and assad. iran is fighting i.s.i.l. in iraq and supporting assad in syria. and now russia, a strong syrian ally during the cold war is back in the fight on the side of assad. we'll look at russia jumping into this fight with a report of al jazeera's jamie mcintire. >> ray, there last always been russian military presence in syria but in the last few weeks, the u.s. has been monitoring a steady influx of men and materiel. this week, it is saying that russia is building a forward air base in latakia in syria. you can't hide it, the number of cacargo and ships bringing supplies into syria. senator john mccain i says it is one more case when russia is out stepping the u.s. >> caution as weakness, taking advantage. according to media reports putin has deployed strike aircraft, t-90 tanks, howitzers, armed personnel carriers russian marines and housing for up to 1500 military personnel in bases in western syria. >> surveillance shows lots of construction, new runways being built, heli-pads a few helicopter gun ships but no strike aircraft yet. christine warmouth s

they believe that assad helps isis. that his reprehensible conduct against the syrian people using barrel bombs and worse, is a recruiting tool for isis. and that he was removed, transitioned at some point. it would be better in the fight against isis, al nusra and others. >> i can tell you this is an active measure by enemies of assad that is anti-syrian propaganda. there's nothing in common between assad and ice ill. they have nothing in common. they're fighting each other. assad and his army is indeed the only force fighting isil. >> rose: but there were reports earlier in the year that you were presented or you -- prepared or you seem to be pulling back your support from him and what you wanted to see was a negotiated political transition. >> we will we think issues of political nature in any can you tell country including sear jaw must be decided by the syrian people first of all. but we are ready to provide assistance to the official authorities in syria and to the rational opposition so they can find some common

bashar al-assad, they were cold war allies. when i was in syria, most people in the government spoke russian 15 years ago. they're not--this is a long relationship. and russians want to do is they want to help assad defeat the smaller but yet virulent groups that have turned near the cities on the west coast like al nusra that blockade the damascus where russian troops and munitions have gone. they blockade them from taking the larger city of aleppo. all those battles they've been fighting between assad and were the free syrian army, and now more al-qaeda-linked groups, they're fighting that to keep assad in power. that's a strategy that the u.s. does not agree with. >> okay. >> but it's still a strategy, and then they go after isil, which does not conflict with the coalition. they just have a different way of doing it. so you could say that some people would support the russian option, but then human rights record, the torture, the killing of his own people, that would sit badly for most people, but at this point the question

that russia will cooperate with getting rid of assad. that the not going to happen. >> not just stronger but stronger than us? >> not yet. but i think the point melissa made earlier which assumes importance because kerry said we wants to be sure russia is hitting isis or al-qaeda targets. i think russia is there to strengthen the assad regime. and i will make this prediction russia want to strengthen the baghdad government and assad and then declare a truce with isis so they can go on and declare other things. don't think these people are not cynical enough to do this. the russians know how to do this kind of thing. >> why are they better at this? this is like politics high grade. >> because vladimer putin cares unt one thing and one thing only: the interest of russia and restoring the power and respect that russia lost during the cold war. unlike our president that is all he cares about. but i think he has a vested interest in beating isis. but i agree it is not at the top of his list. power lust and other motives are at the top but i a

and president obama is calling for the end to assad's presidency, but the u.s. secretary of state john kerry says that the administration is now calling for what he describes as therderly managed transition. a while ago kerry responded to russia's growing involvement in syria, and whether it is committed to stamping out isis. >> if russia's recent actions and those now ongoing reflect a genuine commitment to defeat that organization, then we are prepared to welcome those efforts, and to find a way to deconflict the operation, and thereby multpy pli the military pressure on isil, and the affiliated groups, but we must not and will not be kon fconfus the fight against isil for the support of assad. and moreover, we have made it clear that we have grave concerns that russia should strike where isil and other affiliated groups are not operating. that type of attack would question russia's protection of isil and assad's regime. >> and so what were the air strikes today, and what are the implications. let's bring in elise labot, and former general mark hertling and co

