"washington journal" continues." host: jennifer cafarella is here to talk ab >> jennifer is the director at the institute talking about the us withdrawal from syria. let's begin of the key players in the region. so what has been happening before the president made this decision? the key players are turkey that as the turkish material one --dash those that conduct the offenses on the ground the turkish proxy war is members of the syrian opposition including former members of

the army it is just a complicated operation to be conducting because i'm simultaneously built he - - building a counterforcengd and f those forces it is a kurdish militia. and with that why peg is a syrian affiliate of the kurdish insurgent movement so the turkish president ergogan has warned the us the american partnership was unacceptable to him however he had been negotiating with us for a de-escalation in the northeast

but that change with a call between president trump and president ergogan when ergogan informed the president he would in fact begin a military iooperation. >> i will share what the president had to say about this yesterday to bring up the issue of turkey. >> very strong talks with a lot of people. after so many years the greatest warriors of the world they are policing. they are not a police force but we want to bring our home and itk would be very tough when turkey and others have to maintain their own properties now. they have to maintain peace and safety and we will see what happens with the delegation of a cease-fire

d including massive tariffs to the united states. the make a lot of money shippingsh steel. >> that was president trump talking about the situation in turkey. so talking about some of the major players. >> russia is stepping in to broker a separate negotiation with turkey and possibly the syrian forcesic with a new push by the trump administration to de-escalate the situation looks far more likely russia could have a whole new agreement now rather than negotiate with the united t states it will not necessarily end the fighting but could have a new framework where the

asad regime overlooks some areas that is that turkish involvement in parts of the northeast. >> because why? because of that kurdish element with that issue above all others because it is related to turkish domestic politics and security were the relationship of that insurgency in turkey. >> so now turkey has fought a decades-old war that is the use of terror tactics for the turkish people however it is complicated in syria that the syrian wing has not to my knowledge hasn't participated with attacks inside turkey. eith that governing project in

the northeast is a potential model or an example of what the kurdish example would aspire for. >> is that for the foreseeable future? >> what does russia want quick. >> to displace as the united states as the main securityes guarantor so that was a big gift to vladimir putin with nothing else but to step in to do exactly what he is doing now to embarrass the united states to broker aem deal for the turkish president and then to have in that position to expand the influence throughout the middleou east.

>> so at what craw one - - cost to russia and can they afford it quick. >> so the russians have prolonged to this war that these gains are overblown. so this is to help the asad regime gain control. so that's not true but the alternative right now from the returning from the region. >> the iranians of course support the syrian president

and they want the russians to help them assert as much control that as they can. and then to build up that militaryry infrastructure. and on that sink - - second plank that you have that wider objective and then to link up that infrastructure in syria. not only to israel but to keep saudi arabia and you out the united states which is the key objective of russia and iran. >> and explain the tribal factions. the religious aspect and the

part of sunni islam. and this is not a business organization. but a source of friction with the local population which is primarily that muslim area. . . . .

essentially that they can call upon. all of that on the table, jake in massachusetts good morning welcome to the conversation. i have a couple of questions first of all how many nuclear weapons to be having turkey seeing as how it is a nato ally and can t we get them out of the faster if we go into conflict with turkey i'm not sure of the exact number but if it doesn't according to some press reports the u.s. is in fact considering options to remove the weapons

from turkey certainly not acting like if the alignment with russia is deeply dangerous to the nato alliance and that's why putin has been reaching out as a priority to try to create exactly the scene they have so visibly surrendered to our own nato ally turkey germany, france, etc., do they have any sway? >> guest: it has included but

it's a violation of the security arrangement that they had been working with the united states on us far but the reality is they have little ability to stop turkey without american support for the statements of condemnation are important for the moral aspect of this in addition to signaling at least some aspects of the alliance despite the transgressions but i think the key thing is he isn't willing to step up and put forward american leverage on the table. our european allies are notan going to be able to solve this alone. >> caller: the u.s. has no reason to be in this syria.

there is no reason any american should die o if something goingn for hundreds of years. >> host: let's take what he had to say. >> guest: this i >> guest: this is a serious overlapping problem. we have to go into syria because this region wasn't capable of handling the threat from isis which had rampage across iraq

and syria to plan and execute attacks in europe and to do the sameed here in the united state. our choices were to either accept the organization to expand in the middle east the united states is the only power on earth capable of establishing and leading the global coalition to fight this enemy. i think it was the right decision but we deployed in the attempt to focus only on fighting isis you can't separate them from the problem and that is what we are learning now. yes, good morning. i think the idea for the problem is that we all know.

if they are an ally of what we need to do a is get them to fore them back to their own borders it simply doesn't exist. there isn't a precedent and that creates a different challenge to figure out how would we actually do that. furthermore, the reality is the united states could have prevented this operation inside of syria. we have forces along the border it was a strong contingent but enough to deter the operation that is significant but they only conducted this operation after thean withdrawal of the forces, so i do think that they have some very difficult conversations and decisions to make about whether and how long we can continue to accept turkey

as part of this alliance but it doesn't have to be the determining factor for whether we are able to stand up to turkey on the ground. >> they said i'm going in, this is happening. happening. i've been holding off and i will no longer. i'm going to start fighting for whether you are there or not. it is a proxy force that crossed the border. this wasn't the turkish army. there were contingents of enabling the operation but it's overblown to say the united states would have to go to war with a nato ally to pick in this operation from occurring. furthermore i think we were taking too much on ourselves if turkey opened fire on us, their d to ally, that is their

transgression and they would have won that fight against those proxy forces and i don't think they were willing to risk that escalation. >> host: democratic caller. >> caller: yes. >> host: you are on. go ahead. we are listening. >> caller: it's been ten years or however long it was before turkey got into this war. someone had taped the person in charge of the army and i heard the whole tape and it was reported in the news that somebody had taped a meeting. what was said in the meeting is they would have in attack on their own troops to get in that

war. that is how bad they wanted in this to begin with. >> guest: there is no doubt that turkey has had i'm going to call a complicated relationship. they havela been willing, the administration of the turkish president has been willing to target the movement inside of syria and they calculated that that was an acceptable or ideal vehicle for challenging the regime. however, over time they did become the target for attacks of the islamic states. that doesn't mean that they are willing to put the state first. they certainly are not as theyy stated earlier.

