assad is key to protecting.if assad falls, that could lead to his destruction or in many ways jeopardy in lebanon. so i think iran is going to be really hard to dissuade from its playbook in syria which is unconditional basic support of assad and arming and -- we just heard about it. they're recruiting all sorts of shias, afghan shias. there are shias from all over the place. iran is summoning them to the syria battlefield. iran is really going all out. so, what gets iran to change its playbook then? okay so is they want assad to stay, don't want him to lose. very hard. what gets them to change? what gets them to change would be the fear, the perception that assad is going to lose. until there is a perception that assad is going to fall, iran will not change its view. now this gets us into a whole discussion of what needs to be done to create that perception. we can certainly talk about that in the q&a. jeffrey white of the washington institute put out a great piece on the crucial role that assad's air force pla

get the majestic support, fly weapons over a rock to assad, deliver as much to assad as you can.hat is the basic playbook. in iraq, same thing. the islamic state takes -- payal, iran pants next, falls back to the default playbook. send them to baghdad immediately. revive the shiite militias that iran started in iraq in 2004, when we were there. iran set them up to fight us. after we left in 2011, the shiite alleges -- militias started running for the parliament and various local councils. takes mosul.tate the shiite militias get the weapons out of the closet and appear on the streets again. there were fairly effective. they had weaponry, etc.. , we, the united states, somehow got iran to deviate slightly from this default playbook. strong,rted out very supporting the prime minister. shore him up, help them. is, he was losing so badly, the iraqi security force collapse so badly, that iran was not certain if this default labor could succeed. calculated even though we don't want to be in bed with the great satan, united states, the great satan is needed in this case. to help shore u

regime, the fighters against assad. you've got the fighters against the fighters of assad. and you've got fighters coming in from all over to fight here. we did not address that -- and i've read and listened to the president speak about this. we basically chose to leave the current regime, the assad -- off sort of the table when we're training free syrian fighters to go after isis, or isil, however you want to describe it, just the islamic state, and we're saying we'll deal with the assad part of this later. i'm trying to figure out what are you doing -- or are you doing to curb outside fighters coming in on his behalf? is that part of your policy? and if it is, that contradicts the policy of basically leaving him for another day. >> certainly most of the efforts that i've talked about here today are related to sunni foreign fighters. they are fighters who are going to fight for isil, al nusra, khorasan group. those groups. we are concerned about the other foreign fighters, if you will, that come into syria, the shia fo

as you say russia, iran, hezbollah are protecting assad government and it's clear assad is major part of the problem. there are 11 million refugees and displaced people in syria because of bashar al assad. the administration needs to work hard to create a syria poll sthay -- policy that will be consistent with what it's trying to do in iraq. it's a combined battle space. isis is in both places. >> what could that somebody is there coherent, long-term political strategy for syria that can work, defeat isis and also look at assad? >> i think you have to look first at this refugee is situation. it's becoming catastrophic. half of the country, 11 million people, have lost their onlies and, of course, as you know more than a million ref refugees in jordan and more than a million lebanon, the administration and allies in europe and world will have to consider humanitarian corridors into syria, placed at quarters protected by armed force to get food and medical aid into places where where refugees are besieged. it's urgeant, moral imperative and those numbers likely to increase if we don't d

we need to state clearly if there's no future for assad in syria and seeing assad go remains a top priority and the interests and goals of the united states simply don't align with assad and iran. assad is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of syrians. we also have the horrific pictures smuggled out of damascus by ceaser, a prafer, the syrian army defector. assad is a magnet of extremism. as long as he remains in power, courtesy of iran and hezbollah. we must determine and understand that the u.s. plays a unique role in this situation. our capabilities are unmatched. i understand that the american people are uneasy about getting more involved and the conflict half bay around the globe. i feel the same way. we're tired of war. we want to bring your men and women home. we want to work with local partners is so important to help prevent future escalation of american involvement. but we must not forget in so many places around the world, freedom, dignity and justice are under constant attack and i firmly believe if the u.s. does not lead the way as a champion of these values no one

