madam president, the success of any political path in syria requires that the government of syria be an integral part and party and, therefore, there must be cooperation with the syrian government in all aspects of this path, if we want success. in parallel, the success of the political path requires an international commitment and sincere and real political will from all, notably those countries that have direct influence on the parties that undermine the political path, and those that provide them with a lifeline while the international community emphasizes there is only one solution, and that is the political solution. it or those who do it responsibly at the end repeat without any accountability that they resolve military solution and give names to its failed, to its failed initiatives. such names as the stones, volcanoes, the cyclones and the tornadoes. it has become quite clear that the success of the political process is predicated on a serious and effective and collective countries of terrorism. my country welcomes the adoption of resolution 2253 by the security council and a

he wants to stop it cold in syria. he wants ideally to confront president obama with a binary choice between a barrel bomber on the one hand and kayla baghdadi on the other. he wants president obama to eat is 2011 words on assad stepping aside. rush i believe sees the diplomatic process is a time buying instrument. the russian military operations in syria are fully consistent with the goal of forcing binary choice on washington but it will take time to create the requisite allen perry facts on the ground and extended process can provide time although i have strong doubts that russia militarily will be able to achieve this objective. now, these assumptions, these five assumptions might either now or in the fullness of time proved to be absolutely erroneous. russia and iran may come to see bashar al-assad as expendable. john kerry may persuade them that a continuing political role for this regime is indeed poisonous to the prospect of united syrian front against isil i think they argue now this. it's just that their inte

targets in syria from the air. well, after almost five years of violence and a quarter of a million lives lost it is hard for some to remember that syria's conflict started off with relatively peaceful protests. tens of thousands of syrians fled into the streets, calling for bashar al-assad to step down from power. the catalyst at the time was the arab spring, sweeping motion, movement led by young people, eager to rid their country of corrupt dictators standing in their way of prosperity. it was a cause everyone in syria felt they could get behind, all it did was resurrect deep division. david ariosto reports. >> reporter: the year was 1963. syria's baath party, seized control, and it's held on ever since. struggle between two opposing sides. on one, left wing secular activates, like the baath. baath. on the other, right wing religious fundamentalist like the muslim brotherhood. seeking muslim majority. >> the muslim brotherhood became the main backbone of the opposition. it became very difficult to oppose the inc

in political transformation and transition in syria. rarely have we seen an u.n. negotiation negotiated like this one with basically meetings around the clock, and then the final negotiation going up until about three hours before they actually arrived in the security council chamber. it's normally the case that resolutions have to be submitted 24 hours in advance. they say that's the time for everyone to consult with their capitals, and get it translated to all the languages. on this occasion they pushed past all of that. they only gave the other ten members of the security council, the ones that aren't the permanent members a very brief look at this before they were asked to vote on it. very unusual, a great deal of negotiation, and on the whole it looks to me looking at the resolution that russia did not manage to remove some of the things it was trying to remove in this resolution. >> the they said they hope to look back on this step forward. what are the stumbling blocks that are still in the way? >> yes, will it be a significant s

in syria there aren't. a little bit more at the. >> at least about what ground forces he envisions joining us in the syrian raqaa. >> the difficulty of this case. i don't think you can separate taking out the commander and control of isil's operations against the uk, france, belgium or elsewhere. i don't think you can separate that from the task of degrading or destroying the daesh they've created. the two are linked. as i argued in front of the house last week, as long as this so calefit exist it's a threat to us. it is radicalizing muslims from across the world who are going to fight for that organization and potentially returning to attack us. second question about ground troops as i've explained. there are three parts of the arguments. don't underestimate them. the ground troops that are there. not ideal, not as many as we would like. three, the real plan is as you get a transitional government in syria that can represent all the syrian people, there will be more ground troops for us to work with to def

i don't think we're there in syria now. diplomacy is not going to success until the assad government and many of the fighting groups decide it is in table. >> syria is not a tiny country, but it is not huge either. having that many armed forces deployed, doesn't each additional fighting force add a level of chance that something is going to go wrong, going to go really badly? >> it certainly does. when you only had the syrian government and the u.s.-lead coalition, say most of the last year and a half, sharing that strategic air space, then of course it was possible -- it was possible to keep fighters out of harm's way, but when the russian federation entered, when russia began flying air operations, it was quickly apparent that they weren't sharing their flight plans with the united states. they had transgressed turkey's border before. there had been repeated warnings, public and private to the russians to stop that behavior, and they didn't. so it's a small space, you have several different factions sharing that space whi

