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

madam president, the success of any political path in syria requires that the government of syria be 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 appr

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

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 of

hope for syria. the five permanent u.n.urity 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 bit more

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

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

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 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

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

i don't think we're there in syria now.lomacy 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 which y

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 --

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 tha

he spoke about the situation in syria. i've been to syria many times. i did it with some distaste, shadowing foreign secretary and met leading officials in the syrian administration. murderers. i knew they were murderers. they murder 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's talk about negotiations in vienna, the assumption that somehow or other, that is going to 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 reveem in syria. which would make me very, very happy indeed. it isn't about getting rid of daish. getting rid of it would make me very happy indeed. it's about what practical action can result in some way in damaging daish. in stopping their atrociti

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

western syria.re 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 have a

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

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

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

can we be allies together and syria? i have ai have a feeling that will not be the end of the story. when he can. he will do so. understand the nature and so i think thati think that that -- we have to be very realistic. if it is defeated we are not going to be agreeing on what should be continuing in syria at all. >> i will may be just take off on that and go back to the question of what the russians expected. the language about the anti- hitler coalition was used in 2,001. why did it work? you know, the relationship seems to be on the uptake event. the russians were helpful in that initial phase, the fall phase, the fall of 2,001, war in afghanistan because we agreed on to the enemy was. it was in russia's interest to have the us and allies go in there and take care of the problem. we are not in the condition today. of course we should try to work with the russians, but to have a successful coalition like this we have to agree on who the enemy is. we do not accept by saying in general it is the islamic state. we don't

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

you can let go the syria process like it is and you will have a fragmented syria that at one point wille 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 is

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

in syria and iraq. and anywhere else it arises. and with respect to the homeland, while we don't have any credible imminent threats that i can relate to you today, fortunately, we do take homeland security very seriously. and we particularly take the protection of our own personnel seriously. for, among other reasons, the fact that they were -- many of them were singled out by these guys like general aid hussein. i went to chattanooga where there was a ceremony for six of our service members gunned down by somebody who had been radicalized basically online. born and raised in chattanooga, tennessee. so this is serious business, the violent extremist tendencies. while we need to get its heart in syria and iraq, we need to recognize that this metastasizes elsewhere and protect ourselves and protect our people. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, secretary carter and general dunford. thank you for being at the hearing this morning. gentlemen, having just returned last week from a congressional trip to afghani

as i have said, it is in syria where many of those against our country are born, so we must act in syria to deal with these threats ourselves. >> i would have preferred to hear an apology, but i want to discuss the facts. we are proposing to target very different things than we are targeting in northern iraq. what practical steps will be used to reduce civilian casualties? and what sort of targets will reduce the terrorist threats in the u.k.? cameron: clearly it is the leaders of this death cult itself. it is the training camps, the communications hubs. it is those that are plotting against us. as i am going to argue in a minute, the limited action that hussein, which was an air strike on syria, has already had an impact on isil, on daesch. that is an important point. how do we avoid civilian casualties? we have a starting point of wanting zero civilian casualties. one year and three months into the iraq he operations, we have not had any reports of civilian casualties. i am not standing here and saying that there are will these in war. of course there are. it is a very difficult situat

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

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 inter

the people of syria decide the future and state of syria. the u.n. plays a key role in the negotiations. we agree three principles should be upheld throughout the whole process >>> the national association of international studies, a meeting between the foreign ministers an 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 impartiality to the situation in syria. therefore, i think china can actually play an important and independsable role as a good between or good officers provider 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 the war and destruction. if peace will prevail, this will not only set

. >> i'm talking about syria as well. this is a whole fight. >> 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 wil

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

in iraq and syria. welcome to al jazeera. also ahead. >>> don't bomb syria >>> thousands rally in london ahead of a parliamentary vote on whether to approval 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 virt

inside syria. karen: so much of what we know is going on in syria comes across as soundbites. help us to understand more the situation on the ground and how the political situation is impacting the refugee crisis. >> well, the whole situation that is happening in syria with the crisis initially began because citizens of syria wanted freedom and they cried out for freedom and they still do that years later. we have had not just increased attacks on civilians and families inside syria, but we have seen out extremist forces it is implementing what they call an islamic state. there are a million people of 20 million syrians -- 8 million people under 22 million syrians that are internally displaced. these 8,000,000 internally displaced people are running one from bombings -- running away from bombings, and on the ground attacks from isis. karen: i want to turn to you. give us your view of how the unrest in the middle east, particularly in syria, has global conflict. >> you have a situation where we are