this is what assad wanted. he wanted to make it him versus the most extreme. >> sure, from the beginning. >> exactly. >> he wanted to portray himself as the balward against terroris terrorist? >> we could have acted but we would have had to take very bold action and we would have had to have supports in the region and try to force him to the table when there was somebody to negotiate with. >> since we are in the middle east, i know you supported the action in libya. >> yes, i did. >> tom friedman in "the new york times" wrote a column saying that decapitation didn't work in libya, which is basically getting rid of gadaffi. >> dem citations didn't work in egypt and abdication can which we hoped assad would do, we tried invasion, occupation, who knows what else we have tried in iraq and none of that has worked is it hopeless? is there nothing we can do in the middle east to help? >> so i think you have to ask compared to what if you want to look at libya and syria. libya is in deep trouble. when gadaffi was there

and the assad regime. i think iraq is possible -- probable, i don't know -- possible to make headway. i find it very difficult to see any viable solution anytime soon to the syrian war, and the danger is, enif the rebels were to win -- let's say -- >> charlie: successful against i.s.i.s. >> -- successful against i.s.i.s. and also put enough fresh on the assad regime, the danger is warlordism is so deep and entrenched that we would have a civil war play out in syria after that. this is -- you know, i actually fear that syria could be a far longer war than iraq. >> charlie: thank you for coming. great to see you. >> thank you. >> charlie: the article by robin wright is in the "new yorker" magazine for december 8, 2014, "the vortex: a turkish city on the frontier of syria's war." thank you for joining us. see you next time. visit us online at pbs.org and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> rose: additional funding provided by:

assad? >> these things do go hand in hand. in order to get a political solution, you have to have a counterweight to extremist groups like isil. that's what we're doing with the train/equip effort and some other efforts. >> i yield back my time. >> thank you, gentlemen. the chair will recognize the gentleman from illinois. please don't take any of this personally. you mentioned 25 given to the peshmerga, 2500 to the iraqi government. along a 650 mile border that the kurds have with isis. 25 mraps is really a joke. honestly. i know it's not your decision. >> when i talked to our folks there, forces of fire and not -- take out an mrap better, it was crazy. also it's kind of fun on the committee to see all these kind of new hawks that i remember talking two years ago about what we were going to have to go back to iraq and people thought it was a joke and thought i was joking and here we are. >> devastating foreign policy decisions. up to the red line discussion, there was legitimate talk about

we are not attacking bashar assad, this butcher. in fact, bashar assad has intensified his attacks on the free syrian army. intensified them. and not surprisingly, the morale of the free syrian army is very low. so general allen and others have recently proposed a no-fly zone or aircraft exclusion zone, something we've been arguing for for about three years. this president still refuses to do it. it's heartbreaking. it's heart it breaking and it's tragic. and it will go down in american history as one of the most shameful chapters because of our failure and the president's personal decision not to arm the free syrian army when all of his key national security advisor -- his secretary of state, hillary clinton; head of the c.i.a., general petraeus; and secretary of defense, secretary panetta -- all strongly recommended providing arms to the free syrian army. in the case -- so i'll move on. on ukraine, what putin has seen is the president mobilizing the international community both in support of ukraine and to isolate russia for its a

>> i don't think we're helping assad. i think assad's problems go well beyond whatever we do with isil. and certainly if he's taking some consolation in the fact we are attacking isil, i think he's making a big mistakes. >> well, i just am trying to figure this out. if isil is coming in -- the fighters are coming in to fight assad, we're trying to denigrate isil, so as we -- do we encourage or incite more fighters to come in? i guess that's the question. are our atictions or our inactions -- either our actions to go after isil inciting more fighters to come in or our inaction to go after assad, is that inciting more fighters to come in? >> i'm not sure i can give you a definitive answer here because i can't point to specific evidence. it's hard for me to put myself in the head of a foreign fighter who sees air strikes being carried out -- >> what about in terms of the advertising that they do to bring the fighters in? do they use our actions or inactions -- >> clearly they are trying to use our actions as an incentive or

regime, the fighters against assad. then you've got the fighters against the fighters of assad. and you've got fighters coming in from all over to fight here. we did not address that -- and i've read and listened to the president speak about this. we basically chose to leave the current regime, the assad -- off sort of the table when we're training free syrian fighters to go after isis, or isil, however you want to describe it, just the islamic state, and we're saying we'll deal with the assad part of this later. i'm trying to figure out what are you doing -- or are you doing to curb outside fighters coming in on his behalf? is that part of your policy? and if it is, that contradicts the policy of basically leaving him for another day. >> certainly most of the efforts that i've talked about here today are related to sunni foreign fighters. they are fighters who are going to fight for isil, al nusra, those groups. we are concerned about the other foreign fighters, if you will, that come into syria, the shia foreign fight

