while the Syrian leader "did some bad things," he had been someone U.S. officials "were able to work with," and he urged observers to "see what happens next" with implementation of the January agreement.

When asked what a security agreement would mean for Israel and the region, Speaker 3 said it could "stabilize" Damascus-Israel relations and likely reduce Israeli military operations inside Syria. He framed Israel’s core interest as preventing an Iranian proxy on its northern border and warned that Iran could increase influence "if the country starts falling apart." He emphasized that protecting minorities is important to prevent new alignments.

No formal votes, motions or binding decisions are recorded in the supplied transcript. The most recent procedural step discussed was the need to implement the January agreement and the assertion by Speaker 2 that both the administration and Capitol Hill "are prepared to" enforce it if necessary.

The hearing continued after this exchange; no further outcomes were recorded in the provided segments.