in iraq and syria. this al jazeera. also ahead. >> reporter: don't bomb syria >>> thousands rally in london ahead of a parliament ly vote. >> reporter: in baghdad as violence rises across iraq and the price of oil plum ets global apply and-- globalally >>> a new report reveals the hidden dangers of sugar in what we eat. -- dangers. obama says the u.s. is stepping up the fight against i.s.i.l. and more forces will be sent to fight the group in iraq and syria. american troops will advise and assist iraqi and kurdish forces battling the armed group in conjunction with the iraqi government. over time the forces will be able to conduct raids, free hostages, gather intelligence and capture islamic state leaders. president obama has expressed that the mission will be carried out alongside continued diplomatic efforts. the white house correspondent reports >> reporter: the united states is intensifying the war in iraq and syria in the hope that it will eventually lead to talk of peace. >>> next, in full coordination with the go

when it comes to the conflict in syria. u.s. authorities charge the friend of one of the san bernardino shooters with terrorism-related offenses. enrique marquez bought two of the guns used in the deadly rampage. and you think you know who donald trump supporters are? we speak to some who break the mold and may explain surging polls. welcome to our viewers on public television in america and also around the globe. vladmir putin held his annual news conference covering everything from the conflict in syria to donald trump. is greatest language was directed at turkey who shot down a russian jet last month. the situation in syria, russia and the u.s. agree on a general approach to settling the crisis there. our correspondent reports. richard: vladmir putin's end of year news conference is a marathon event with hours of carefully vetted questions and the president who has ruled russia for 15 years often uses it to speak out about international disputes. there is no more pressing issue han this, the crisis sparked by the shooting dow

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

because political transition in syria is essential to a durable end state to this -- civil war in syria that started this whole business in syria. and that would mean -- and at that time 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 in syria. there's a political sentiment that in the meantime we're using forces some kurds up north the ybg and we're trying to accumulate additional syrian arabs that want to take their homes back from isil. t 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 alwoits, which are shia, are going to join up with the opposition soonie forces to go after isil? the political transition is exactly to have a syria that is once again whole, multisectarian for sure like all those states over there with all the complication that is go with that and that we see in iraq.

and ben wedeman there inside of syria, and be care canful. let's talk more about the emerging strategist with former required terrorism analyst general mark hertling and paul cruickshank. so general hertling, the bases could join some u.s. special operation forces, and is it going to be making a difference? >> yes, i won't put a number on it, but it is the plan as we have said from the beginning a year ago as the rebel and the iraqi forces stood up, we would continue to contribute more and more to their capability. that is what is happening right now. when you have task organizing which the army does, and the military does it really well, and the special operations at the next high level than the rest of the military. you are putting a group on the ground with task-oriented to accomplish specific tasks tha. that is what is occurring right now, a group of individuals to act very, very quickly, and contribute to the fight on the ground, and help the indigenous forces that they might not have had before. >> and it sounds like they have had boots

military presence in iraq and syria.just last month, obama broke a pledge of no troops on the ground by ordering the deployment of around 50 special forces to syria. earlier this month, the u.s. said it was deploying another team of less than 100 special forces to iraq. and last week, the pentagon said for the first time it's ready to send u.s. advisers to help the iraqi government retake ramadi from isil. in his remarks, president obama acknowledged that with isil's continued control of large parts of iraq and syria and recent terrorist attacks abroad, progress "needs to keep coming faster." and in an implicit rebuke of middle eastern allies such as saudi arabia and turkey, obama did not mention any of them among the nations assisting the u.s.-led coalition. instead, obama said the "others" he did not name should do more in the fight. >> we recognize that progress needs to keep coming faster. no one knows that more than the countless syrians and iraqis living -- living every day under as well as those in san bernardino

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

oil that it steals from the territories it occupies in syria and iraq.y according to russia is the principal buyer of this oil, and it gets into turkey by three main smuggling routes, and after that it's then sold on. the revenues from this are then channelled back to isil in the form of mercenaries and ammunition and weapons, but the main controversial plank of its allegation is not this. the main controversial plank is this is not some casual smuggling operation, this is something that the turkish state is involved in and the president and his family directly profit from. erdogan recently has said that if it's proven that turkey is involved in this trade, then he will resign. russia says it's not actually trying to get that to happen. what it is doing here, it insists, is trying to lay the evidence out for international journalists like myself to investigate, and also to foreign military attaches who are present at this military briefing as well, for them to take away and act on. what russia is trying to do it says is shut down isil's illegal trade in

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

strange you're going to do it in iraq but not syria.t 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 by