sokey doesn't like assad, they're not helping with isis. we don't like a solder or isis, but we think isis is the more problematic of the two. paints a picture of where we are going. you to spend $500 million for the free syrian army fighters for which you can provide no answers onto the american people are supposed to continue supporting the administration's policy -- imax what the heck it is. i am asking what the heck it is. >> i have tried to do that to the best of my ability. i was not asked to be a witness on our broader syria policy or discuss the future of syria. i have said that -- the essentials of our policy are to try and have a political settlement inside of syria. it enables to read you have a democratic future without al-assad. to be free from terrorist threats and terrorist organizations as well. i really feel that if you want to delve more deeply into our , we can send someone who is an authoritative spokes person on our policy in syria. >> i appreciate that. those are great platitudes that all people can agree with. korsan

assad? >> these things do go hand in hand. in order to get a political solution, you have to have a counterweight to extremist groups like isil. that's what we're doing with the train/equip effort and some other efforts. >> i yield back my time. >> thank you, gentlemen. the chair will recognize the gentleman from illinois. please don't take any of this personally. you mentioned 25 given to the peshmerga, 2500 to the iraqi government. along a 650 mile border that the kurds have with isis. 25 mraps is really a joke. honestly. i know it's not your decision. >> when i talked to our folks there, forces of fire and not -- take out an mrap better, it was crazy. also it's kind of fun on the committee to see all these kind of new hawks that i remember talking two years ago about what we were going to have to go back to iraq and people thought it was a joke and thought i was joking and here we are. >> devastating foreign policy decisions. up to the red line discussion, there was legitimate talk about

i don't want to go to a place we should be working with a side. -- assad. my only point in raising that is certainly among the neighbors there is beginning to be a big split in how we approach syria. those are the things we need to figure out. there is an arab face on this. right now obviously we are viewed as taking the lead over time. bombediranians airstrikes against isis last week. they played a role in stopping isis from going to baghdad. good or bad? >> it is interesting. in iraq, we would perceive we have some interest. they certainly are opposing isis inside iraq. on the other hand, they have concerns about us having alignments with the sunni population. in syria, they are working against us. they support hezbollah. hezbollah has been helping the regime. the regime is killing the moderate opposition. and we are having training sites throughout the region to train more moderate syrian rebels to help us. at the same time through hezbollah, iran is killing them. >> this leads to the question of nuclear talks with iran. you have talked in the past about

america doesn't want to build up assad.n fact, they are doing as much as they can economically to embargo the country and to weaken assad as they are bombing the main opposition centers in syria that belong to at a time jihadist, al-qaeda and isis. >> what you are saying is the battle against isil has fundamentally changed the context in which the international world sees the conflict within syria, itself? >> yes. it does. i mean, in a sense, the united states now sees assad government as a bullwells fargo bank against isis and nusra. were he to fall tomorrow, the chances are that the jihadist would take damascus and all of the other major cities. it would be difficult to get them out of that. so even though the united states abhors assad, they do not want to see him talk but they don't have to have peace talks with him and are unlikely to recognize this russian drive and try to give it any kind of push that might be necessary to make it successful or even begin to be successful. so, i think the united states is going to st

it is one thing that you're fairs are being overseen by bashar al-assad or nouri al-maliki, but it'snother to put up with daily life imposed by the islamic state which is separate severe and austere. >> absolutely. you see the same kind of growing frustration, the difference between a group that is far away and have ideals that you agree w and then living with them when you need your crash picked up. we saw the same situation with hamas in gaza. they had to take over, they had to moderate somewhat to meet the governance obligations of that territory, and you see tremendous dissatisfaction of them as an organization in control. >> praying five times a day may satisfy some personal aspirations but won't make stores open up and have bread when they do. >> that's right. and the dissatisfaction that the sunnies felt under the previous regime, it's not like the day-to-day life is going to get any better under isil. >> michael, the is there a plan yet, a coherent approach of what to do in syria and western iraq? >> no, this is one of the biggest challenges for the united states going in to

i frankly think that bashir al assad is the incubator of isis. even a terror group like isis looks better than the guy who has killed your wife and son, as he has done in so many cases. you mentioned -- by the way, we've heard recent reports even that the fsa is complaining of us cutting funding off to them and not even able to pay their soldiers anymore. i hope that's not true. that would be devastating. as a military guy myself, i expect a paycheck. it doesn't mean i'm any less of a patriot. just means i have to support people when i was full-time active duty. one thing i do want to ask you, though, when we talk about, for instance, strikes in syria, you mentioned loiter time over syria, as having to come from the gulf. has there been any negotiations with turks in place to open up those bases? if so, what's been the administration's response? from what i understand, if there's an air exclusion zone, which the administration is not -- in fact, i've heard that. i would like to you address that, sir. again, thank you for being here. >> congressma