we need a syria free of isil and assad. the point i am making, assad is one of the recruiting sergeants for isil. because of what he has done to his people, that is one of the reasons people are flocking to isil to fight foisil. so that method that some put forward wouldn't work. we need a syria free of both. >> do you believe president putin when he says that he is involved in syria because he wants to help take out isil? >> i think putin understands that islamist extremist terrorism is against russia's president just as america's interest or britain's interest. he knows that is a threat to him. he has been up to now willing to work with assad. we need to convince him that actually the only way you will have a syria free of isil is to have a replacement of assad. that's what we need these intensive talks and discussions about. meeting between obama and putin last night was important. but we need much more of that to try to build some sort of shared understanding. that's why i met the iranian president yesterday. >> prepare

he's propping up bashar al assad. he wants to protect his base there to make sure that is secure, and he doesn't care who he has to kill in order to do it. you just mentioned that we have reports of air attacks on homs where a number of men, women and children have been killed. >> we are playing some of that video right now as we speak. senator, i wanted to play the deputy national security advisor, ben rhodes, speaking at the atlantic conference today. because the white house and other officials at the state department are trying to downplay this russian move. let's watch. >> everybody's looking at putin as if this is some offensive maneuver. again, they've had basis in syria for a very long time. this is their principle state in the arab world. he's trying to prop them up. i think that's hardly someone in a strong position. >> is vladimir putin in a weak position as you've heard testimony from david petraeus saying he's broke, spending money on military engagements and he could be going to the banks for more money w

this is an area where the anti-assad, and anti-regime militias are battling the assad government, and this is going to go to what the pentagon was worried about and the u.s. had been worried about for days that the russian military buildup was aimed at the russians supporting assad and propping him up and keeping him in power and exactly what the obama administration did not want to see. but deeper than that even, the pentagon not very happy this morning. it was a couple of days of course, that president obama and president putin said that the two militaries would sit down and have talks, technical talks about how the deconflict the operations over syrian air space, and instead, a russian general essentially went and banged on the door of the u.s. embassy in baghdad and said, get out of syrian air space, because we are about to bomb, and that is the extent of the russian discussion of deacon flick shun, a -- deacon flick shun, and that is the point with russian airplanes still in the air. >> and the issue of de conflick shun, and let me skip over, because i have a lot more about this

israel and others support the regime of al-assad. the u.s. and france are bombing the jihadist and islamic state in syria and britain might join them. any diplomatic resolution would mean all those powers and others agreeing and finding a way to enforce their plan. the chances are not great. the exodus of syrian refugees towards europe is one factor that has put syria at the top of the have the diplomatic agenda. it cannot be ignored. the other factor is the continued rise of the jihadist and islamic state and the threat they represent in the middle east and further away. in a country that's being destroyed by war, the regime has learned to ignore pronouncements by britain and its friends about president assad's future. western powers have almost no influence on what happens inside syria because of anywhere reluctance over more than four years to get involved. but president putin of russia is different, looking eager to use his country's military might to restore its status as a major middle eastern power. he says his army is the only force f

putin wants to back assad. the president obviously sticking by his policy that assad has to go. there's no future for him. you cannot go to the status quo before the civil war which is now in its fifth year. as for the who, a question as to who was under those bombs dropped by 20 russian war planes. putin told the president obama that he wanted to fight against isil. but today secretary of defense ash carter said those bombs dropped where isil fighters are simply not known to be. as it happened, secretary of state john kerry was at the united nations and issued a stark warning. >> we have also made clear that we would have grave concerns should russia strike areas where isil and al quaeda affiliated targets are not operating. strikes of that kind would question russia's real intentions fighting isil or protecting the assad regime. >> and, mike, ash carter held what seemed to be a pretty long and detailed brief, reporters today as well. >> this gets to the when question and it really points out the friction now that exists between the u.s. and russia not only between the presiden

he called for a new alliance with assad to fight isis. he said it would be "an enormous mistake not to cooperate with the assad regime." which he said was valiantly fighting terrorism face to face. but the u.s. blames assad for alug isis to drive which is why he cannot be an effective partner. and scott, u.s. officials say today's meeting with putin was about judging whether he truly wants to fight isis or whether he is trying to keep assad in power. >> margaret brennan for us tonight. thank you. >> in an interview for "60 minutes," put spin told charlie rose russia's own security is at stake in syria. >> much has been read into this including this -- that this is a new effort for russia to take a leadership role in the middle east and that it represents a new strategy by you. is it? >> translator: not really, no. more than 2,000 fighters from russia and ex-soviet republics are in the territory of syria. there is a threat of their return to us. so instead of waiting for their return, we are better off helping assad fight them on syrian te

