The Iranian Foreign Minister, Dr. Javad Zarif responds to an open letter of 47 US Senators to Iranian leaders

Asked about the open letter of 47 US Senators to Iranian leaders, the Iranian Foreign Minister, Dr. Javad Zarif, responded that "in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy.  It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history.  This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.

Foreign Minister Zarif added that "I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law. The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfil the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations.

 The Iranian Foreign Minister added that "Change of administration does not in any way relieve the next administration from international obligations undertaken by its predecessor in a possible agreement about Iran`s peaceful nuclear program." He continued "I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law.

He emphasized that if the current negotiation with P5+1 result in a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it will not be a bilateral agreement between Iran and the US, but rather one that will be concluded with the participation of five other countries, including all permanent members of the Security Council, and will also be endorsed by a Security Council resolution.

Zarif expressed the hope that his comments "may enrich the knowledge of the authors to recognize that according to international law, Congress may not modify the terms of the agreement at any time as they claim, and if Congress adopts any measure to impede its implementation, it will have committed a material breach of US obligations.

The Foreign Minister also informed the authors that majority of US international agreements in recent decades are in fact what the signatories describe as "mere executive agreements" and not treaties ratified by the Senate.

He reminded them that "their letter in fact undermines the credibility of thousands of such mere executive agreements that have been or will be entered into by the US with various other governments.

Zarif concluded by stating that "the Islamic Republic of Iran has entered these negotiations in good faith and with the political will to reach an agreement, and it is imperative for our counterparts to prove similar good faith and political will in order to make an agreement possible."

Obama and his mistakes in Iraq and the Middle East

by Ian Bach
President Obama recently said that ISIS is the consequence of our invasion of Iraq.  Unfortunately, the interviewer did not challenge him or ask a couple of follow-up questions.  For example, why didn't ISIS exist when we had troops as late as 2011?  Is it just a coincidence that ISIS filled the vacuum that our departure created?

The truth is that when Obama pulled the troops and advisers out of Iraq in 2011 Maliki was propelled into the position of having to consolidate his power and the government to people who he did not fear i.e. Sunni or Kurdish. So as soon as the USA left in fact while we were leaving this all began. The USA had to help get some of the high up Sunni and Kurdish politicians and leaders out of Iraq and to safety as a cleansing was under way by the Shia lead Government and Maliki. Even counterinsurgency expert David Kilcullen has talked about this and is constantly frustrated by people who wonder why Iraqi had fallen into this dark hole.

So the reality is it is Obama who is much to blame not only for Iraq's sectarian divide but even more so for the rise of ISIS, and not George Bush. Had Obama listened to David Petreaus, David Kilcullen, and Ryan Crocker we would likely not be where we are today.

Afghan Militia Leaders Inspire Fear in Villages

Well I have no Idea who had the idiot idea of forming militias in Afghanistan but it is apperntly going on. This appears to have been an Obama strategy for Exit from Afghanistan, which he had promised would happen.....but ever since his education on what happens when you pull forces out to fast (this he did in Iraq and well...we all know what that lead to, sectarianism, and Maliki elbowing out minority groups and shrinking his circle of friends, and the rise of ISIL in Iraq that moved to Syria and then came back with a vengeance) - Ian Bach

KABUL, Afghanistan — Rahimullah used to be a farmer — just a “normal person living an ordinary life,” as he put it. Then he formed his own militia last year and found himself swept up in America’s exit strategy fromAfghanistan.

With about 20 men loyal to him, Rahimullah, 56, soon discovered a patron in the United States Special Forces, who provided everything he needed: rifles, ammunition, cash, even sandbags for a guard post in Aghu Jan, a remote village in Ghazni Province.

Then the Americans pulled out, leaving Rahimullah behind as the local strongman, and as his village’s only defense against a Taliban takeover.

“We are shivering with fear,” said one resident, Abdul Ahad. Then he explained: He and his neighbors did not fear the Taliban nearly as much as they did their protectors, Rahimullah’s militiamen, who have turned to kidnappings and extortion.

Mr. Ahad ran afoul of them in January, he said in a telephone interview. Militiamen hauled him to a guard station and beat him so badly that neighbors had to use a wheelbarrow to get him home.

Scattered across Afghanistan, men like Rahimullah continue to hold ground and rule villages. They are a significant part of the legacy of the American war here, brought to power amid a Special Operations counterinsurgency strategy that mobilized anti-Taliban militias in areas beyond the grasp of the Afghan Army.