>> so i think, you know, the anti-assad campaign doesn't mean anti-ally. and i think that, you know, if you listen closely to the conversations that are taking place, there's desire for assad to lead but then there's a desire to figure out some way of having a government -- by the way this is all easy that talk about much hard tore do over and over again as we've seen. to create a partner shim between the bureaucrats that do exist within syria do have the ability to cause the government to function so that we don't do the same kind of thing that we did in 2003 in iraq but also bring the sunni population into the fold. i mean, again, that's so much easier said than done. but when we say assad we're talking about him as an individual over time but keeping many of the intellect if you will in place. back to iraq, i mean at the end obviously not in iran's interest for the -- i mean, they have some -- they have actually a lot of interest for us in a way. it's not in their interest that the sunni extremists continue to gain territory. so look, we have allowed a

assad is also a magnet for extremism.he conflict in syria and iraq as he ever end as long remains in power. lastly, we must determine and understand that the u. s. takes role in this. i understand that the american are uneasy about getting more involved in the conflict around the world. this is another reason why working with local partners is so important. will help prevent further escalation of american involvement. we must not forget that freedom, dignity, and justice are constantly under attack in other parts of the world. if u. s. does not lead as the one pion in his values, no else will. there are times when defending advancing this vision involves difficult choices and sacrifices. that is what makes the united states the one and indispensable nation. i look forward to hearing the questions and answers, and the testimonies. i once asked my first question, question iran. to defeat isis. have involvement does iran in iraq -- both in the air and on the ground? can we prevent our best intentions in iraq from empowering

assad has been able to get away with dropping deadly bombs on aleppo. they get away with his own aggression. in some ways it has helped him militarily. if it was just a war, the world would pay more attention. >> what are the options for this administration as it looks at syria, looks at iraq, and tries to ascertain how to fight isis? and be true to its commitment to regime change in syria? how do they balance that? fight two wars at the same time? >> i think that is exactly what they are trying to do. focused largely on iraq. trying to regain territory with help from u.s. air power. after that is achieved, once isis is forced back into syria, held the rebels become strong enough so they could put pressure on isis and the assad regime. iraq is possible to make headway. i find it difficult to see any viable solution anytime soon. even if the rebels were to to win, the danger is a warlordism is so entrenched elite have a civil war play out in syria after that. i fear syria could be a longer war than iraq. >> thank you. thank you for joining us. see you ne

of view, of course it is obligated by the fact that they also want to remove policy and get rid of assad. is there going to be a no-fly zone? >> the reporting has gotten ahead of the policy decisions. can i give you some granularity? turkey has borne the brunt of the refugee outpouring and has a critical role to play in many asked x -- aspects, counter financing, countering the flow of foreign fighters, and could play an increasingly important role in the military site if it chose to do so. already turkey has committed to providing a training facility, as has saudi arabia, for our efforts to train the money it -- the moderate syrian opposition. that is a very important contribution. we are able to use turkish facilities for different parts of our operations. the question is, would turkey be willing to go all in, as some of the arab countries have, with their positions? they share our strong view that assad has lost all legitimacy and you cannot have a stable syria as long as he is in power, but their statement on the counter-isil campaign has established a broad swath of a no-fly zone an

we are not attacking bashar assad, this butcher. in fact, bashar assad has intensified his attacks on the free syrian army. intensified them. and not surprisingly, the morale of the free syrian army is very low. so general allen and others have recently proposed a no-fly zone or aircraft exclusion zone, something we've been arguing for for about three years. this president still refuses to do it. it's heartbreaking. it's heart it breaking and it's tragic. and it will go down in american history as one of the most shameful chapters because of our failure and the president's personal decision not to arm the free syrian army when all of his key national security advisor -- his secretary of state, hillary clinton; head of the c.i.a., general petraeus; and secretary of defense, secretary panetta -- all strongly recommended providing arms to the free syrian army. in the case -- so i'll move on. on ukraine, what putin has seen is the president mobilizing the international community both in support of ukraine and to isolate russia for its a