the second thing is about syria. the real question that you asked at the beginning of syria. now i remember actually. i'm not sure about russia was trying to do but it was first started the attack -- the estimated cost of the attack what $4 million. and as far as i understand, putin's russian foreign policy makers were thinking of a predetermined activity. to leave the proxy war and just get into the conflict you'll have several costs. it's not about the economy costs but today the cost of the war increased to $8 million today. and i'm not sure how far this -- how much this continue and how much russia can afford this. $8 million doesn't look a lot but through these kind of conflict we see that an incrementalism and it may be somehow they may consider that -- we spent so much money and did sacrifice, let's go on this and it may turn into a quagmire, because of that russia will try to find a solution in a very expedited way. they will push the diplomatic solutions and try to find solution out of this. lastly, about the economic punishment thing, here theof court the aing a --

brothers from syria. we have shared with them our limited resources. we on behalf of entire humanity, we have carried out our obligation in hosting them and providing them with all that they can. we are proud of our ability to host them. hosti the world must share this burden with us because we're performing the humanitarian duty on behalf of entire humanity and to help us shoulder this burden and to work with us in accordance with the response plan which was drawn by the government of jordan in order to alleviate the suffering of those who are living in the camps or are hosted. we look forward to the convening of the london conference next year, early next year. we call on the international community to effectively participate in that conference. we are today before a real chance that should not be missed in order to take confident steps toward the realization of the political solution that will satisfy all the syrians, which will restore stability and security to syria. we should realize the ambitions o

whether that will lead to success of diplomacy in syria, we will see. >> how to sox the conflict in syria was the focus of president obama's address a short while ago in paris where he was attending the climate conference. the french president has met, of course with obama and other leaders to talk about syria and how to confront isil. president obama has said he has a plan for how to end the war in syria. let's bring in our patty calhane who is in paris traveling with the president. what is the plan? >> well, i think when we heard from the president at his press son presence before departing paris, which should be wheels up any moment now, laid out exactly how he sees the syrian conflict ending. he talked about the vienna process and right now, jordan is putting together a list of groups they call the moderate opposition. it's everybody even r.b.i. agrees needs a seat at the table. these groups would have a ceasefire with the forces fighting on behalf of bashar al assad. there will be slowly areas of calm spreading throughout syria while these groups and the assad forces continue to figh

launching air strikes in syria. plus. >> reporter: i'm in baghdad as violence rises across iraq and the price of ill plum ets globely and an increasing number of iraqis are falling into extreme poverty >>> myanmar's road to democracy. the power is being discussed by aung san suu kyi with the out going prime minister. obama says the asmt s is stepping up the fight against i.s.i.l. more special forces will be sent to help fight the armed group in iraq and syria. the ground troop mission will be carried out besides continued diplomatic efforts. >> reporter: the united states is intensifying the war in iraq and syria in the hope that it will event eventual ly go towards peace. >>> we will assist sources to put more pressure on i.s.i.l. these operators will over time be able to conduct raids, free hostages, gather intelligence and capture i.s.i.l. leaders. that creates a virtuous cycle of better intelligence which generates more targets, more raids, more momentum. >> reporter: the military says when they find an i.s.i.l.

targets in syria. the syrian government and opposition groups have agreed a truce in the city of homs. the cease fire is the only town in control. violence, political instability and a struggling economy have left almost a third of iraq's population without basic services such as water and sanitation. a report on how people are coping in the capital baghdad >> reporter: this man says he feels hopeless. his motorised rick shaw broke down months ago and he can't afford to repair it. he relys on small loans to get by. a move to the slam here a few years ago, he says he came here in the hopes of giving his wife, daughters and examined children a better life. but it hasn't worked out that way. >> translation: what can i tell you. our lives here are miserable. sometimes we wish we would die than have to live like this. i served as an army reservist for eight years during the war and in the end the government gave us nothing for our service >> reporter: the world bank says 30% of families live below the pover

he wants to stop a cold in syria. he wants ideally to confront president obama with a binary choice between the barrel bomber on the one hand and al-baghdadi on the other. he wants president obama to beat his 2011 words on assad stepping aside. russia i believe it sees that the unit diplomatic process as a time buying instrument. russian military operations in syria are fully consistent with the goal of forcing binary choice on washington, but it will take time to create the requisite military facts on the ground, and extend a process can provide time, although i have strong doubts that russia military will be able to achieve this objective. now, these assumptions, these five assumptions, might either now or in the fullness of time proved to be absolutely erroneous. russia and iran may come to see bashar al-assad as expendable. john kerry may persuade them that a continuing illegal role for this regime is indeed poisons to the prospect of a united syrian front against isil. i think they already know this. it's just th

