President's Interview with Foreign Affairs Magazine

President al-Assad to Foreign Affairs Magazine: Israel is supporting terrorist organizations in Syria (Full Text)

26/01/2015

President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to the American magazine Foreign Affairs published on Monday, 26th January 2015.

Following is the full text of the interview:

Question 1: I would like to start by asking you about the war. It has now been going on for almost four years, and you know the statistics: more than two hundred thousand people have been killed, a million wounded, and more than three million Syrians have fled the country, according to the UN. Your forces have also suffered heavy casualties. The war cannot go on forever. How do you see the war ending?

President Assad: All Wars, anywhere in the world have in the past ended with a political solution because war itself is not the solution; war is one of the instruments of politics. So you end with a political solution. That’s how we see it. That is the headline.

Question 2: You don’t think that this war will end militarily?

President Assad: No. Any war ends with a political solution.

Question 3: Your country is increasingly divided into three mini-states, you could say: one is controlled by the government, one is controlled by ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, one is controlled by the more secular Sunni and Kurdish opposition. How will you ever put Syria back together again?

President Assad: First of all, this image is not accurate because you cannot talk about mini-states with out talking about the people who live within those states. The Syrian people are still with the unity of Syria; they still support the government. The factions you refer to control some areas, but they move from one place to another; they are not stable, and there are no clear lines of separation between different forces. Sometimes they mingle with each other and they move. But the main issue is about the population. The population still supports the state regardless of whether they support it politically or not; I mean they support the state as the representative of the unity of Syria. This is what I mean by supporting the state. So as long as you have the Syrian people believing in unity, any government and any official can unify Syria. If the people are divided into two, three, or four groups, no one can unify this country. That’s how we see it.

Question 4: You think that the Sunnis and the Kurds still believe in a unified Syria?

President Assad: If you go to Damascus now you can see all the different, let’s say, colors of our society living together. So the divisions in Syria are not based on sectarian or ethnic grounds, and even in the Kurdish area you are talking about, we have two different colors; we have Arabs more than Kurds, so it’s not about the ethnicity; it’s about the factions that control certain areas militarily.

Question 5: A year ago, both the opposition and foreign governments were insisting that you step down as a precondition to talks. They no longer are. Diplomats are now looking for an interim settlement that would allow you to keep a role. Just today, the New York Times had an article that talked about increased U.S. support for the Russian and UN peace initiatives. The article refers to: “the West’s quiet retreat from its demands that Syria’s president step down immediately.” Given this shift in the Western attitude, are you now more open to a negotiated solution to the conflict that leads to a political transition?

President Assad: From the very beginning we were open. We engaged in dialogue with every party in Syria. Party doesn’t mean political party; it could be party, current, or some personality, it could be any political entity. We changed the constitution and we are open to anything. But when you want to do something, it’s not about the position or about the government, it’s about the Syrians; sometimes you might have a majority that doesn’t belong to any side. So when you want to make a change, as long as you’re talking about a national problem, every Syrian must have a say in it. When you have a dialogue, it’s not between the government and the opposition; it’s between the different Syrian parties and entities. That’s how we look at dialogue. This is first. Second, whatever solution you want to make, at the end you should go back to the people through a referendum, because you’re talking about the constitution; changing the political system, You have to go back to the Syrian people. So engaging in a dialogue is different from taking decisions, which is not done by the government or the opposition.

Question 6: So you’re saying that you would not agree to any kind of political transition unless there is a referendum that supports it?

President Assad: Exactly, the people should make the decision, not anyone else.

Question 7: Does that mean there’s no room for negotiations?

President Assad: No, we will go to Russia, we will go to these negotiations, but there is another question here: who do you negotiate with? As a government, we have institutions, we have an army, and we have influence, positive or negative, in any direction, at any time. Whereas the people we are going to negotiate with, who do they represent? That’s the question. When you talk about the opposition, it has to have meaning. The opposition in general has to have representatives in the local administration, in the parliament, in institutions, they have to have grassroots to represent. In the current crisis, you have to ask about the opposition’s influence on the ground. You have to go back to what the rebels announced publically, when they said many times that the opposition doesn’t represent us, they have no influence. If you want to talk about fruitful dialogue, it’s going to be between the government and those rebels. There is another point. Opposition means national, it means working for the interests of the Syrian people. It cannot be an opposition if it’s a puppet of Qatar or Saudi Arabia or any Western country, including the United States, paid from the outside. It should be Syrian. We have a national opposition, I’m not excluding it, I’m not saying every opposition is not legitimate. But you have to separate the national and the puppets. Not every dialogue is fruitful.

Question 8: Does that mean you would not want to meet with opposition forces that are backed by outside countries?

President Assad: We are going to meet with everyone. We don’t have conditions.

Journalist: No conditions?

President Assad: No conditions.

Journalist: You would meet with everyone?

President Assad: Yes, we’re going to meet with everyone. But you have to ask each one of them: who do you represent? That’s what I mean.

Question 9: If I’m correct, the deputy of UN representative Staffan de Mistura is in Syria now. They’re proposing as an interim measure a ceasefire and a freeze in Aleppo. Would you agree to that?

President Assad: Yes, of course. We implemented that before de Mistura was assigned to his mission. We implemented it in another city called Homs, another big city. We implemented it on smaller scales in different, let’s say, suburbs, villages, and so on, and it succeeded. So, the idea is very good, but it depends on the details. De Mistura came to Syria with headlines. We agreed upon certain headlines, and now we are waiting for him to bring a detailed plan or schedule – A to Z plan – let’s say. We are discussing this with his deputy.

Question 10: In the past, you insisted as a precondition for a ceasefire that the rebels lay down their weapons first, which obviously from their perspective was a non-starter. Is that still your precondition?