it escorted those that intervene further west in the province in the i northwestern portion. it's a delicate and dangerous game and that is one of the reasons it is so unacceptable he's taking his proxy force eastward to according to some reports may include elements of al qaeda passions. >> host: what was life like before the civil war started? >> guest: they have had a very difficult experience inside of syria. they were displaced from many of their villages by the president bush or al-assad's father who delivered a campaign of the arab northeastern syria, resettling families and historically kurdish communities in order to displace them marginalize them in the society. i think that is one of the reasons why this moment is so

painful. they've also fault with the syrian opposition. they are in fact politically repressive in some ways were theyau claim to reason and they don't even allow competition from other kurdish parties and this is another one of those aspects that they don't even allow the kurdish competition. >> guest: i don't have a great number on that.

some are being displaced by the fighting which is tragic to see but equally as the other communities that have suffered so much in this conflict. >> host: because they seem levangelical leaders to be vocal about the decision to withdraw from the syria and why is there this emphasis. they are there for a victim of the incursion into there are the militias to fight with both ipg however they are also christian militias to fight with the asad regime so a very complicated and difficult example.

>> caller: with the time change that made it october 7 in turkey, and here is a fun fact that was vladimir putin's birthday. does that have any significance to the people that read those tea leaves or was it just a birthday present or was it just another one of those strange coincidences that seem to follow the president around? >> guest: i think it was a sirange coincidence. it does create the observation i

don't think that it's true for the timing but certainly an interesting fact. >> caller: [inaudible] to receive $6 million to be in the middle east besides, we are going in the 21st century with our renewable energy so the middle east is becoming obsolete, totally irrelevant [inaudible] it is certainly true they've

played both sides of the war in that they've had a relationship and haven't gotten a deal with the regime however i think what's important to keep in mind is that we deployed to syria in order to fight the islamic state which was a floristic enemy. i think there can and should be debate over whether that was the right call or if it is in america's interest to have the forces at this but it's important to focus on the fact president obama had already withdrawn from the regionma in 2011 and made the difficult decision to redeploy in 2014. because of the severity of the a truly horrific enemy. maybe as a nation we are willing to accept the additional bombs

and god forbid a potentially even here in the united states as it reemerges. i personally am not willing to accept that. this was a limited deployment of the special operation forces and some enablers to take down the enemy in what was one of the most successful and effective operations in the history of the military, so i think that we need to give the defense department credit for doing what it did so well and with such a little cost and ask the hard questions now about what kind of threats we are willing to accep as a nation. >> host: where did they fight dt and who do they fight in the middle east? >> guest: they are actually already reorganizing.

this is an enemy that is already fighting and will accelerate its resurgence if it is able to get the prisoners out. the training ground to conduct attacks abroad they are clear about that and maybe attempting to resume those global attacks. >> where do they get money? >> guest: from extorting the population by imposing taxes on them as well as requiring a communities to pay bribes for protection and to avoid further attacks from isis so the revenue generation is from the local population in addition to

selling limited at this point amounts of oil in other quantities including drug smuggling that gets o additional revenue. >> they are facing the campaign of ethnic cleansing this is the third in incursion into northern syria but in the far northwest they began operation in january of 2018 they began the ugsettlement of the refugees in the kurdish homes and the deliberate attempt to change the demographics of that zone.

that is why they are so rightfully alarmed about what they intend to do, where will they go? >> guest: some will try to enter into iraqi kurdistan that could become reachable into iraqi kurdistan that remains to be seen whether the iraqi kurds are able or willing to take this number of additional refugees. >> host: brian, independent. >> caller: you are the opposite of the guest was on before. she had a lot of misinformation. the only thing she had that

wasn't true is the president called up trump and said i'm coming in. he responded sure i've opened the door for you and get out of your way which is very dishonorable because as you said before, they are our only sincere allies there. we should have carved out for them and defended them and build a base therbuilta base there bei arabia and israel and turkey are allies that they are very insincere and the only reason trump made the deal is because turkey, saudi arabia and israel they have to trump towers in israel and saudi arabia.

>> caller: [inaudible] what is the difference between protection -- >> host: i think that you are talking about the impeachment inquiry but let's stick toth the topic, what are you watching for next? >> guest: with the northeast, it is possible that the regime would decide to support the

kurdish counter offensive and seek to limit us apart from the regime to the kurds in order to prevent this from escalating further. regardless what russia tries to broker in the fight against. as i t mentioned earlier, they d invaded twice before, so they have an additional level of control in the far northwest. i mention this because they've asked the regime for support not only to defend the northeast, but to take the war to turkey in the north west as well. i don't expect they want that escalation in the northwest and they seek to contain the scope and scale of the fighting but the regime does have the ability to make its own decisions and to so i am watching for that escalation. >> i don't think the sanctions will be enough because it would

take time for them to kick in and have the effect that he thinks he can finish the military operationss on the ground before the worst of those actually hit him i and his key power base.

ho