to a new syria, we would do it. there's no cure solution. you drew it up and i can draw a couple of formulas. the issue has been raised. how long does it or does it not or if he does bashar stay. clearly you're negotiating by the new syria. but to get there i can't simply talk to my friends. i have to talk to the other parties on the ground and as angry as i understand and i respect and i agree where the syrian opposition in their anger with bashar there are other despicable characters on the ground that are tremendous threat to the middle east. it's not something that i'm going to talk to these and that. it's complicated. because of the complexity we need to engage each other asthmature and rational people and understand that i may differ on interest, but it's better to engage you than say your interests are different than mine and therefore we won't play cards. >> if i may take the privilege also to asking you about assad, nobody mentioned the word turkey which along egypt and arab world is close to my heart. a lo

seems he has forgotten the courage and syria from the several battalions of syria christians and also the arabs in north and northeast syria who will work with the free syrian army to take on daesh. no answer. >> anybody watching this debate and reading hansard in the future will be able to recognize that this question has been asked time and time and time again and we have not had an answer to that question. i have given away a significant number of times no. [shouting] and nobody has answered me and nobody -- [shouting] sorry. if my ex-dean -- my esteemed colleague is able to answer the question i would be delighted. >> what interests me about the argument the right honorable gentleman is putting forward is erased is perfectly legitimate questions which should i hope be answered in the course of the debate. but what he glosses over is what his and his party's position is on the current operations which i think you will agree with me are, in fact, controlling daesh ability to do violence and cruelty in the area, and terrorism in europe. and if, indeed, those actions at the moment inv

but in syria. to identify the critical nodes that if targeted would have an impact against the revenue stream of isil. over the course of the months that was studied and brought to secretary carter and secretary kerry four weeks ago. we had been striking oil infrastructure. but we were able to do it in a much more effective way subsequent to the study being seen. we estimate that approximately 43% of the revenue stream that isil derives from oil has been affected the last 40 days. it affects oil revenue but cement and other industries from which they draw their primary funds. >> anything else with allies in that regard as well? >> the coalition we have what's called an air task. so the coalition is integrated into the air tasking order. they conduct strikes. it is supporting strikes that we are conducting against the infrastructure. >> thank you. >> and i want to shift just quickly. what are your concerns about pakistan's commitment to eliminating terrorist organizations? >> i spoke just in recent

should decide the future and fate of syria. u.n. plays a key role in negotiations. we agree that these three principles should be upheld throughout the whole peace process of syria. >> the china national association of international studies representative says the meeting between foreign ministers in china is important because beijing doesn't have an agenda when it comes to syria. >> china has good relations with almost all these major players who have one set of vested interest or another in syria. china can apply a higher level of objectivity and i am partiality to the situation in syria. china can play an important and indispensable role and china may eventually win the trust and confidence of not only the syrian government right now, but also rebels in syria, but also more importantly, other major players who are now fighting their way out in the situation in syria. one thing is simple, that is peace should prevail in syria, rather than war and destruction. if peace will prevail, this will not only set a good example for pe

hope for syria. the five permanent u.n. security councilmembers agree on the text of a draft resolution on the syrian peace process. >>> president obama says the u.s.-led campaign against ice is progressing and he's con if i had did he want the group will be defeated. >>> despite the supposed ceasefire pro-yemen forces seize two towns from the houthis in 24 hours. >>> and the vatican says mother teresa will now be made a saint. >>> hello i am rahul in doha, i'll have all your sporting. find out what he had to say later in the program. ♪ ♪ >>> hello there, a very warm welcome to this hour of news. the five permanent members of the security council agreed on the text of a draft resolution on a peace process for syria. the full council is expected to vote on it any time now. so let's go live now to our diplomatic editor james bays who joins us from new york. james, you were outside the hotel earlier when they were discussing this and all the back and forth. but the up shot is we now have this draft text. can you tell us a