however the turkish leader hosting one of bashar al-assad's best allies.can power consumption in china, impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain, and the use of medical technology in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 70% of r mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. you don't need to think that makes our lives possible. because we do. we're exxonmobil... and powering the world responsibly is our job. because boiling an egg... isn't as simple as just boiling an egg. life takes energy. energy lives here. . lou: the white house's state department contradicting one another about proposals to create a no-fly zone along the turkey-syrian border following reports turkish officials narrowed differences with the united states in a joint military mission proposal. joining us

coming up in the next 60 minutes, syria's assad's government agrees to take place in peace talks as government forces strike rebel helders. defending erbil. they say they need more weapons to win the fight against isil. more than 100,000 people are displaced in the worst flooding to strike malaysia in dick assessed. welcoming back prisonersers of war. plus. >> working on a computer system to regulate the movement. this is how qatar could provide a more efficient and reliable source of renewable energy. >> a top story in the syrian government has officially agreed to participate in peace talks in moscow. russ russia's foreign minister said it hopes to host talks between bashar al-assad's government in late january. its unclear as to who will take part. >>> intention fighting continues as syrian government keeps up its airstrikes in aleppo. the attacks killed at least three people on friday. they targeted areas controlled by isil fighters in the city of albad. at least 36 people were killed in similar strikes around the same area on thursday. residents say helicopters and planes dropped barely b

to get rid of assad. there is also the fear that if assad is toppled, ankara is to who have some sort of relationship with jihad so they can deal with them. i think overall i see a turkey which is no longer in the days looking west, but are looking to become a power play in the region that they have to follow or follow western interests as much as they did in 1990. i covered ken baker's visit to turkey in 1990 when he visited to discuss turkey's role in the fight against saddam hussein. it was kind of interesting of course. it could dangle this idea that america would help turkey gain entry into the european union. i am not too sure that would work now. we had this week after the round up of journalists by the authorities in turkey number of diplomats complaining about this and then we had a speech saying the e.u. should mind its own business. i think we are dealing with a change. >> tony, how do you think turkey sees this playing out? >> first, i apologize because i'm not really a little sick. my voice d

you have to deal with assad because assad is reeking havoc in syria, killing hundreds of thousands ofeople and also bombing and attacking the very forces that we're trying to assist inside of syria. so the fact of the matter is we have resisted all those overtours. this is the issue, lou, that got secretary hagel in trouble with the administration. he felt the syria strategy was flawed and we need to do something about the assad regime. the administration always counters and says there is no military solution in syria. well, no one says there is. but if you took assad's air power away as the president of turkey is advocating or at least limit it severely, you begin to get the possibility of a political solution because assad becomes defanged and those around him start looking for other answers. >> if erdogan wants assad out and wants them dead, why doesn't he attack? he has the military to do it. he can trounce syria's forces, could he not? >> oh, yes. he could clearly make a difference. but he wants to have his cake and eat it, too. he has been -- >> the hell with his cake. we've see

so my question is how do you balance going after isil, and are you helping assad, are we helping assad in that regard. and then the second issue that i have read and heard people say is that our actions, whether it's bombing, air strikes or whatever, that we tend to inflame certain folks that will cause them to use our actions as a recruitment for isil. i would like to hear your reaction to that. i yield back, mr. poe. >> anyone else wish to make an opening statement? mr. kennedy, one minute. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you to the chairman and ranking members of this committee for holding this hearing. to our witnesses, thank you for coming here today, thank you for your service to our country. a number of my colleagues have already touched on the issues around trying to limit the number of foreign fighters coming in to syria in the region and obviously that's critical. the other as pekts of this is our ability to monitor their movements after they're there and once they return home. this puts an awful lot of pressure on our intelligence agency's apparatus to try and make sure

you raise the question of turkey, assad.don't forget, you've got the russians who you're working with through the iranian negotiations. i mean, which is a bigger threat, isil or nuclear armed iran? you'll have to make that judgment. and to a certain extent in the cold war, it was easy. if you help the soviets, it's against us, and vice versa. and remember, that we prevailed against the soviet union, not militarily. they collapsed economically. okay? they collapsed because they were trying to maintain a very large military establishment, and the economy was going down. and the key event -- and it's coming back now -- the saudis dropped the price of oil to $10 a barrel by 1985. and that -- you know john mccain, how he describes russia? as a country -- a gas station masquerading as a country. that was the key thing. you didn't beat them. you contain them. we had the forces, and all of that type of thing. i'll give you an analogy, and no analogy is perfect, where in vietnam we diverted our attention. we said communism was the en

