worked with already. but it's not easy. so the big question is access. it goes back to senator menendez's question about the russians. this is one area where the russians have expressed a lot of concern as well about would lik russian concern that's stated on humanitarian to be translated into the type of pressure on the assad regime that helps ease these questions of access. >> thank you. ambassador ford? >> i liked your two word, senator, solidarity and commitment. and i think especially pretty now when people in cities like homs and iblid are under siege, i think holding this hearing is terrific and i think the concerns expressed by bodies like the united states senate are especially important. i would never want syrians to

think that because we closed the american embassy we're not longer interested in their efforts there. to create a new syria that treats people with dignity. and with respect to the commitment that jeff was talking about, would i just underline that we do need to get access so that we have supplies position, we just need to get access into the country. if the russians would indeed translate their expressed policy into actions, in terms of pressure on the syrian government, we would hope that they would do that now. >> thank you very much. my time is up. i'll submit some others for the record. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and to the other chairman who was here first. i am glad we're having this hearing. i hope we'll have multiple hearings on iran. it feels we're moving into a

position where military conflict is going to be weighed and i can't imagine why we're not having a hearing on iran, both classified and unclassified every single week. i hope in your temporary capacity we can urge that. but we thank both of you for your testimony and for your service to our country and we had a classified briefing yesterday that could not have been more different than the one we're having today. it's really kind of fascinating. and, you know, when we talk about the opposition groups, this part i don't think is classified, you ask, okay, what are these guys fighting for? the word democracy never comes up. i mean, basically you've got a minority that has dominion over, if you will, a sunni population mostly. what the sunnis are fighting for is dominion over the oregon population. we he'd in words about anything

ever than this being a conflict by another group of people and their desire to change that equati equation. >> so when i do hear the flowery statements, ambassador ford, if you could educate a little bit, this is night and day presentation that we had new our intelligence community yesterday. >> senator. the opposition is divided and this it fractious and there are competing divisions. there is an islamist element, for example as contrasted to a secular element. and that's why i spoke before about the need for the opposition to unify around a vision and the need for the opposition to unify around a transition plan.

the transition plan would in fact be the way to attract people that have been sitting on the fence so far to join the larger -- the protest group in itself. i don't know what you heard in the briefing yesterday but let me just say from direct first-hand experience, i have talked to people who organized the demonstrations and i have had team members from my embassy talk to them repeatedly. we got a very clear message from them the people who organized this, senator, that they have a vision of a state that abides by rule of law and is not targeting the alois. however, it a complex society and the longer the violences going on and the government is driving this violence, perhaps

intentionally with this in mind, the greater the risk that the sectarian conflict that we have seen in homes but really has not been seen to such a agree in other cities, homs is the worst, that it would spread and metastasize into other cities in other cities in syria. let me give you some very concrete examples. there are druss communities. they are more and more saying they should stop supporting assad as machine and begin to support the protest movement. there have been calls by leaders south of damn discussion to stop serving in the military and to join the protest movement. there have been calls within the

al owe we community -- >> if i could, i appreciate all the background and history but i think what you're saying is there is no central vision. there are lots of differing visions and we have diplomatic relations if i remember correctly with syria; is that correct? >> yes, we do. >> and i think you went over to work with this government to put reforms in place. and by the way, i at -- there was a controversy over you being there. i very much supported you going and doing that. i thought that was an intelligent thing for us to do. but we have diplomatic relations, were working on reform and they had done some really, veal terrible things and are not kind of government we want to see persuasionive around the world. but the fact is that this is not

exactly a democracy movement right now. there are so many people who are spiech, in-from-what i understand the people are fighting for power and government. they're not fighting by mr. feltman. at least by our intelligence committee anyway. >> senator, i will have to respectfully disagree. the public statements from senior figures in the presyrian army speak about supporting a democratic state. we don't know yet what they would do were they in power. we only have their -- >> who would be in power, by the way? i think it's pretty interesting. who would be -- if bashar was gone, who would be the person that was leading the country there? who is it we are support, if you

will, morally at least. >> we are supporting at transition, which the syrian national council has laid out in connection with the road map set out by the arab league. in a sense they're linked. out of that would be a process by which a leadership would be chosen. i can't give you a name. i can define the process for you but i can't give you a name. i think this is an important point, though, senator. the people who are doing the fighting, the people who are doing the fighting say they are fighting to defend the protest movement. so there is a link even if you can't say that the fighters themselves claim -- >> you think it's in our national interests -- and i'll close with this -- do you think it's in our national interests

to be involved in military operations, arming operations, to join in with al qaeda and hamas and others and certainly the folks that are on the ground, the opposition groups to overthrow this government? >> senator, as i said, we have been supporting a plan developed by the arab states for a political transition. the secretary spoke earlier this week of some of the discussions that we've had in-house about how complicated this is in terms of sympathying about arming people in syria and arming the opposition, how complicated it is in terms of, a, knowing who is t is you're giving the arms to and what does represents, how would you deliver it, what good would it do when they're facing tannings and heavy artillery?