he spoke about the situation in syria. i've been to syria many times. i did it with some distaste as shadow foreign secretary and met leading officials in the syrian administration. murderers, i knew they were murderers. they murdered their own people. they murdered 10,000 people in hama alone. i would be delighted to see them got rid of but they're not going to go. and when there is talk about negotiations in vienna, the assumption somehow or another that will result in getting rid of assad, getting rid of the administration, is a delusion. putin, one of the most detestable leaders of any state in the world, will make sure that because they're his allies and because they suit him, action against them is not going to be successful. so what is the issue today? it isn't an issue about changing the regime in syria which would make me, very, very happy indeed. it isn't about getting rid of daesh, getting rid of daesh, would make me very happy indeed. it's about what practical action can result in some way in damaging daesh, in stopping their atrocities, in

in both iraq and syria, and quite frankly, it metastises beyond syria, we can't rely on air strikes alone to counter the threat >>> days after a possible limited truce in syria, the government and rebel forces have agreed to a cease fire in the city of homs. this is applying to the only district by homs. it could last two months, but the rebels are denying reports that they have agreed to leave the neighborhood. the truce was mediated by u.n. delegation to syria. >> reporter: this visit is to implement the plan after the vienna talks to find a solution and to reach a truce in a certain area and to stop the fighting and shelling across syria >>> the people of homs were among the first to rule up against the rule of bashar al-assad in 2011. the city was once known as the capital of the revolution. the executive director of the arab center of washington and he says this homs cease fire was about desperation on the side of the rebels. >>> this has nothing to do with the conversation that took place in vienna, talking about the need for all the parties to get together and reach a national ceas

how long will the army remain in syria. he made it clear that russia's army will remain in syria, as long as the army continues its offensive, and will not pull out before then. talking about bashar al-assad. he said nothing has changed there. russia never agrees that anyone from the outside should determine who should rule another country and stressed in his alignment that vladimir putin has been making that only the syrian people can determine their future, and that will be part of the political settlement, the third stage of this, which is going be convened by sergey lavrov, the foreign minister in new york, tomorrow and friday. >> not budging when it comes to turkey, he lashed out at the turks. what is the resolution there. did he put anything forward as far as that is concerned in. >> i think, really, it's an icebox. no one is going near, despite the fact that the turkish president would like to sit and diffuse the issue, and n.a.t.o. is sending advisors and air force personal to ensure that turkey doesn't take any dan

civil war in syria started this whole business in syria. and that would mean, and that time the, the force that is now not available because they're fighting each other, but that could fight isil is the combination of syrian forces and moderate operation now fighting in syria. if there is a political settlement -- in the meantime we're using forces up north, the ybg, we're trying to accumulate additional syrian forces that want to take their homes back from isil but the civil war, is meanwhile using up a lot of combat power that could potentially be used against isil. >> so you really believe that once there is a path for assad to leave, that syrian government forces which include alawhites which are shia, will join up with the opposition sunni forces to go after isil? >> the transition, the political transition is exactly to have a syria that is once again whole, multisectarian for sure like all the states with all the complications that go with that, that we see with iraq, but as alternative to sectarianism and continue wages of sectarian

clearly negotiating about a new syria, it shouldn't be reinvention of the old syria. but to get there i can't simply talk to my friends. i have to talk to the other parties on the ground. and as angry as i understand and i respect and i agree with the syria opposition in their anger with bashar, there are a lot of other despicable characters frankly, on the ground that are of tremendous threat to the middle east. so again, it's not i'm going to talk to these and i'm going to talk to the others. it complicated. because of the complexity we need to engage each other as mature rational people understand i may differ with you on some interests but nevertheless it's better to engage you rather than say your interests are different from mine and therefore we won't play cards. >> before we turn to broader questions and discussion, if i may take the privilege also of asking you nobody mentioned the word "turkey" which along with egypt and the arab world is close to my heart, a lot of my professional experiences there it seems to me there has been a major turn in turkish relat

they spoke about getting a transitional government in syria he spoke about the situation in syria. it is some distaste as the foreign secretary in the leading officials in this area and administration. they murder their own people. but then they are not going to go. vendors talk about negotiations indiana, the assumption that somehow that is going to result in getting rid of assad and the administration is a delusion one of the most detestable leaders of any state in the world because the allies and because the suit him. action against them isn't going to be successful so what is the issue today. it isn't about getting rid. it's about what practical action can result in some way in damaging and stopping their atrocities and the people that are fleeing from them and flocking to them including sadly some small number of people. if what we are proposing today would in any way not simply are not totally get rid of it but we condemn in a significant way so that they wouldn't go on behaving in the fashion that we see i wouldn't have any difficulty. there are no limits of any kind. the up

