Stein wants a peace offensive to deal with the problems in Syria.
JILL STEIN: Let’s take Syria as an example. The U.S should use its power to help convene, as President Putin was trying to do as far back as 2012. To convene all the groups that are involved including President Assad, including the forces of democracy that have been so brutally repressed. To bring them all together at the table and work out a process for democratic determination of Syria’s future. It should not be decided by the foreign powers. And this is all really predicated I think on foreign powers. This is to me why you can’t separate these into their separate boxes. We need to move toward clean renewable energy so that we are self sufficient and not fighting proxy wars over fossil fuel resources and their modes of transport.
SOPHIE SHEVARDNADZE: But that’s still a long term strategy, but what about right now, the way things are looking in Syria? What we have is the U.S sending special operations forces to fight ISIS. Obama’s opponents actually are saying that he’s moving too slow. Do you think there should be more involvement or do you think he should change his strategy?
STEIN: They would love for him to have an explicit strategy of regime change, which has basically been the U.S strategy not only in Syria but in Afghanistan, in Iraq, aiming for Iran and look at the consequences of that policy. The people who are encouraging him to strike harder and to do more are exactly the people who brought us catastrophic regime change, failed states who have created this massive crisis of refugees. Sixty million who are basically fleeing the consequences of economic and military policy largely driven by the U.S and they have only made the forces of terrorism far stronger. The U.S has been doing this for 14 years, since we entered into Iraq and Afghanistan and look at the consequences. We have made terrorism far stronger. There are effective things we can do. We’re calling for a peace offensive instead.