and bashar al-assad, but if they use it to strengthen assad is bad. are we -- is the united states just not being clear enough with the russians and with the world as to what they're trying to do there? >> right, i think there is this internal contradiction, in our policy. we simultaneously want two things. we want the assad regime to go and we want i.s.i.l. to be defeated. but as the russians point out, assad for all his faults and, you know, admittedly as general petraeus said, his existence does inspire some jihadis they are fighting i.s.i.l. that's essentially the russian he' point. we are banding together with everyone who is really serious about fighting i.s.i.l. in their minds it is syrians the iraqis and the iranians. >> even up to the setup of the two leaders, after the meetings, consume after the meeting reports say that it was split 50-50 between ukraine and syria. so is russia clearly setting the agenda? >> i think the russians have some advantage in setting the agenda. look, they're the ones who have made these moves and we're kind of pus

speak assad must go. the question is now what's the plan to get assad to go? >> the truth is the americans don't have a plan and what i think the russian moves over the last couple of weeks have shown is the extent to which the u.s. policy in syria is in tatters and has been for now for several years. there's been moments where the u.s. could have effectively intervened or imposed no-fly zones or imposed buffer zones or used coercion and force to stop president assad barrel bombing his own people. it didn't do any of those things and now the russians are taking that vacuum. i agree with mark at the moment. maybe the fact the russians have a plan here is better than the no plan that the americans have. and if it brings some amount of stability, there are flaws in it because assad is not fighting isis, he's fighting opponents to his regime, that's his priority. but i think some amount of stability in the region is better and may be the u.s. can use some influence on negotiating power with putin to say listen can you stop the barrel bombing of civilians. that mig

look at how they see assad. mr. putin said he's a bullwork against isis, he is what's standing between even a wider expansion of terror in that region. mr. obama says that he has to leave before the conflict in syria is settled. so you have them on two opposite sides. you hear vladimir putin say, he's critical to stability in the region. while president obama is calling him a tyrant. and meantime, the pressure is building because the european nations who have borne the brunt of what's happened here with the refugee crisis, they have suffered the most, obviously, outside of those who are being persecuted within syria and murdered within syria to come up with a solution and nobody thinks there's a quick solution and easy solution or as a matter of fact this is going to stop before hundreds of thousands if not more refugees continue to flee. >> one thing that's interesting, chris, both men spoke about democracy, even iran president's rowhani and expanding democracy and the perspectives it takes to do that. it seemed vl

two clark narratives, america says assad is a terrorist, the russians say assad is a force of stability, the syrian army is the most likely force to engage i.s.i.s, while the americans say there is no way. so how do you bridge this divide? how do you really basically bring about a compromise between the americans, who cannot even say that assad might stay because even if they believe it because there are some major consequences. and the russians are bent on challenging american power. not just in syria but in ukraine. the most important statement in the speech for president putin, he said we cannot accept an international system based on american hegemony, never. this tells me a great deal how he views the world. >> are the russians as committed to assad's permanent survival in syria as they perhaps were, have been in the past? is there some room to maneuver there? >> russia has been supporting assad for more than four years. without russian support assad would not have survived. now between assad and syria, whether you have 200 or 2,000, the fact is russia says we're here to stay, no o

they believe that assad helps isis. that his reprehensible conduct against the syrian people using barrel bombs and worse is a recruiting tool for isis. and that if he were removed, it would be better in the fight against isis and others. president putin: in the language of intelligence circles, this assessment is clearly an acted measure by enemies of assad. anti-syrian propaganda. nothing in common between assad and isil. assad and his army is the only force which is indeed fighting isil. charlie: there were reports you were prepared or you seem to be pulling back a degree from your support of him and that what you wanted to see was a negotiated political transition. president putin: we think issues of political nature in any country must be decided by the syrian people. we're ready to provide assistance so they can find some common points and agree upon the future of their country. that is why we organized a series of meetings between the representatives of the opposition and assad's government. we are ready to work