strange you're going to do it in iraq but not syria. it does make sense. isis doesn't recognize the border. they're operating freely in syria. a military strategy can help. but if you're going to sit there and say bombing raqqa makes you safe in london, that's not the case. this is a political military strategy where he needs to make a bigger distinction. >> everyone talks about 2003 and what happened there. militarily what do you think the british have learned about taking that kind of military action in the east? >> first of all, going in with large numbers with boots on the ground is pretty unpopular. at this point in time the british are not looking to stabilize on the ground areas of iraq and syria where they're really not welcome. what the coalition is looking for are people on the ground, the kurds were the easiest partners to deal with, and then the iraqi government. the big problem is in syria who are we going to partner with on the ground? that's the issue. that's what is leading to the abraham. it knows it would be rejected b

bombing in syria. to do so, it would have had to be passed under chapter 7 of the united nations chapter to which the security council could not agree. the u.n. resolution is certainly framework. for joint action to cut off funding, oil revenues, armed isil.ies from but i wonder how much signs there are of that happening. way to the member. >> thank you for giving way to myself. the necessities of the oil supply, do i very much agree with him. therefore, i concede us not to understand why he would oppose a strikes, which is such crucial part in oil supplies, which is the heart of the isil conflict. >> the problem is the oil supplies that are being sold by isil are going into other and to s, into turkey other places, and i think we need toknow, i think we know exactly who is buying that that oil, funding what banks are involved, international transactions, which ultimately end up with isil, and which other countries or may not be ay involved in it. that's despite, mr. speaker, the clear risk of essentia

. >> in syria, to be honest with you, congressman, i think the military campaign in syria is designed to put pressure on core isil. there is not a military solution in syria. >> at some point in time i think it would be helpful if we had a sense of what this beast looked like. you mentioned we spent some period of time studying the oil infrastructure. i know you weren't there, and that's not how you would do it necessarily, but taking out the tankers and how they move off from point a to point b, why did we just get around to doing that last week? i understand the production facilities, but the movement itself, why did we wait so allo to do that? >> congressman, again, i don't know what the thought process was six or eight months ago. i do know we have a much better appreciation for the resources of isil. in august i went around to all the regions, i was in transition, to get a better sense of isil. at that time there wasn't a clear understanding of how isis i will was generating revenue. even in the weeks subsequent to august, we started to have a much better appreciation for the sou

' syria--serious claims by amnesty international. today they categorically deny the report. the same clichÉs. the same fakes. it's nothing but a flood of lies empty, and without any proof. >> we familiarized ourselves with the contents of this report, and as usual there is nothing concrete and nothing new published in it. in regards to the suggestion about the use of cluster bombs in syria, the russian air force does not use them. >> the russian defense ministry said that they were unprecedently open about their operations in syria, and they stated categorically there were no munitions in cluster bombs in the air base in the country. the purpose of all these manipulations by amnesty is to smear others. >> well, al jazeera's roslind jordan lives us from washington, d.c. there is mounting pressure on russia other its airstrikes in syria. what sorts of response has there been to russian strategy? >> well, the u.s. has not been pleased with the russian strategy because even though russia said it is going after isil fighters, the u.s. do

is in syria. we're being asked to make further contribution to international effort to contain daesh from extending the mayhem and bloodshed of that accompanies their every move even more widely across the middle east. serious questions have been raised that i respect those who raised them. there is unease about ground forces. there is proper concern about the strategy and endgame and about the aftermath about rebuilding. some say simply innocent people are more likely to be killed. military action does create casualties, however much we try to minimize them. so should we on those grounds abandon action in iraq although we undertake it at the request of iraq's government and it does seem to be making a difference? should we take no further action against daesh who are themselves killing innocent people and striving to kill more every day of the week? or should we simply leave it to others? would we make ourselves a bigger target for daesh attack? we are a target. we will remain a target. no need t

is in syria. we're being asked to make further contribution to international effort to contain daesh from extending the mayhem and bloodshed of that accompanies their every move even more widely across the middle east. serious questions have been raised that i respect those who raised them. there is unease about ground forces. there is proper concern about the strategy and endgame and about the aftermath about rebuilding. some say simply innocent people are more likely to be killed. military action does create casualties, however much we try to minimize them. so should we on those grounds abandon action in iraq although we undertake it at the request of iraq's government and it does seem to be making a difference? should we take no further action against daesh who are themselves killing innocent people and striving to kill more every day of the week? or should we simply leave it to others? would we make ourselves a bigger target for daesh attack? we are a target. we will remain a target. no need t

