about our "trying to train moderate Syrian rebels to fight ISIS," Gen. Clark said
'When asked about our "trying to train moderate Syrian rebels to fight ISIS," Gen. Clark said "You have to go back to say who is the political leadership? The problem we've had from Syria in the beginning is we haven't had real political leadership. That political leadership needed to be in there on the ground in Syria directing the military forces. They didn't. They wouldn't. They complained they couldn't because the U.S. wouldn't provide air cover for them." There is MORE:
Aired September 28, 2015 - 17:00 ET
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: "Let's get some more analysis on what's going on right now. Joining us the former NATO supreme allied commander, retired General Wesley Clark.
General Clark, thanks very much for joining us. You saw those icy glares, staring at this toast between these two presidents, Putin and Obama. It's sort of reminiscent of the bad old days of the Cold War. And you served in the U.S. military during those bad old days.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK, FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER: We're back to the geostrategic chess board, and this is Russia's move. They put a knight into the Middle East, so to speak. A chess piece. They pole-vaulted over Turkey, and now they've got their base established and a lot of key. And they've got tanks, air defense, combat aircraft, doing drone reconnaissance and presumably soon starting to strike to support Bashar Assad.
BLITZER: But in the process of helping Bashar al-Assad, which the U.S. is not too keen on, but if they do help beat ISIS, the U.S. would welcome that, right?
CLARK: Well, you would think so. But there's a larger issue that has to be worked also, because a lot of U.S. allies don't want Iran to dominate the region. And this is really about Russia and Iran's hegemonic aspirations in the region.
ISIS is, to some extent, a reaction against Iran. Iran had a dominant position in Iraq in the government, forcing the Sunnis out. We know that certain Sunni nations supported ISIS in the early days before they recognized they'd created a Frankenstein there. So they're worried about ISIS, but they're also worried about Iran.
And the talks still from these nations underneath is that the Iran nuclear agreement, however welcoming it is to forestall a war, might empower even greater ambitions by Iran in the region.
BLITZER: So what should the U.S. do, now that Russia is really maneuvering, putting in tanks, putting in heavy weapons, planes and troops, for that matter, into Syria?
CLARK: Well, No. 1 at the military level, you've got to go for some kind of deconfliction, because you don't want Russia and U.S. forces actually fighting. You don't want the aircraft seeing each other on radar and engaging with air-to-air missiles by accident or by mistake.
But I think the crucial thing for the United States is to focus on the end-state we're seeking in Syria. You know, we've never picked out -- we said Assad must go, but who's going to take his place? Is it just to be a democratic election? Is it a free-for-all? Are we going to have a series of weak parliamentary leader emerge, each for six months, like the Syrian opposition's doing right, now with no leadership? That won't work in this region.
BLITZER: We're standing by this hour. The two presidents are going to be meeting here at the United Nations, Putin and Obama. First time in two years they've met across -- face-to-face, for that matter.
And some of President Obama's critics, as you know, they say Putin right now is almost completely outmaneuvering President Obama in Ukraine, for example, and now in Syria.
CLARK: Well, actually, although I supported sending lethal weapons to Ukraine to make sure, I think President Obama, he took a chance that Putin wouldn't move. And Putin hasn't moved beyond this. And President Obama's still...
BLITZER: He's got Crimea.
CLARK: Yes. And we haven't surrendered it legally either. So we're not going to take it back by force. We're going to take it back by economic development. If what we believe in is true, that democracy and the free market system are superior to the kind of kleptocracy that Putin's running.
Now, with respect to Syria, the key thing is who follows Assad? Is it a general from the Syrian military? Which general would be acceptable to us?
Because our key point is you do have to have strong leadership in this region. You can't have an extended period. We know U.S. forces on the ground can't broker this agreement. So -- and former Syrian intelligencia who are living now in Paris and advocating for the Syrian opposition, they don't seem to be strong enough. Maybe I'm misjudging them, but I've met with a number of them. Got to have strong leadership on the ground.
BLITZER: All right. General, we have more to discuss, including this very worrisome development from the U.S. perspective: a new intelligence-sharing alliance emerging between Iran, Iraq and Russia. What's going on? Stay with us. Much more with General Clark right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: We're following the breaking news. President Obama and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, they're officially meeting at the United Nations now.
This was the scene earlier today when the two leaders toasted at a U.N. luncheon. We're back with the former NATO supreme allied commander, retired General Wesley Clark.
General Clark, it's now been reported and confirmed that there's a new intelligence-sharing cooperation deal involving Iraq, involving Russia, Iran and Syria, for that matter. Is that good for the U.S. that these countries -- Iraq, for example, a country the U.S. liberated from Saddam Hussein, now working with Bashar al-Assad, with Iran and Russia? The U.S. is not involved in this.
CLARK: Well, we are actually involved in this through Iraq. And we'll probably get some information coming out of this. So the idea for the United States would be take as much as we can, lose as little as possible out of this.
It's not good geo-strategically. It might -- it might help us in targeting.
But you know, the larger question is what is Russia doing there and who are they going after? Bashar Assad's regime has deliberately avoided ISIS, because he's wanted to pose for the west the alternative, "It's either me or ISIS."