he's coming in to help assad, as is obama. we want first and foremost isis and coiled to get 911 kill and would destroyed and anybody that's up for doing that, i'm with. the guy i don't understand is the president of the united states. the we -- why we -- if we can't make up our mind who our enemy is? eleanor: i don't know about that. it is so factionalized over there and i don't see that sending in troops are going to be the answer. they are conducting air strikes and the more the merrier if these other countries are going to come in and battle against isis but i do think there's a diplomatic solution here and i do think it's at odds with what putin is doing. it may keep assad in power or there may be a place holder in his -- but this is going to take time and in the meantime you're going to have a lot of this human misery and that's what we have to step up to. tom: you have two sides of the same coin. iran is not an ally to our cause. the united states needs to be in the middle of that. this said, i do think there is the pot

in do course, almost certainly assad will have to go. the question is whether it's a negotiated settlement that leaves allies in place in damascus or an all or nothing deal which isn't working at the moment. >> given sanctions enforced on russia because of actions in ukraine, what kind of credibility does putin command on the world stage today when he makes his speech to the u.n. general assembly? >> in many ways, not much. we've seen russia being isolated, see recent opinion polls showing that actually putin's personal standing and russia's standing. on the other hand, what russia has done effectively is present himself as in some ways the anti washington. if you have any qualms about the current world he status quo, if you feel at times america does overreach particularly in the middle east where chaos has followed, putin is your man, the guy willing to stand up to america. you don't have to like him but at least for some countries, they're glad. >> he comes off as a guy getting stuff done and should americans be glad or be concerned t

this is an area where anti-assad, anti-regime militias have been fighting the assad government. this, by all indications, is a military strike to prop up the assad regime. but that may be the least of it right now. one u.s. official is saying to me a short time ago this is not how militaries in this day and age conduct relations. one general banging on the door of the u.s. embassy in baghdad and saying "don't fly your planes." right now what the russians have done is create an exquisite military problem for u.s. pilots. what has to happen now, officials say, there are going to have to be so-called rules of engagement. if u.s. pilots flying in syrian airspace, and they will continue to fly, if they encounter russian aircraft, what are the rules of the road? if they feel threatened, even inadvertently, let's say the russians are making the mistake, they don't understand it's a u.s. aircraft, what are the rules of the road for u.s. military pilots encountering russian aircraft? do they have the right of self-defense? can they counterattack against the russians if they feel a threat

we need a syria free of isil and assad. the point i am making, assad is one of the recruiting sergeants for isil. because of what he has done to his people, that is one of the reasons people are flocking to isil to fight for isil. so that method that some put forward wouldn't work. we need a syria free of both. >> do you believe president putin when he says that he is involved in syria because he wants to help take out isil? >> i think putin understands that islamist extremist terrorism is against russia's president just as america's interest or britain's interest. he knows that is a threat to him. he has been up to now willing to work with assad. we need to convince him that actually the only way you will have a syria free of isil is to have a replacement of assad. that's what we need these intensive talks and discussions about. meeting between obama and putin last night was important. but we need much more of that to try to build some sort of shared understanding. that's why i met the iranian president yesterday. >> prepa

president putin believes assad is the key to fighting isis where president obama would like to see assad go as quickly as possible. so those are two headlines out of the briefing. this is undoubtly an escalation in terms of russia's military engagement. the administration underscoring the point that russia has been slowly building up its military engagement in syria. and what we are seeing today is a ramping up of that effort. the u.s., by the way, in its coalition partners, some 65 countries have also launched a series of air strikes in syria and in iraq as they try to defeat and destroy and dismantle isis. brian? >> kristen welliker at the whit house. let's go to michael mcfall now. i found it interesting that josh earnest said that russia will not be able to achieve a military solution in syria. and he cited as part of his argument, the fact that the u.s. was unable to achieve a military solution in iraq. >> and i think that was interesting that he used that analogy. and i would also say that so far our ability, the coalition, to achieve a military outcome, a successful military outco