syria. later vladimir putin's annual news conference. >> you can see if you want to understand the red/blue politics of you can't look at the state level project a look at the county level because that's where you start seeing those divisions. you can see it right there, presidential election maps. you can see yankee gum popping out, left the coast of veering, the deep south and tidewater. i haven't messed with the college. the red really is republican and the blue religious democrat. this isn't a recent election. this is the 1916 showdown. republicans for the first century of the history, party founded and almost explicitly yankee gum for centric mike lux but the parties come and go. awakes are gone. federals or so one as well. the current parties have swapped over last 40 years their constituencies and the program. it's just shifted around trying to understand any kind of historical time for them what's happened using parties as a cipher, red versus blue, is an exercise in futility. to las

it is more difficult to travel from france to syria, from western europe to syria. and also it is probably a sociology. it is probably also the result of social problems that we can have in france. it is also probably, to some extent, the result of bad policies with, indeed, marginalization of muslims and from the been -- security services. amy: what would you say to young europeans who want to join, who what to become jihadists? >> this is a very important message. isis will recruit you, telling you jihadi is cool. yes, it is cool, you have no life, no girlfriend, no job, no money, nothing in your home country, and isis promises you, what, adventure him engage meant , a girl, car, weapon, power, money, whatever. they all play like jihad is cool. -- becauses, isis isis doesn't really fight assad, doesn't reject the muslims in syria. extent? ato what number of muslims in syria. isis is a disaster for the syrian people. for those who want to join isis, i tell them, i understand the reason for your rage because, yes, there are many reasons actually to be unhappy about

the situation in syria is incredibly complex. i'm not overstating the contribution that our incredible service men and women can make, neither am i ignoring the risks of military action nor am i pretending that military action is any more than one part of the answer. i am absolutely clear that we must pursue a comprehensive strategy that also includes political, diplomatic, and humanitarian action. i know that the long-term solution in syria as in iraq must ultimately be a government that represents all of its people, and one that can work with us to defeat the evil organization of isil for good. >> i call mr. jeremy corbyn. >> thank you, mr. speaker. recognizes the decisions to send british forces to war are the most serious, solemn, and morally challenging of any that we have to take as members of parliament. the motion brought before the house today by the government authorizing military action in syria against isil faced us with exactly that decision. it is one with potentially far-reaching consequences for us all here in bri

to destroy syria's chemical weapons' arsenal. they won't confirm that syria's commitment produced and mixed an creating chemical weapons has been destroyed. the opcw concluded that mustard gas had been used in aleppo province. the fact finding mission was not mandated to assign any blame but the area had seen fighting between isil and an opposition groups. the findings found that isil had obtained and was using chemical weapons in iraq and syria. that was not the only attack investigated. in the syrian province of idlib there were incidents between march and may which the fact-finding mission said likely involved the use of one or more toxic chemicals including chlorine. the u.s. envoy to the chemical weapons watchdog has warned that the use of weapons has become increasingly common in the syrian war. voices have been growing louder in the use of weapons in syria. a group has released a report saying 200 civilians have been killed in the past three months. it alleges russian authorities lied to cover up civilian damage in two air

is backing the kurds in syria. the turks are backing jihadi arabs and bombing the kurds simultaneously. i mean, it's a complete, complete mess, and nobody has -- i don't think anybody could imagine a way out of this. >> rose: strange bedfellows. you're absolutely right. what's so interesting to me and coming to nick's point about the narrative, is at least russia and iran and assad seem to have all agreed on a narrative and they have a very clear objective. that narrative is they are saving the world from radical islamist lunatics who want to destroy everything. >> rose: -- not fighting them all. >> they don't talk about that narrative. what is the u.s.'s real narrative here? what is the west's real narrative? what is europe's real narrative? what is the arab's world real narrative? everyone else is struggling to find a coherent narrative they can all agree on. >> rose: is there a moderate syrian force that can be mounted effectively against assad? >> there was one guy we interviewed -- (laughter) >> one guy... he

western syria. there have been some reports this has had some effect on coalition air operations. can you explain if that's true how so? >> yeah. i've seen some of those reports. i'll tell you they are, i think, largely inaccurate. so while there have been -- and we've openly discussed the presence of russian and syrian air defense systems in northern syria, i can tell you has not been a significant disruption to our operations. we conduct strikes in northwestern syria continually. we conducted strikes as recently as two days ago. we did some strikes in the pocket last night, so the answer is no. we're aware of them and we have the ability to continue our operations unabated. the russians, their actions do not dictate how we do business and that is simply not going to happen. we will continue to conduct our operations in support of local ground forces there in syria. >> do you have anything on additional u.s. aircraft going after the f-15s have departed to replace them to some degree? >> we don't ha

