CNN " The Situation Room" - Transcript: Congressman Adam Schiff

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: Very complicated situation. Clarissa, thanks very much. Stay safe over there. Be careful.

While the fight against ISIS rages, so does Syria's catastrophic civil war. Now U.S. officials say Iran has been invited to join international talks on ending that conflict.

Let's talk about all of this and more with Iraqi member of the House Intelligence Committee, Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff of California.

This represents, Congressman, a significant shift in U.S. policy. For the first time now, the Obama administration saying not only Russia can participate in future talks involving Syria, but Iran is invited to do so, as well. Are you OK with that?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D), CALIFORNIA: I'm not sure that at this point Iran is going to play a constructive role. They're certainly not playing a constructive role on the ground in Syria, where they're only prolonging the agony of the Syrian people by prolonging the civil war.

So I'm very skeptical, I have to say, of Iranian participation at this point. Certainly, ultimately in a resolution, all of the regional powers, as well as the United States and Russia, are going to have a role to play. But I'm very skeptical at this juncture that Iran is going to have anything positive to offer.

BLITZER: Several of your colleagues in the House and the Senate, including Senator Tom Cotton, they've already issued statements saying this sends the wrong signal to the pro-U.S. rebels, the moderate rebels fighting the Bashar al-Assad regime that Iran has now invited, Russia's now invited. And there are two -- the key backers of the Bashar al-Assad regime. They're deeply concerned about this, as I see you are, as well.

SCHIFF: Well, I am. And I would love to see us, frankly, provide much stronger support to the Kurds. As we were just hearing that report from Irbil, we ought to be making sure that the Syrian Kurds, as well as the Peshmerga, have all of the material they need. And in the case of the Peshmerga, if they're not getting it from the Iraqi government, we ought to be providing it to them directly.

And likewise for the Syrian Kurds. They're one of the only real effective fighting forces on the ground. And while I understand that would offend Turkish interests and sensibilities, I think we ought to do it anyway.

BLITZER: Pentagon officials say their goals right now include taking over Ramadi, which is in ISIS control in Iraq, but also Raqqah in Syria, which is really the headquarters of ISIS. That effectively will mean more U.S. troops on the ground, not only in Iraq where the U.S. has about 4,000, but in Syria, as well, where the U.S. doesn't have troops. Are you OK moving troops, American troops into Syria?

SCHIFF: Well, I want to learn a lot more about what the administration has in mind.

I mean, here's my concern, Wolf. You know, we're going to launch, it certainly sounds like, a lot more Special Operations in this area along the lines of what we did in the effort to grab Abu Sayyaf. These are very risky operations.

And in order for them to have an impact on the battlefield, you're going to have to have them with, I think, great frequency, because the way that those forces -- and they're the best in the world, operated successfully in Iraq in the past, for example -- was doing a raid, gathering intelligence, exploiting that intelligence and then quickly doing another raid on the basis of what you learned in the first. If they're done infrequently, they may be enough to put our people at risk. But they may not be enough to change the dynamic on the battlefield.

And I suspect ultimately, Wolf, if we want to change the dynamic on the battlefield in Syria, it may very well require imposition of some kind of a safe zone or a no-fly zone. There have been a number of different formulations of that. And I think, much to the regret of the administration, they're going to have to take a fresh look at that.

BLITZER: Would that require this -- some people call it mission creep. Other people say it's a dramatic expansion of the U.S. military role in Syria. Would that require congressional authorization, in your opinion?

[17:30:12] SCHIFF: Well, my opinion, it does require that, particularly if it puts us in conflict with the regime forces, which I think it very well would.

But frankly, even without that, even in the present day, I think that we are operating well beyond the scope of the current authorization use force and I think well beyond the president's power under Article II. So I think we're on very shaky legal and constitutional ground domestically, as it is, but certainly, if we are going to escalate in those terms, I think the president ought to come to Congress and seek another resolution.

BLITZER: Congressman Adam Schiff, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, Congressman, thanks very much for joining us.

SCHIFF: Thanks, Wolf.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source