From the start, some Afghan officials, including former President Hamid Karzai, objected to the Americans’ practice of forming militias that did not answer directly to the Afghan government. They saw the militias as destabilizing forces that undermined the government’s authority and competed with efforts to build up large and professional military and police forces.

Now, many of those concerns have become a daily reality in Afghan villages.

“For God’s sake, take these people away from us,” Mr. Ahad, 36, said of Rahimullah’s militiamen. “We cannot stand their brutality.”

About 50 miles northeast of Mr. Ahad’s village, other anti-Taliban fighters arrested a 13- or 14-year-old boy in January and then killed him, the boy’s father said.

And in the northern province of Kunduz, men in a militia that had received American support raped a 15-year-old boy last year after forcing him to join, according to a United Nations inquiry.

From the beginning of the American presence here, the United States doled out cash to militias and warlords. Paramilitary forces were raised to guard American bases. The C.I.A. trained and funded at least six paramilitaryforces, with names such as the Khost Protection Force and 0-4, to pursue the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

The Afghan Local Police program, with nearly 30,000 Special Forces-trained militiamen nominally answering to the central government, is the biggest and best-known result of the American counterinsurgency strategy, and it has been successful in places. But reports of abuses and banditry by units in the program have hurt its reputation.

Then there are militia groups like Rahimullah’s that have also received American training or support over the years but operate under even less oversight.

In Ghazni Province, the drive to create militias gained momentum after a series of anti-Taliban uprisings in 2012 emerged in areas once considered lost. Until they pulled out of Ghazni’s districts last year, American Special Operations units gave cash, ammunition and even armored vehicles to men who had little or no official connection to the Afghan government and were often former insurgents themselves.

One of them is Abdullah, a militia commander with a chiseled, almost gaunt face, who wishes “my brothers,” as he still calls the American Special Forces soldiers, had not left late last year. “Whatever they wanted me to do, I would do for them,” he said. “If they tell me to kill someone, I will kill them.”

The Americans, he said, had once fought alongside him in Ghazni’s Andar district, offering a sense of discipline — not to mention firepower and air support.

Abdullah described the growing desperation and brutality of a war he and his 150 men now fight mostly alone against the Taliban. Abdullah said 11 of his men were killed in their sleep in late January by a Taliban infiltrator posing as a new recruit. Then the Taliban followed up with a coordinated attack on his guard post.

“In this attack, the Taliban hit me hard,” Abdullah said during an interview last month in Kabul. He had come here to get medical treatment for a gunshot wound he received in the attack, and to seek support from Afghanistan’s intelligence agency.

Human rights groups portray Abdullah as being among Afghanistan’s most notorious militia commanders. Human Rights Watch and the human rights division of the United Nations have censured his militia in the past year, citing extrajudicial killings. In an episode in January, one of Abdullah’s sub-commanders killed the 13- or 14-year-old after questioning him about roadside bombs, the boy’s father, Khial Mohammad, said.

“After they killed my son, they said he was involved in planting bombs on roadsides and cooperating with the Taliban fighters,” Mr. Mohammad said. But he added that his son had had no involvement with the Taliban.

Abdullah insisted that he did not kill civilians. The Taliban, he said, not he, were responsible for escalating the brutality.

Abdullah recalled the Americans lecturing him about the laws of war and human rights, but those notions barely seemed to register. He admitted to desecrating the bodies of his enemies.

“Yes, dead bodies are left on the ground,” he said. “We drag their dead bodies with a car.”

The last time he saw the American Special Forces team was some five months ago. “ ‘You did great work with us,’ ” Abdullah recalled the soldiers telling him in parting. “ ‘If we stay in Afghanistan and we need something to get done, we need people like you to do it for us,’ they said.”

Since the Americans left, many of these militias have become more predatory, officials in Ghazni say, partly to feed themselves and partly because there is no one to stop them.

“These uprisers, they are like roundworms in your stomach,” said Khial Mohammad Hussaini, a tribal elder from Ghazni Province. “They are eating everything.”

In another part of Ghazni, Rahimullah became a militia leader last year, starting with about 20 men who joined him after the Taliban kidnapped and killed his son.

In an interview, he expressed pride: In the eight months since he had come to power, a school had reopened, and a new road was being built in Aghu Jan, home to about 1,500 families, he said.

Asked about his militia’s treatment of the people, he acknowledged expelling several of his men who had abused villagers. “I warned them several times not to rob or harass the people,” Rahimullah said. But in the same interview, he also claimed that many of the accusations against his men were part of a pro-Taliban conspiracy.