these are extremely complex questions and i think we are not yet at a point where we could discuss it in this kind of format least. >> listen, thank you. i appreciate you playing out the tremendous complexities and competing fours and lack of knowledge of what this is about. hopefully i hope we understand it more fully and i'm sure you'll play a role in that. >> senator? >> i appreciate you being here. i appreciate the opportunity to listen to you on a number of areas. i'd like to pick up a little bit on this notion of afterwards, which you mentioned several times today. what exactly is the afterward? what would it potentially be and what would it potentially not be? we can look back in fairly

recent history and there are a couple of realities and one is repressive reej eems sometimes do survive. probably the best example of that is the chinese government itself when it turned its army and tanks on its own people in tiananmen square 22, 23 years ago and killed more than a thought of its on people. it's still in power. it's more than still in power we all know. another reality is particularly in this part of the world and both of you have an enormous repository of experience in this part of the world, the outcomes from these types of unrest are rarely quick, they're rarely clean and they're rarely fully predictable. i have an engineering degree and

i look at a lot of what's been happening over the last year sort of through the eyes of the chaos theory. this actually is a scientific theory. it's not political. it's a political term but, you know, one degree off, one assumption off you end up with a compilation of results that's far away from where you thought it might be. and perhaps the best clear example of that is lebanon itself, looking back in the 80s and beyond. but also i think we have to say openly that we don't know what's going to coming out of the last year. we don't know how the arab spring is going to play out. it's going to take years for it to clearly manifest itself in sort of a political apparatus in a number of these different

countries. so i actually would -- there are two questions, i'm going to ask them both together in the interest of time here, that i would seek your thoughts on. the first is that there are actors in this region, government actors that quite frankly may not be saying this only open li but might be very hesitant by the complete removal of the syrian regime. that believe that a weakened regime might be more palatable, in terms of regional instability and security in some of these countries. i think ambassador ford your answer to senator corker kind of shows how difficult the building blocks would be to put together a replacement rejy. we'd talk a lot about russia. i'd like your thoughts as to why

china has declined to are more forthcoming. >> senator, thanks. you're absolutely right that we don't know how these arab transitions are going to turn out. of course the challenge is that our interests in hour they turn out are great but we have to be modest about how much influence we can play in helping to determine those outcomes. so you put your finger on a big issue given the transitions going on in the arab world. in terms of the united states, it not in our interests to see the regime survive. we've talked about strategic questions. this regime -- >> trust me, i'm not advocating the end result. the question is there are

countries in the region, who would be making the point quietly. >> if you look at the arab league transition plan, if you talk about that what, it was was denied withwhat that playoff, parts of the current system and the opposition movement together work hard in a company. >> bob: ilt one of the themes that get repeatedly. the stewart forces need to be preserved. so the people are in fact working on a transition plan with the idea that you can preserve the state, a state that's no longer a malignant

octoberor. >> we got a vote that was called and out of respect for my colleagues, i appreciate your that an observation. can you give me a quick observation on the roles on china? >> neither of us are great in china. that's what my colleagues in the international bureau average. >> it's what chan has to lose by losing credibility elsewhere in the arab world. >> thank you, senator webb.

as he said we had a vote go on for 11:31. i just have a few questions to be able to finish you here and alease you and come in. will are the reports that saudi arabia and ta r march begun t n town -- what is the possibility that saudi arabia and other arab countries are arming the rebels and are we communicating the position about what our position is on army new rebels and could thattine mean to the pow emerment and cladia all at one. i was in the chair during the some of this. but if you could answer that,

that would be great. >> senator, we've been very hesitant about pouring fuel on to a con full grags that asaid himself has set. we're very consensus on political tracks, diplomatic tracks, in order to kpet to the consultation earlier. >> there this is right decision. but we would like to use the political tools that are at our disposal and that includes the security council in order to advance the tipping point because it not clear to us that arming people right now will either save lives or lead to the demise of the afff questions.