today you have repeatedly said that assad is fighting against his own population. but look at those who are in control of 60% of the territory in syria. it's controlled by either isis or by others. such as al neusra and terrorist organizations recognized as terrorist organizations by the united states and by other states and by the united nations. >> are you prepared to put russian combat troops on the ground in syria if it is necessary to defeat isis? >> translator: russia will not participate in any troop operations in the territory of syria or in any other states. well at least we deon't plan on it right now. but we are kconsidering intensifying our work with president assad and with our partners in other countries. >> i come back to the problem that many people look at and they believe that assad helps isis. that his reprehensible conduct against the syrian people using barrel bombs and worse, is a recruiting tool for isis. and that he was removed, transitioned, at some point, it would be better in the fight against isis, al nusra and others. >> translator: wel

president barack obama softening his tone toward the assad regime and possibly considering that assad might be able this day in power if the war in syria ends? subject toes are not statute of limitations. these are the most serious crimes in the world. these are not going to go away. there will be accountability for these crimes one day in one place or another, be it france or the icc or another local court, but there will be justice and these allocations -- allegations won't just go away. laura: thank you for joining us. the u.n. headquarters in new york is flying the palestinian flag for the first time. it is a symbolic gesture of support for the palestinians who have nonmember observer status at the organization. president mahmoud abbas spoke at the ceremony earlier. abbas: on this historic moment in the struggle of the palestinian people towards freedom and independence, i say to my people everywhere, raise the palestinian flag high, because it is the symbol of our identity. reporterrance 24's" told us what the flag flying means palestinians. reporter: proud day today for the pale

assad is the glue holding syria together. that is the that is the iranian national security adviser's line to me word for word. it is sergey lavrov's line word for word. >> does it mean that it's automatically wrong? >> no, but our analysis is that this is one-sided story. of course assad plays a role in the regime's structure. >> but if it's shared by the people who gave us evidence yesterday. and i would invite you to look at the evidence we took yesterday. >> the committee will take evidence from experts, and it should, of course, do so. but now you're asking me for my opinion and british government's position, and i'm giving you our political judgment that we cannot work with assad in anything other than the very short term of a transition. now we've indicated to the russians and the iranians that if there is a sensible plan for transition that involves assad remaining in some way involved in the process for a period of time we will look at that, and we will discuss it. we are not saying he must go on day one categoricall

who can replace assad? right now there is nobody on the horizon that anybody can agree on. >> former ambassador, appreciate you both joining us. up next, top republican lawmaker seems to admit that investigating hillary clinton over benghazi is politically motivat motivated. was this an honest admission or big mistake? (wind noise) (road noise) what's happening here... is not normal, it's extraordinary. 291 people, 350 tons, 186 miles per hour... you're not sure what's on the other side to that time after you land. but momentum pushes you forward. you are a test pilot, breaking through where others broke. this is why you take off. same reason the pioneers before you went in canoes and covered wagons, with wild eyes and big fevered dreams and it's why we're with you. 80 thousand people now... on the ground. in the air. engines on. because there is no stop in us. or you. only go. hhe's psyched. ready for the knockout? you don't know "aarp." he's staying in shape by keeping his brain healthy and focused with a

nothing in common between assad and isil. assad and his army is the only force which is indeed fighting isil. president putin: there were reports -- charlie: there were reports you were prepared or you seem to be pulling back a degree from your support of him and that what you wanted to see was a negotiated political transition. we think issues of political nature in any country must be decided by the syrian people. provideeady to assistance of they can find some common points and agree upon the future of their country. that is why we organized a series of meetings between the representatives of the ssad'stion and a government. we are ready to work in this direction in the future. charlie: here is what the washington post said today. into the vacuum of american leadership has stepped russian president vladimir putin who has dispatched troops and equipment to syria to force the world to accept his solution to the war, the creation of a new coalition to fight the islamic state, that includes in the coalition the aside governmen