He said that he had the support of Afghanistan’s intelligence service, the National Directorate of Security, as well as the people of Aghu Jan. But tribal elders routinely travel from Aghu Jan to the district and provincial capital to complain about the heavy-handed ways of his men.

In January, when a roadside bomb wounded Rahimullah, retribution was swift — and random. Militiamen rounded up over a dozen people and brought them to the guard post the Americans had helped construct.

Mr. Ahad was one of those who was arrested. But he insists that he and the others had nothing to do with the roadside bombing. Their innocence was corroborated by the district police chief, Mohammad Hashem, who described the men rounded up as day laborers and farmers. In the guard station, the men were beaten with chains taken from motorcycles.

Rahimullah’s men told them the only thing they could do to save themselves, Mr. Ahad said: “They started asking each of us to pay 50,000 or 100,000 rupees, depending on who we were.”

Ahmad Shakib contributed reporting.

Obama may not reduce troops in Afghanistan

By Jim Acosta, CNN Senior White House Correspondent

Updated 6:03 PM ET, Sat March 14, 2015

Obama reconsiders draw down of U.S. troops in Afghanistan 01:59

Washington (CNN)President Barack Obama is considering whether to scrap his draw down plan to reduce U.S. forces in Afghanistan to 5,500 troops by the end of this year.

A senior administration official said Saturday this is at the request of new Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. The two leaders spoke earlier this week via video conference.

The official said no final decisions have been made.

“Presidents Obama and Ghani have had regular discussions on the security transition and peace and reconciliation processes in Afghanistan, as well as planning for President Ghani’s upcoming visit to Washington,” the administration official told CNN. “In the context of supporting Afghanistan’s evolving national security strategy and associated opportunities, President Ghani has requested some flexibility in the troop draw down timeline and base closure sequencing over the next two years and we are actively considering that request.”

During a trip to Afghanistan last month, shortly after he took office, Defense Secretary Ash Carter said he might advise Obama to consider slowing the drawdown of U.S. forces from Afghanistan — partly because of better relations with the new Afghan government. Any review would be based on the reality on the ground.

There are about 10,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Prince Bandar Heads the Secret Saudi-CIA Effort to Aid Syrian Rebels to Topple Assad

http://www.democracynow.org/embed/story/2013/9/6/iran_contra_redux_prince_bandar_heads

The video link above and article below I found here at Democracy Now  Prince Bandar is the guy in charge so to speak for the FSA ISIS and Nusra Front. Turkey is perhaps the second most involved even allowing ISIS to use their hospitals in Turkey free of charge.

Prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud — Saudi’s former ambassador to the United States — is leading the effort to prop up the Syrian rebels. Intelligence agents from Saudi Arabia, the United States, Jordan and other allied states are working at a secret joint operations center in Jordan to train and arm hand-picked Syrian rebels. The Journal also reports Prince Bandar has been jetting from covert command centers near the Syrian front lines to the Élysée Palace in Paris and the Kremlin in Moscow, seeking to undermine the Assad regime. “Really what he’s doing is he’s reprising a role that he played in the 1980s when he worked with the Reagan administration to arrange money and arms for mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan and also worked with the CIA in Nicaragua to support the Contras,” says Wall Street Journal reporter Adam Entous. “So in many ways this is a very familiar position for Prince Bandar, and it’s amazing to see the extent to which veterans of the CIA were excited to see him come back because, in the words of a diplomat who knows Bandar, he brings the Arabic term wasta, which means under-the-table clout. You know his checks are not going to bounce and that he’ll be able to deliver the money from the Saudis.”

Watch Part Two of Interview, ‘U.S.-Russian Tensions Heighten over Syria; Roots of Conflict Stem from NATOBombing of Libya’

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: At the G-20 Summit in Saint Petersburg, Russian and China officials, as well as U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, are urging the United States not to bomb Syria in response to last month’s chemical weapons attack. The U.N.’s Ban Ki-moon said, quote, “Let us remember: Every day that we lose is a day when scores of innocent civilians die. There is no military solution.” Ban Ki-moon has repeatedly said a U.S. strike without authorization from the U.N. Security Council would be illegal. But on Thursday the Obama administration declared there is, quote, “no viable path forward” in the U.N. Security Council on Syria. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power has accused Russia of holding the U.N. Security Council hostage.