that's necessary in iraq in syria. that's two different cases but that's why we pursue only set terry and governance in the state of iraq and why we are trying to find a political solution to the syrian civil war because while it's important to beat isil is important to do it in a lasting way. that is a critical part of the strategy and the reason why we are so intent upon identifying and enabling capable and motivated forces. >> chairman don -- chairman dunford what did general mcfarland plan to do. >> to disrupt, degrade and if you'd isil. >> we don't have a political plan that underlies what our military mission is. we have heard that from general petraeus and general mcchrystal and ambassador carter people on the left in the right have come before the committee and written about this problem. can you speak a bit to that coordination and that planning and your confidence that general mcfarland and others on the ground and see if what akel entity that will stick and make all their military efforts worthwhile? >> cong

>> they send you back to syria. >> what happens if you go back to syria? >> most probably die on the way or some people get arrested or be taken into the army. >> how different is damascus from beirut? >> oh, it's really, really different. in damascus i was always afraid of the government. some people died because they cursed the president. i left syria and i found hope here and i screamed in the streets, cursing all politicians and everything. it's all right. nobody's going to come and arrest you. i really love this place, with all my heart. >> is all of the chaos and the violence worth it for change, is that other dying for? i mean, things were, there was order when you grew up. there was order. >> yes. >> no freedom, but order. would you go back to that? >> i don't think that there is anything worthy in the world of a human blood. there is nothing more important than human being. >> you'd never be able to yell out loud, never be able to do the things you're doing now. you'd go back. >> i was alive. >> you were alive. >> lots of people were alive. luckil

forces into syria? because i think most people would agree, we do not want a yew new lateral american force governing syrian cities. the second question is if you are going to assemble that coalition, what government in damascus are they going to hand power over to? so the questions to me are what is the secretary of state doing to accelerate the process to bring governance to syria potentially including the russians and a conversation about the future of assad, and how do u.s. forces come behind that? most of the conversation now is focused on u.s. forces without considering what they're going in there to do. i think it's backwards. >> and barbara, we heard from ash carter saying, look, in order to succeed here, we need to defeat isil and its parent tumor of syria and iraq. but as we've seen, isis fighters are spreading all over the world in other countries. why is that so important? why so much of a focus there? >> well, you know, i think senator mccain was making this point repeatedly. that, you know

force in the syria. and as i was discussing that when they followed the terrorist attacks of paris it went immediately to moscow and sat down with putin and the fact that we are thinking about how they might be folded into some kind of diplomatic solution and process makes it in or must be difficult for the europeans to sort of continue to justify the sanctions policy against the europeans particularly at a moment when the sanctions have a distortion that impact on the europeans and when it's hard to justify new projects like the stream at the same time keeping sanctions in place on russia. so i'm not predicting an early change in this policy but i do think it is if putin demonstrates that he's trying to seek some help from purely public diplomacy to play a constructive role in the exercise, i think the sanctions policy is russia are going to be vulnerable. the second point i would say is simply that i think if you compare the u.s. and russian policy in the situation what putin has done is defined or has

and potentially in syria. >> back home, 16 lebanese soldiers freed in the prisoner swap with syrias front rebels.

all this in the face of a plan with syria. why vladimir putin says he's prepared to use more military force. and a most uncertain election in decades. spain hopes to elect a new government, but experts say the results could be messy. from cnn world headquarters here in atlanta, welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world, i'm george howell, "cnn newsroom" starts right now. very good day to you. we start this hour with the democrats running for president taking center stage for the third debate. the last debate of the year. hillary clinton on stage alongside rivals bernie sanders and martin o'malley. they squared off on a wide range of issues from gun control, terrorism and they also talked about wall street and big business. listen. >> should corporate america love hillary clinton? >> everybody should. >> will corporate america love a president sanders? >> no, i think they won't. >> hillary and i have a difference. >> that debate featured something rarely seen at a presidential debate. it was an apology. t