assad is a different assad entirely. the statement now "assad must go" is interested. he is much weaker in 2012 -- he is much weaker than in 2012. a political opening has been available since at least last year when the iranians came to the americans and said they would like to push beyond the geneva talks for a serious regional discussion about setting matters, at least in the western part of syria. i think that is what mr. putin is repeating, the idea that the state structure in syria must not be destroyed but at the same time, a reasonable process of transition has to be worked out by all the powers in the area. amy: during his address to the u.n. general assembly, president obama said the coalition could have done more following the 2011 invasion of libya. let's go to a clip. >> were order has completely , but wewn, we must act will be stronger when we act together. it such efforts, the united states will always do our part. we will do so mindful of the lessons of the past, not just the lessons of iraq, but also the example of libya where we joined an international

isil and join with president assad and deal with that enemy. the other side, which is the u.s. and western nations say no, isil is only there because which president assad, he created the conditions that put isil in place. there is now some discussion, though, among some european countries about political transition, the way forward and perhaps whether assad could have a role certainly in the transition phase and then move to some sort of ceremonial role. some countries agree with that idea. what's the view of the european union. i asked the high representative. >> i think it would be impossible to imagine for the future as many are saying be a a role for assad, but it's also true that over owe the point is how do we start the change in government? how do we make sure that we manage to unite forces within syria and outside syria against daish? that is the question mark. >> is there any consensus other than that view? ok, so we've got people disagreeing about whether assad should stay or should go, but about this political transition that you we

where does bashar assad go? you had the secretary general of the united nations announcing today he wants to refer what happened in syria to the international court of justice, international criminal court. >> great, in 20 years we'll get some sort of answer? >> if you listen to geraldo, you partner with assad, destroy isis and then turn around and destroy who you just partnered with, and then bear the brunt of iran and russia who is just partnering with assad also. here's a better idea. let them beat the living dal daylights out of each other in syria. knock yourself out. i'm sorry about the refugee crisis. make it stay in syria, geraldo. push them out of iraq the way you can with the kurds and the iraqi forces. get them the hell out of iraq. >> a better idea. russia and the today, form the two biggest armies in the world, they create a save haven. i don't care who you are. if you're syrian, you stay in syria. i'll give you jobs, and then you fight isis outside the safe haven where you worked with the russians

support assad. i think the obama administration's argument is that -- is that isis is so awful that he has contributed to the rise of isis. and, you know, the trouble with -- the real trouble i think is that both might be right. in other words, that both arguments have a degree of validity, which -- and what that implies is that whether assad goes or stays, isis is going to be a problem. and that's the situation i think that we're really stuck in, that, you know, it's -- you know, we can argue about how to deal with the syrian situation, but the real bottom line is that neither we nor the russians really have an adequate response to this, that it's gotten -- it's gotten out of hand. and sort of whatever way we go, it's going to remain a problem. >> thank you. >> let's give our panelists each one minute to summarize what they would like to summarize on the issue. but one minute. and please then the chairman with his prerogative will have a final statement as well. >> yes. one minute is enough. i thin

he said isis is directly a result of bashar al-assad, a creation of bashar al-assad, this coming against a backdrop of the russians warning the united states to get out of that area and keep military flights out of that area. tense times in the middle east. >>> let's talk about leadership and what is happening overseas. benjamin collins is here. we will talk about afghanistan, but in the immediate, what is your reaction to what mccain had to say? >> he is right. we gave up the leadership positions in the middle east and leadership hates vacuums and someone stepped in and it happened to be putin. when you have a triad of countries like syria with assad and the ayatollahs in iran and russia that are are coming together and putin reached out to saudi arabia to create some ties there it is alarming. any influence we had five or six years ago evapated. >> as a veteran and someone that served the country how does that feel? >> it is myopic. you have to have a long view of this. i think putin is playing chess in that region and president obama is playing checkers. we are looking at -- we forgot

it's not just because we object to assad. it's because we believe that you can never have stability in that country with assad there. he's been a magnet for isil. a magnet for jihadists around the world. we're going to make clear to the russians and the iranians that we will engage in diplomacy in pursuant of a transition in syria, but part of the diplomacy has to involve assad leaving power. it's not just going to be our position. that's been the position of our key partners in the region, whether you're talking about the gulf states, turkey, jordan and others. >> the impression is that the u.s. is scrambling. there were unscheduled meetings hastily convened this morning, and another meeting between secretary kerry and the foreign minister from russia this morning. we were not aware that baghdad was going to be part of the intelligence sharing. russia has created the illusion, perhaps, of a new coalition including baghdad, to deal with this situation in syria that does not include us. it really is challenging american influe