SAMANTHA POWER: I was present in the meeting where the U.K. laid down the resolution. And everything in that meeting, in word and in body language, suggests that that resolution has no prospect of being adopted by Russia, in particular. And our view—again, our considered view, after months of efforts on chemical weapons and after two-and-a-half years of efforts on Geneva, on the humanitarian situation, is that there is no viable path forward in the Security Council.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power.

SHOW FULL TRANSCRIPT ›

Turkish Involvement in Sarin Gas Attack

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

ANFAAL COMMANDER JOINS SYRIAN GOVERNMENT FORCES – GIVES TOW LAUNCHERS TO SAA!

ANFAAL COMMANDER JOINS SYRIAN GOVERNMENT FORCES – GIVES TOW LAUNCHERS TO SAA!

Yarmouk Camp:  It is official, the entire terrorist group known as the Anfaal Brigades led by Abu Maazin Al-Rifaa’iy and some members of the Syrian Revolutionaries’ Front, have voluntarily given up all their arms (including the TOW launchers and rockets provided by the U.S.) to the security services in exchange for amnesty and the opportunity to serve in the Popular Defense Committees (a/k/a NDF).  The agreement took months to hammer out, but, essentially commits the government to several conditions: the first is acceptance into the Amnesty Program; the second is absorption of the Anfaal fighters into the PDC to protect the area of Al-Dhiyaabiyya, the home town of many members.  At the present time, the new volunteers will be garrisoned in Al-Husayniyya Residencies where they will receive training in communications and intelligence-gathering from the SAA.

The deal was struck at the Yarmouk refugee camp which is now a suburb of Damascus housing thousands of Palestinians from 1948 and 1967.  The group approached the agreement quite gingerly.  Only after an initial 7 fighters were turned over to the authorities did the rest, about 53, assent to the pact.  They wanted to make sure the government was serious and to insure they were not falling into a trap.

GENERAL AL-FURAYJ VISITS TROOPS IN SOUTHERN DAMASCUS PROVINCE AND GENERAL AYYOUB INSPECTS FORCES IN AL-JADHAL GAS FIELD IN HOMS:

On the 52nd anniversary of the March 8th Revolution, the Minister of Defense and Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Syrian Armed Forces, Lt. General Fahd Jaassim Al-Furayj, brought a message of appreciation and pride to the officers, enlisted men, conscripts and defense militias in Southern Damascus Province.  He also conveyed to them the president’s heartfelt concern for their safety and his confidence in their abilities to annihilate the terrorist plague which has settled  temporarily in Syria.

On the same anniversary, Lt. General ‘Ali ‘Abdullah Ayyoob, Chief of the Syrian General Staff, inspected the armed forces which liberated the Al-Jadhal Gas Field in Homs Province conveying to them the same message of pride and confidence expressed by the Minister of Defense.

__________________________________________________________________________

DER’AH:  So much action on the Jordanian border you’d think the pygmy king in Amman might be involved in trying to smuggle terrorists into Syria.

Taysiyya Town:  Near the Jordanian border, right under the eyes and noses of Jordanian troops (hints of Turkey), a sizeable infiltration took place.  Unfortunately for both Jordanians and the rats, the event also took place under the eyes and noses of the Syrian Arab Army which interpreted the actions to be hostile.  The SAA and SAAF opened fire on the rodents killing 15 and wounding scores who hied it back to Jordan for the usual incompetent medical treatment.

West Al-Ghaariyya:  A van carrying rodents was ordered to stop by PDC.  It wouldn’t.  The rats were pursued until they veered off the road.  A firefight ensued and these carcasses were identified:

Bilaal Mahmoud Mahsoob

‘Abdul-Lateef Kallaas

The other 3 could not be identified and had features and literature on their person indicating North African origin.

Al-Suhayliyya Village:  A bulldozer and a pickup with 23mm cannon were destroyed after the SAA-MI had been conducting surveillance of the area for some time near Al-Shaykh Miskeen.  Once the order was given to attack the 2 vehicles, 5 rodents were killed.  I have no names.

Der’ah City:  These groups are now active in the city: Kateebat Madfa’iyyat Sijjeel, Kataa`ib Mujaahidiyy Hawraan, Liwaa` Tawheed Hawraan.  There are negotiations going on today similar to those that resulted in the surrender of the terrorists in the Yarmouk Camp.

Al-Jeeza Village:  After a period of monitoring this area, the MI reported the existence of a nest of rats on the Jordanian border.  The SAA attacked and killed 3 rodents wounding 8 who escaped to the “neighborly” country to the south.  Weapons and ammo were seized for use by our PDCs.