So he's gone after the moderate Syrians. They were a softer, easier target. And so -- what now is Russia (AUDIO GAP) or are they really going to go after is?
BLITZER: This regime in Baghdad right now seems much more inclined to work with Iran, for that matter, Russia and Syria than maybe even the United States.
CLARK: Well, this regime in Iraq has never really, even since Maliki, he was always a tool of Iran. I mean, we kept forces there. They used us. But the Iranians did not want us to extend that U.S. presence past 2011.
BLITZER: That Iranian arc is going from Iran through Iraq into Syria and into Lebanon through Hezbollah. That's a source, in the Sunni Arab world, of enormous concern right now.
CLARK: Absolutely. It's a concern to Turkey. It's a concern to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and of course, to Israel, as well.
BLITZER: Thirty thousand foreign forces now, foreigners, have now joined up with ISIS in Syria and Iraq right now. And it doesn't seem to be ending by any means. They keep coming in. How do you stop that flow?
CLARK: You have to stop that in the source countries by tightening up on matters of, like, Internet privacy and things like this.
But the point is, Wolf, that once you put the Russian forces in there, you will further incentivize volunteers to come in to support ISIS. This will be a war against Sunni Islam.
My Sunni Islam friends tell me, confidentially, they say, "Look, no one's going to fight against Hezbollah any way, unless they're zealots." They say, "We had to use these crazy Sunnis, these terrorists. They were the only ones willing to fight." That's how ISIS got its start, and this will further mobilize ISIS.
BLITZER: It's sort of pitiful what's going on. The U.S. trying to train moderate Syrian rebels to fight ISIS, a half a billion dollars appropriated for that kind of a mission. And in the end the U.S. military central commander says, "You know what? They maybe trained four or five." Four or five. Not four or five thousand. Four or five. Isn't that pitiful?
CLARK: Wolf, you have to start at the top of this. You have to go back to say who is the political leadership? The problem we've had from Syria in the beginning is we haven't had real political leadership. That political leadership needed to be in there on the ground in Syria directing the military forces. They didn't. They wouldn't. They complained they couldn't because the U.S. wouldn't provide air cover for them.
But in fact, look, in Bosnia, Asmir Begovic would never have held onto Sarajevo if he hadn't stayed there, and there wouldn't be a Bosnia today, except for Asmir Begovic's personal courage.
Where is that Syrian -- Free Syrian leader who's got the courage and the force of personality to hold a moderate opposition? Apparently it doesn't exist. I don't know. But that's what we in the United States should be looking for and cultivating. And the number of Americans trying apparently to get in maybe 250 Americans are there right now fighting with ISIS. How do you stop that?
CLARK: Well, I think you've got to reach the parents of these young people in the United States. By the way, they're probably not all Islamic. ISIS recruiting has reached out beyond Muslims to young people simply looking to make a name for themselves and a service for themselves.
But you've got to reach the parents. The parents don't appreciate the danger until it's too late. So you've got to see -- parents have to watch what are my children looking at on the Internet? Who are they talking to? And why?
BLITZER: And if the parents suspect something, it's pretty hard for a parent to call the FBI and say, "I'm worried about my son, what he's doing." That's pretty hard for any parent to do.
CLARK: Sure. You can't get to the FBI, but you can get to the local police. You can go to school authorities. You can go to other community leaders. You can go to your imam, if you're Muslim.
And these people know the connections. I mean, we've been pretty active in terms of U.S. government work with local authorities to try to help local authorities deal with this problem.
BLITZER: One final question. NATO -- and you were the former NATO supreme allied commander -- right now in this whole war, they seem to be invisible.
CLARK: Wolf, this is not a NATO issue, per se.
BLITZER: But NATO's involved in Afghanistan.
CLARK: Yes.
BLITZER: Why isn't NATO involved in trying to crush and destroy this Islamic State?
CLARK: Well, it may come to that. But NATO is ultimately a creature of U.S. leadership. Where the U.S. doesn't lead, NATO doesn't go. The U.S. led NATO into Afghanistan.
BLITZER: Do you blame President Obama for not leading NATO?
CLARK: No, I'm not blaming anybody.
CLARK: Because NATO right now, as I said, is invisible. Because the problem in Syria really isn't a NATO problem. The problem in Syria is who is the alternate political leadership?
If we had that leadership -- and that's not a NATO function, then the rest of it would follow. What we could have done perhaps is cultivate that leadership.
You know, that's not an easy problem. In World War II when Charles De Gaulle emerged as a the leader of the free French, he drove Eisenhower crazy. Churchill hated him. He was obnoxious and annoying. That's exactly the kind of leader that Syria needs right now to impact the conscience and leadership of western nations.
BLITZER: That leader, unfortunately, doesn't seem to exist right now. Let's see if there's a Syrian De Gaulle, but I'm not holding my breath.
Thanks very much for joining us, General.
General Wesley Clark, the former NATO supreme allied commander.
TRANSCRIPTS.CNN.COM
= new reply since forum marked as read