, we're with assad. we're going to help bolster this up. and by the way, the united states said, we got your message, we don't want us to fly. we can continue to fly our missions but there can be natural deconfliction so the u.s. and russian aircraft aren't going to -- >> everybody is using this word "deconfliction". this is not deconfliction. this is russia trying to ground the u.s. it's creating this new reality on the ground which is basically not to go after bashar al assad. and let's be fair. i don't think this u.s. wants assad to fall right away. they are definitely concerned that there is some element of the russian military that will go against the opposition, but if they're there to make sure the syrian regime doesn't fall and there's not a vacuum, i don't think that's really at otds with what they're looking at. and that's in effect what secretary kerry told me yesterday in an interview i did with him. he said, yes, we are concerned about their intentions on the ground, but there is actually an

today you have repeatedly said that assad is fighting against his own population. but look at those who are in control of 60% of the territory in syria. it's controlled by either isis or by others. such as al nusra and terrorist organizations recognized as terrorist organizations by the united states and by other nations. >> are you prepared to put russian combat troops on the ground in syria if it is necessary to defeat isis? >> translator: russia will not participate in any troop operations in the territory of syria or in any other states. well at least we don't plan on it right now. but we are considering intensifying our work with president assad and with our partners in other countries. >> i come back to the problem that many people look at and they believe that assad helps isis. that his reprehensible conduct against the syrian people using barrel bombs and worse, is a and that he was removed, transitioned, at some point, it would be better in the fight against isis, al nusra and others. >> translator: well speaking in a professional language of intelligence

a strategy that ignores assad -- for example, trains -- to go into syria to only fight isil but not assad i think -- i think we now need to recognize that's not a logical strategy. part of good strategic thinking is you modify your strategy according to the changed circumstances. the circumstances are, you mentioned he's losing his capabilities every day, i'm sorry, general. i have been hearing that at every hearing since 2013. assad is about to go. he's about to collapse. i know you didn't say that today, but we've got to find a strategy that allows us to move assad aside in some way working with the russians, if necessary, or the iranians, if necessary, because he's the irritant that's keeping this thing stirred up. finally, in terms of our troops, the fundamental problem seems to me is, we are not going to defeat isis with just airpower, everybody knows that. we are trying to rely on a weak force in iraq and no force in syria. how do we refine this strategy, general, and you know that -- in order to root them out of mostle or iraq or any place else, you have to have troops on the groun

is it about supporting assad and how do they want assad to engage in the fight against isis? those are real questions as to whether he had been successful in that or intends his force to simply resist anybody that wants to look around. >> for sure. coming up on "cbs this morning," we reveal the forbes 400 list of america's wealthiest individuals. they have the biggest >>> the new film "the martian" was made with the help of nasa. but there is identify r evidence of flowing water on the red planet. you are watching "cbs this morning." queso dip ♪ ♪ haven't been this lost in years ♪ (gps) ♪ recalculating shortest route ♪ ♪ do i really look like this? ♪ ♪ never seen this one before ♪ chicken parm you taste so good ♪ i like it. ♪ mmm mmm mmm mm mmm mm mmmmmm wheall i can think abouthit, is getting relief. only nicorette mini has a patented fast-dissolving formula. it starts to relieve sudden cravings fast. i never know when i'll need relief. that's why i only choose nicorette mini. with roc® multi correxion® 5 in 1. proven to hydrate dryness, illuminate du

the big sticking point is what will happen with assad? obama is digging in his heels that assad has to go and putin saying no, he has to stay. >> reporter: we don't really know from the speech to what extent president obama is digging his heels in. he said, i'm paraphrasing, things cannot go back to the way they were before. he didn't specify what they would go to. you are right. there is a major disagreement between the two countries on what should happen to assad. vladimir putin backs him to the hilt. he has seen as a guarantee of russian influence in syria. i think it is a mistake to think vladimir putin in some way married to the idea that only bashar al assad can lead syria in the future. he wants the guarantee russian interests. if it is assad, fine, but it could be somebody else as well. >> a meeting leading to some progress. matthew, thank you. >>> afghan security forces trying to recapture a northern city that fell to the taliban one day ago. the fall of the city of kandu is a critical blow to the afghan government. i want to bri