Samaad Village:  South of Busraa Al-Shaam.  SAA clashed with terrorists here and killed a reported 4.  Once again, weapons and ammo were confiscated for use by our PDCs in killing Wahhabists.

Jaassim:  It is now reported that over 570 rat terrorists have died in this town alone over the last 3 months.  Their carcasses are testimony to the losses.  They are all buried here and act as fertilizer for next year’s crops.

Fighting reported intense here: Zimreen, Simleen, Qarfaa Village, Saneena, Al-Tayha –Al-Maal Crossing, Kafr Naasij (warehouse destroyed), ‘Aqraba (warehouse), Al-Shaykh Miskeen (warehouse), Al-Faqee’, Ibta’.

 From the reports we are getting, it seems the SAA is focusing on finding the sources of arms in order to deny the rodents the instrumentalities of war.

Read more at http://www.syrianperspective.com/2015/03/damascus-anfaal-commander-joins-syrian-government-forces-gives-tow-launchers-to-saa-derah-syrian-army-batters-obamas-rodents.html#Je6ZOZU4lZwO5z61.99

Former U.S. ambassador says he could ‘no longer defend’ Obama administration’s Syria policy

Former U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford explains to chief foreign affairs correspondent Margaret Warner that he left his post in February because he could "no longer defend" U.S. policy in Syria. He also criticized the Obama administration for what he calls its "behind the curve" policy and claimed that al-Qaida groups would have been "unable to compete" in Syria if the administration would have armed the moderate opposition a few years ago.

RELATED

• Syria holds presidential election widely condemned as rigged
• Former U.S. ambassador to Syria on why ‘it was time for me to go’

TRANSCRIPT

JUDY WOODRUFF: Our chief foreign affairs correspondent, Margaret Warner sat down with Ford today, on the first day he has agreed to be interviewed on television since his departure, to discuss the election and what he sees as the failures of U.S. policy.

RELATED LINKS

• Former U.S. ambassador to Syria on why ‘it was time for me to go’ 
• Syria’s shattered health care system causes suffering from eradicated diseases, preventable amputations 
• Syrian opposition leader on Homs retreat, international aid and chances for a political solution 

MARGARET WARNER: Ambassador Ford, thank you for joining us.

ROBERT FORD, Former U.S. Ambassador to Syria: It’s my pleasure to be here.

MARGARET WARNER: So, President Assad seems to be coasting to another victory in an election. What’s going to be the impact of that, both on the political situation and the battlefield situation?

ROBERT FORD: I don’t think it will have much impact on the battlefield. I have no indication that the opposition and the armed opposition groups are going to stop fighting, so I think the election will have no result on that.

Politically, it will cheer Assad’s supporters. I have seen pictures today of celebrations in Syria. But it really is simply a signal. The election is a signal to us to, to other countries in the region, to Europe, et cetera, that Assad is not leaving, he is staying, deeply entrenched in the capital in Syria, even as other parts of the country remain outside his control.

MARGARET WARNER: And so is it time for us to recognize that, in fact, he’s going to be there a long time, that the whole strategy both of the opposition and the Western- and Gulf- and neighbor-backed efforts has not worked?

ROBERT FORD: Well, certainly, the efforts we have made to date have not worked. They have not put enough pressure on the regime on the ground.

And that’s why the peace talks that we tried to do in January and February in Geneva, when I was there, and the regime completely refused to discuss a political settlement. The policy has not brought them to the point where they feel they have to negotiate. They’re not under enough pressure. So, so we need to think about how to escalate pressure.

MARGARET WARNER: And certainly not a transition that didn’t include Assad as a part of it?

ROBERT FORD: Well, the message of the election today is that he’s not going anywhere.

MARGARET WARNER: You left as ambassador in early 2012.

ROBERT FORD: In February, right.

MARGARET WARNER: Under fears for your own safety and the safety of the entire embassy.

ROBERT FORD: Safety of the team, yes.

MARGARET WARNER: But you stayed at the State Department. Why have you left now?

ROBERT FORD: In the end, Margaret, I worked from Washington on the Syria issue for two years.

Events on the ground were moving, and our policy wasn’t evolving very quickly. We were constantly behind the curve. And that’s why now we have extremist threats to our own country. We had a young man from Florida, apparently, who was involved in a suicide bombing, and there will be more problems like that, I fear.

Our policy wasn’t evolving, and finally I got to the point where I could no longer defend it publicly. And as a professional career member of the U.S. diplomatic service, when I can no longer defend the policy in public, it is time for me to go.