the i don't think when you hear them talking about arming the opposition they're talking about somehow betting men are serious implications. >> if you have any thoughts on that? >> i agree exactly with what ambassador feltman said. we understand the ernest desire, the need, for people under siege in a place like homs when their homes are being attacked by thugs and people want to take up orms to protect themselves. it's human to protect your

family. however, senators carey and lugar both spoke about the need for us to work with regional states find a durable solution. that is why we have been -- that is our thinking too, and that is why we have been so strongly in support of the arab league initiative and the transition process, that it laid out. if i may just add one other comment, senator. we too have noticed the increase in support from religious figures in some arab countries for taking up more arms against the syrian government. we've seen statements by various religious figures across the arab world. we have cautioned the opposition that if they declare some kind

of big jihad, they will frighten many of the fence sitters in places like damascus, and it will make ultimately finding a solution to this, a durable solution more difficult. we don't want to see syria go toward civil war. we want to see the violence stop immediately. and to see syria begin a political transition. >> the other thank you for those answers -- the other issue, it may have been touched on a bit, is this whole issue of weapons of mass destruction, and what's happening in syria, if and when the assad regime falls, are we considering and making plans regarding how to account for those weapons, how to assure they not fall into the hands of terrorist organizations such as al qaeda. is this an issue that's being discussed among the allies and people in the region that are

concerned? >> senator, you put your finger on an extremely important point. this is a topic that's being discussed actively with syria's neighbors, with our allies. in europe and elsewhere. syria is not even a signatory of the chemical weapons convention. this is a reminder of the destabilizing role syria has played over the years. the fact that these stockpiles exist. we don't have any indication at this point that these stockpiles have fallenen out of control to the syrian government. it's one of the reasons why a managed transition is so important, rather chaotic transition is important. but we are watching this, we're watching this carefully. some of the discussion we have to have in a different setting than today. >> thank you. ambassador, do you have any other thought on that issue? are you -- >> i would just underline that it is a subject of great concern

to us. and we are looking at what needs to be done, but let me assure you, senator, we have a lot of people working on it. >> well, i know you do, and, you know, when i get home to new mexico, a lot of people, you realize there's a lot of concern about kind of the brutal massacre of the syrian people by its ghost when really this started out as a peaceful protest and evolved into what we're seeing today. so we -- all of us, i think on the committee very much appreciate senator kerry holding the hearing. we very much appreciate both of you being here. and if there -- we're going to keep the record open until the end of the week, there may be additional submissions and you may or may not get additional questions as was indicated earlier. but thank you very much for your

service and with no additional questioners here, we would adjourn the hearing. coming up here on c-span3, military officials discuss options for dealing with iran. and later, cia director david petraeus and nasa administrator charles bolden discuss national security and the future of their departments. the prime minister of libya is speaking at the carnegie endowment for national piece about the changes in his country since the death of moammar gadhafi. see it live at 9:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span3. >> iran's top leader said

thursday he welcomed president obama's recent comments advocating diplomacy as a solution to tehran's nuclear ambitions. last month, a panel that included two former high ranking u.s. military officials discussed the policy options available to get iran to stop its nuclear program. from the center for strategic and international studies this is about an hour. >> we have a terrific program tonight. thank you all for coming out on behalf of the schieffer school journalism at texas christian university. this week we lost a couple great, great journalists. i wanted to remember them. anthony shaneed particularly had a relationship with csis. there's a great essay at

csis.org, a friend of anthony's for 20 years, i urge amount of you to watch it. this will be tweeted live tonight, csis underscore.org with the hash sign. schieffer series. with that, i'll give it to bob schieffer. >> welcome on behalf of tciu. we try to stay on top of the news. and we're right on top of it. we're here to talk about iran, what could be done about it, what should be done about it, what does the future hold there. jeff cartwright, united states marine corps retired, holds the csis herald round chair. he served as strategic command before being nominated and appointed as the eighth vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. served a four-year tenure as the

nation's second highest military officer across two presidential administrations. admiral william fallin on my right, former commander of the u.s. central command has served as the u.s. pacific command, the u.s. fleet forces command. and general david sanger. >> ole what's his name. >> who knows a lot about everything. he's the chief washington correspondent for the new york times, one of the newspaper's senior writers. he really isn't a general. i forget in this day of the internet there are no jokes. he's reported from new york, tokyo and washington. he's author of several books. you haven't seen his bi-line

lately because he's in the process of writing another book. what is your -- let's just start off and give you a little plug. >> the new book is a look at the obama administration's national security policy, it deals with with afghanistan and pakistan, it deals a lot with iran, as you would imagine, a bit with the arab spring and china. mostly it's an effort to try to explore what's new and different about this administration versus the bush administration. how you compare the promises that they came in with with what actually happened. the world's been a little busy in the years since the president was inaugurated. >> when does it come out? >> in june. >> let's just start out with this, i'd like to ask you two gentlemen. if president obama called you, if you were still on active duty and said, what do i do about

iran, what would you tell him? >> how do you spell that? >> i'm going to start with the easy questions. >> give us a rundown on where you think things are right now. what the situation looks like. >> my concern with iran, if you were to get one of those telephone calls is that we have as a nation embarked on negotiating diplomatic approach along with stretching out the time lines in order to have an opportunity for a diplomatic solution to work. there are those around the world and certainly in the united states that believe that clock is ticking and starting to run out of time. and so what are the logical next steps you would want to worry about, and think your way through. not necessarily because you want to execute them, but you want to have them in your head.