it is likely assad will stay. this is what the president of iran told me when i sat down with him about whether or not they have formally been invited to the talks on syria. >> translator: now, iran with the united states does not have any direct talk s vis-a-vis syria, but with the european union, as well as other countries, does have talks regarding syria. those parties to the talks with iran about syria are in direct conversations with the united states, as well. so perhaps not direct, but there are talks. >> it seems to be that the united states, the united kingdom, russia obviously, iran obviously, are now all talking about a potential transition that involves president assad staying where he is for the moment. >> translator: i think today, everyone has accepted that president assad must remain so that we can combat the terrorists. however, as soon as this movement reaches the various levels of success and starts driving out the terrorists on a step by step basis, then other plans must be put into action. so

or the bashar al-assad forces, or both? >> well, we are saying that we are going to hit terrorists. >> who are the terrorists? >> well, in the recent view, vladimir putin says he doesn't know about the decision, and the role of terrorists. but it could be approach also the - bashar al-assad opposition forces too, especially would be easy to attack, at least idea logically the al nusra front, since it's affiliated with al qaeda, and the opposition is more of a direct threat to the bashar al-assad regime, forcing us than i.s.i.s. >> to clarify. they'll target bashar al-assad forces and i.s.i.l. if there are going to be air strikes against i.s.i.l., will russia coordinate with the u.s. and the coalition partners who have been lunching air strikes against i.s.i.l. >> yes, the fact that there'll be coordination not to bump each other in the skies. russia could concentrate in the palmyra region where i.s.i.s. forces are actually standing against bashar al-assad people. that would be most likely where we'll con sen trait. and be a

now, the russian military has taken positions to bolster president assad. the united states has accused russia of carrying out airstrikes with her was no islamic state fighters. moscow dismissed claims of civilian casualties. the u.s. secretary of state issued a warning to russia. not, best not, and will confused in our fight against assad.th support for moreover, we have made clear that we would have grave concerns should russia strike areas where russia and al qaeda affiliated targets are not operating. questionf that kind russia's real intentions fighting iso-or protecting the assad regime. steven: if this is part of international action against isil and the appalling terrorist isis, it is good. if it is against the free syrian army and for assad, the dictator, that is a retrograde step. that is what has happened. steven: then try to isolate president putin and russia over the conflict in ukraine. airstrikes in syria means america needs to find a way to cooperate with moscow. recognized russia as a global power. they will not put troops on the ground in

when he drew the red line against assad, assad crossed it. assad will be standing when obama leaves. that set in motion bad behavior by iran, by china and by russia. the only way to reset the table is to get a new president, and whatever i can do to give leverage to that new president if i'm not the new president i will do between now and january, 2017. >> would that include the c.r.? would you be willing to risk a government shutdown to implement this plan? senator graham: if my colleagues insist we give money to the iaea without looking at the deal, that would be their decision to make. i will advocate to my leadership that the congress should not buy into this concept. there have been other occasions where the iaea shared agreements with the congress. this is a moment of testing for the congress. this should be something that's bipartisan in nature. to have something this important to the nuclear ambitions of the iranians not understood by the american people is an affront to the congress. i cannot believe that my colleagues are going to a

wants syrian president bashar al-assad to be replaced, but russia supports assad, recently began re-arming his troops, and deploying fighter jets and helicopters to a syrian base yesterday. in london today, after conferring with britain's foreign minister, secretary of state john kerry called on russia and iran and any other countries with influence over syria to push for negotiations. >> we're prepared to negotiate, is assad prepared to negotiate? really negotiate? is russia prepared to bring him to the table and actually find the solution to this violence? >> sreenivasan: because the u.s. also has a military presence in the region, the u.s. and russian defense secretaries have begun talking to avoid a direct conflict between u.s. and russian forces. for a year, the u.s. has launched airstrikes on islamic state, or isis, militants inside syria." new york times" correspondent michael gordon is traveling with secretary kerry. he joins me now via skype, from london. there's been an escalation of military activity from russia into syria. what does the u.s. plan to do about it? >> well, basica