MARGARET WARNER: What was the biggest mistake you think the Obama administration, this government made?

ROBERT FORD: We have consistently been behind the curve.

The events on the ground are moving more rapidly than our policy has been adapting. And at the same time, Russia and Iran have been driving this by increasing and steadily increasing, increasing massively, especially the Iranians, their support to the Syrian regime.

And the result of that has been more threats to us in this ungoverned space which Assad can’t retake. We need and we have long needed to help moderates in the Syrian opposition with both weapons and other nonlethal assistance. Had we done that a couple of years ago, had we ramped it up, frankly, the al-Qaida groups that have been winning adherents would have been unable to compete with the moderates, who, frankly, we have much in common with.

But the moderates have been fighting constantly with arms tied behind their backs, because they don’t have the same resources that either Assad does or the al-Qaida groups in Syria do.

MARGARET WARNER: But you know the arguments we all heard from many in the White House, which is, if we arm the opposition, we don’t know who will get ahold of these advanced weapons.

ROBERT FORD: I have heard those arguments, Margaret.

To be very frank, we have plenty of information on reliable groups, and we have long had that. It is a question of whether or not there’s a will to actually help people whose agenda is compatible with our national security interests, and then to make a decision and push forward. And that really is the question before the administration.

MARGARET WARNER: And who lacks the will? Is it the president?

ROBERT FORD: I’m simply going to say that I think it’s on record now that the State Department, for a long time, has advocated doing much more to help the moderates in the Syrian opposition, these moderates, by the way, who evolved directly from the peaceful protest movement that I saw with my own eyes in 2011.

And those people need more help. And arguments that were worried things are going to trickle into bad hands or that it’s going to bring in American troops directly, nobody is asking for American troops to be sent there. I was in Iraq for five years. The last thing we want is to have a repeat of the Iraq experience.

But there are other tools in our toolkit, and those are the things we need to work on, in conjunction with our allies in the region.

MARGARET WARNER: Now, President Obama in his West Point speech last week said he was going to ramp up support to the opposition, but it was left totally unspecified. What did that say to you? What does that mean?

ROBERT FORD: It’s not clear to me yet if they are prepared to ramp it up in such a way that it will be meaningful on the ground, and that’s really what matters. This is a civil war.

And we can’t get to a political negotiation until the balance on the ground compels — and I use that word precisely — compels Assad not to run sham elections, but rather to negotiate a political deal. But the situation on the ground is key.

MARGARET WARNER: Do you think it’s too late at this point?

ROBERT FORD: No, I absolutely don’t, but I do think that the way the policy has been moving has been so slow on our part.

And that has caused frustration in the region. It’s caused huge frustration among large segments of the Syrian population. And so I’m hoping that the president’s speech signals that now we are getting more serious. But we will have to see what happens on the ground.

MARGARET WARNER: And if this conflict continues for years as it is now, does that increase the terrorist threat here to the United States?

ROBERT FORD: I think it can’t help but do that, because there’s large parts of Syria that are basically ungoverned.

And just as happened in Afghanistan, just as happened in Somalia, just as has happened in Mali and Yemen, when you have large ungoverned spaces, groups especially like al-Qaida are quite skilled at setting up operations there, and then sending out people, sending out resources, sending out money, coordinating.

It’s very dangerous. We warned about this years ago on the Syria team at the State Department. This is — we expected this was going to happen.

MARGARET WARNER: But the warnings went unheeded?

ROBERT FORD: The policy has evolved very slowly. And events on the ground have not evolved as slowly. Events on the ground, it’s a dynamic situation. It changes.

MARGARET WARNER: Ambassador Robert Ford, thank you.

ROBERT FORD: No, it was my pleasure. Thank you for having me.

JUDY WOODRUFF: This afternoon, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf was asked about Ambassador Ford’s criticisms of the administration’s Syria policy and why it compelled him to leave government.

Here is an excerpt of her response from the daily press briefing.

MARIE HARF, State Department Spokeswoman: Ambassador Ford served a very long, distinguished career here, is now a private citizen, obviously entitled to his own views.

The president was clear in his speech last week. We have all been clear that we’re frustrated by the situation in Syria. You heard the president at West Point say we’re going to increase our support to the moderate opposition, because we know more needs to be done.

No one working on this issue can look at the situation on the ground — I mean, just look at today, the photos — disgusting photos of President Assad voting, acting like this is a real election. Nobody working on it is happy with where things are. We’re all frustrated, and I think you heard some of that in Ambassador Ford’s comments.