but they also need assad. >> the priorities are more than bashar assad. i think it comes, the guarantor is more the russians than the iranians. i think the russians need as we do to start to unravel this phenomenon. and syria is a good place to start. damascus is not that far away from the caucuses. and this problem with stability that isis in syria and iraq is preventing goes back to the caucuses quite easily. and don't forget, the fighters are not just coming from chechnya. we have seen them from goes back from uzbekistan and other of the stans. >> and why are they doing it? do they believe in the mission? >> part of it is the media, the role the media play in isis and other groups are quite successful. they take cherry picking bits of the koran and say this is what the koran says, which is completely and utterly untrue. and they have been very successful in the media and in reaching out to the use all over the world, frustrating people who are without jobs. and don't forget they are offering very good salaries. part of the problem that we had with isis

can rest assured assad will show up. >> do you think that putin would be in favor of assad himself leavinghe picture if other parts of the regime were left in place? >> i think it's pretty clear now that it would be near impossible to move forward for as long as assad remains in power but, you know everybody remembers the experience with iraq when the entire sadaam government was dismantled virtually overnight and the country descended into darkness. known wants that for syria especially with isil so close to damascus. i think it's pretty clear and there's a lot of consensus even among opposition, that at this point, it's best to maintain some integrity to the regime in syria, but get rid of the top head certainly the president and his family, and his close circle, and this way, you know, the country can start to reconcile and maybe move forward. >> when we were talking a year ago about international brokered peace talks those fell apart without real results. what has changed since then? >> well, not much has changed but i think the biggest thing is that moscow is onboard. moscow might be

we need to state clearly if there's no future for assad in syria and seeing assad go remains a top priority and the interests and goals of the united states simply don't align with assad and iran. assad is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of syrians. we also have the horrific pictures smuggled out of damascus by ceaser, the syrian army defector. assad is a magnet of extremism. as long as he remains in power, courtesy of iran and hezbollah. we must determine and understand that the u.s. plays a unique role in this situation. our capabilities are unmatched. i understand that the american people are uneasy about getting more involved and the conflict half bay around the globe. i feel the same way. we're tired of war. we want to bring your men and women home. we want to work with local partners is so important to help prevent future escalation of american involvement. but we must not forget in so many places around the world, freedom, dignity and justice are under constant attack and i firmly believe if the u.s. does not lead the way as a champion of these values no one else will

lou: if everyone wants assad out and wants them dead, why doesn't he attack? the military to do it. he could trounce syria's forces, could he not? >> yes. he could clearly make a difference. but he wants to have his cake and eat it too, and he's been a huge problem. lou: we've seen this thing before. it's the world's only superpower used as a proxy for some two bit state. are you kidding me? >> i agree with you. fact of the matter is we also want to get his basis, it's been pretty frustrating not able to use the basis that he has. this is a member of nato, lou, and we're having difficulty. lou: i'm not nearly as impressed by that as i once was, let me be clear, general. nato looks like a paper tiger of immense proportions. we haven't responded in ukraine, we didn't respond in crimea. played for a fool by turkey. we haven't made a decision about how to destroy the islamic state and we've got nato allies involved in the so-called coalition effort. we're not doing well, are we, general? >> no, the strategy in syria, what we're trying to work out is improvement in

. >> in syria, bashar al-assad's government says it's ready to talk to the opposition to try and end the almost four year long civil war. now this is in response to russia's proposal for dialogue after two rounds of peace talks failed earlier this year. the syrian government says it is open to preliminary consultations in moscow. russia is planning to host the talks between the assad government and the opposition in late january but not sure who is going to take part. kimberly halkett is reporting. >> syrian government and its opposition will have peace talks but i can tell you this will be looked at with some skepticism in washington considering it's counter to u.s. policy. president obama has long maintained that president bashar al-assad the syrian president must go, he must step aside for the sake of the syrian people, that is his exact statement yet we see this discussion of peace talks. so there is this concern and this view in washington that as long as bashar al-assad remains in power that syria remains divided. there are also concerns about the objectivity of the russia to h