you can let go the syria process like it is and you will have a fragmented syria that at one point will be legitimized and legalized by an international process. people will sit around a table and say these are the borders, let's accept them. in value, i don't have anything against it. maybe one day lebanon will disappear. iraq has more or less disappeared. however, we are today, all of us international community, bound to a process of geneva where we are still saying we want to unified secular democratic syria. if these words mean something, let's do it. if not, let's sit on the table with the syrians if they accept this and say, okay, people, you can't live together anymore. let us see where are the boundaries of your internal -- it can be a federalization, it can be a federal state with federal parts of lebanon and iraq. i don't know. i am the people that think probably the old state order is dead. what will replace it, i don't know. and i don't think analytically again that it will be replaced soon by something. my worry, how do you shorten this limbo period between something which

iraq.targets at and reconnaissance missions in both iraq and syria. british partners have provided robust support, advising, assisting, and building capacity of local forces taking the fight to isil in both iraq and syria. as we put a increased pressure and intensify airstrikes against isil's financial infrastructure across syria, we appreciate and to the world appreciates the uk's contribution to this necessary and critical mission. with strong allies like the united states and the united kingdom need to bear every instrument of power against this barbaric foe, we will defeat isil and we will ensure they stay defeated. of course our work together , extends far beyond the middle east. in europe we must continue , writing the new playbook. one that includes preparations to encounter new challenges like cyber and hybrid warfare. we must continue to adjust our posture and presence in response to russian aggression and support our allies. last month, the u.k. released its strategic defense and security review. a blueprint for british security priorities t

already deploying on the ground in syria. >> it puts everybody on notice, in syria, you don't know at night who's going to be coming in the window, and that's the sensation we want all of isil's leadership and followers to have. it's an important capability. >> reporter: the expanded u.s. combat role comes in the aftermath of paris. and as progress against isis on the battlefield has been halting, president obama declared the group contained in an interview two weeks ago. >> from the start, our goal has been, first, to contain, and we have contained them. >> reporter: today, however, the chairman of the join chiefs of staff general dunford appeared to contradict his commander in chief. >> have we currently contained isil? >> we have not contained isil. >> have they been contained at anytime since 2010? >> tactically in areas they have been. strategically they have spread since 2010. >> reporter: carter insisted the u.s. will eventually win. >> are we winning, mr. secretary? >> we will win. >> are we winning now? >> we are going to win. >> we have been watching the number of u.s. force

trying to hammer out a plan to end the war in syria. they hope today to get international agreement on a roadmap to stop the worst humanitarian crisis of our time. welcome to your world this morning i'm stephanie sy. >> and i'm del walters and meeting bringing key players except syrian opposition and as we are told there seems to be some sticking points as well. >> this is being pulled together as you know on quite short notice. >> reporter: the last two rounds showed a new found result among powers. >> build on the burst of diplomatic momentum and seeing they will lead down a path again to a political transition. >> reporter: the group's third meeting will continue to try to nail down a realistic nationwide ceasefire in syria whi negotiating a political resolution. the ultimate goal is to hold u.n. nationwide elections to allow the syrian people to choose their next leadership. >> translator: key points no matter how strange it seems corresponds with the plan and vision proposed by the united states. >> reporter: russian president vlad

they can restore some decency and some governments to the territory of syria. that's the transition we are looking for. you asked about the russians. russians have a lot of influence with assad. they are using it in the wrong way. i said this repeatedly, the russians are wrongheaded in their strategy. they are going at it backwards. they said they were going to go into fight i sell and promote a political transition. they backed assad and targeted people who are part of the opposition that needs to be part of syria's future so they are off on the wrong foot and for us to associate ourselves with what they are doing they'd have to get on the right foot. >> thank you. >> mr. jones. >> mr. chairman take young mr. secretary and general dunford thank you so much for being here today and your leadership. i have listened to your testimony and i read in the papers and classified briefings you all have got an unbelievable complex task on behalf of the american people and certainly our military. thank you. a few of us when mr. boehner was the speaker asked for a debate o

business in syria. and that would mean -- and at that time the -- the force that is now not available, because they're fighting each other, but that could fight isil, is the combination of syrian forces and the moderate opposition that is now fighting the syrians. if there's a political settlement. in the meantime we're using forces, some kurds up north, the ypg, and we're trying to accumulate additional sunni arabs who want to take their homes back from isil. but the civil war is meanwhile using up a lot of combat power that could potentially be used against isil. >> so, you really believe that once there's a path for assad to leave, that syrian government forces, which include alawites, which are shia, are going to join up with the opposition sunni forces, to go after isil? >> the political transition is exactly to have a syria that is once again multisectarian, for sure, like all those states over there with all the complications that go with that and that we see in iraq, but that, as an alternative