President Assad: We choose different scenarios or different reconciliations. In some areas, we allowed them to leave inhabited areas in order to prevent casualties among civilians. They left these areas with their armaments. In other areas, they give up their armaments and they left. It depends on what they offer and what you offer.

Question 11: I’m not clear on your answer. Would you insist that they lay down their weapons?

President Assad: No, no. That’s not what I mean. In some areas, they left the area with their armaments.

Question 12: Are you optimistic about the Moscow talks?

President Assad: What is going on in Moscow is not negotiations about the solution; it’s only preparations for the conference.

Journalist: So, talks about talks?

President Assad: Exactly, how to prepare for the talks. So, when you start talking about the conference, what are the principles of the conference? I’ll go back to the same point. Let me be frank: some of the groups are puppets, as I said, of other countries. They have to implement that agenda, and I know that many countries, like France for example, do not have any interest in making that conference succeed. So they will give them orders to make them fail. You have other personalities who only represent themselves, they don’t represent anyone in Syria. Some of them never lived in Syria and they know nothing about the country. Of course, you have some other personalities who work for the national interest. So when you talk about the opposition as one entity, who’s going to have influence on the other? That is the question. It’s not clear yet. So, optimism would be an exaggeration. I wouldn’t say I’m pessimistic, I would say we have hope, in every action.

Question 13: It seems that in recent days the Americans have become more supportive of the Moscow talks. Initially, they were not. Yesterday, Secretary of State Kerry said something to suggest that the U.S. hopes that the talks go forward and that they are successful.

President Assad: They always say things, but it’s about what they’re going to do. And you know there’s mistrust between the Syrians and the U.S. So just wait till we see what will happen at the conference.

Question 14: So, what do you see as the best way to strike a deal between all of the different parties in Syria?

President Assad: It’s to deal directly with the rebels, but you have two different kinds of rebels. Now, the majority are al Qaeda, which is ISIS and al-Nusra, with other similar factions that belong to al Qaeda but are smaller. Now, what’s left, what Obama called a “fantasy” the moderate opposition. It’s not an opposition, they are rebels. Most of them joined al Qaeda, and some of them rejoined the army recently. During the last week, a lot of them left those groups and came to the army.

Question 15: Are these former defectors who came back?

President Assad: Yes, they came back to the army. They said, we don’t want to fight anymore. So what’s left of those is very little. At the end, can you negotiate with al Qaeda, and others? They are not ready to negotiate, they have their own plan. The reconciliation that we started and Mr. de Mistura is going to continue is the practical solution on the ground. This is the first point. Second, you have to implement the Security Council resolution No. 2170 on al-Nusra and ISIS which was issued a few months ago, and this resolution is very clear about preventing anyone from supporting these factions militarily, financially, or logistically, yet this is what Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar are still doing. If it’s not implemented, we cannot talk about a real solution because there will be obstacles. So this is how we can start. Third, the Western countries should remove the umbrella, still refered to by some of supporting the moderate opposition. They know we have mainly al Qaeda, ISIS and al Nusra.

Question 16: Would you be prepared to take any confidence-building measures in advance of the talks? For example, prisoner exchanges, or ending the use of barrel bombs, or releasing political prisoners, in order to build confidence on the other side that you’re willing to negotiate in good faith?

President Assad: It’s not a personal relationship; it’s about mechanisms. In politics, you only talk about mechanisms. You don’t have to trust someone to do something. If you have a clear mechanism, you can reach a result. That is what the people want. So the question is, what is the mechanism that we can put in place? This takes us back to the same question: who are they, what do they represent, what’s their influence, what is the point of building trust with people with no influence?

Journalist: When two parties come together, it’s often very useful for one party to show the other that it’s really interested in making progress by taking steps unilaterally to try and bring down the temperature. The measures that I described would have that effect.

President Assad: You have something concrete, and that is reconciliation. People gave up their armaments, we gave them amnesty, they live normal lives. It is a real example. So this is a measure of confidence. On the other hand, what is the relation between that opposition and the prisoners? There’s no relation. They are not their prisoners anyway. So it is completely a different issue.

Question 17: So, have you offered amnesty to fighters?

President Assad: Yes, of course, and we did it many times.

Question 18: How many, do you have numbers?

President Assad: I don’t have the precise numbers, but it’s thousands, not hundreds, thousands of militants.

Question 19: And are you prepared to say to the entire opposition that if you lay down your weapons, you will be safe?

President Assad: Yes, I said it publically in one of my speeches.

Question 20: And how can you guarantee their safety? Because they have reasons to distrust your government.

President Assad: You cannot, but at the end, let’s say that if more than 50 percent succeed, more than 50 percent in such circumstances would be a success. So, that’s how. Nothing is absolute. You have to expect some negative aspects, but they are not the major aspects.

Question 21: Let me change the subject slightly. Hezbollah, Iran’s Quds force and Iranian-trained Shiite militias are all now playing significant roles in the fight against rebels here in Syria. Given this involvement, are you worried about Iran’s influence over the country? After all, Iraq or even Lebanon shows that once a foreign military power becomes established in a country, it can be very difficult to ask them to leave again.

President Assad: Iran is an important country in this region, and it was influential before the crisis. It’s influence is not related to the crisis, it’s related to its role, its political position in general. When you talk about influence, various factors make a particular country influential. In the Middle East, in our region, you have the same society, the same ideology, many similar things, the same tribes, going across borders. So those factors are crossing the borders. If you have influence on one factor, your influence will be crossing the border. This is part of our nature. It’s not related to the conflict. Of course, when there is conflict and anarchy, another country will be more influential in your country. When you don’t have the will to have a sovereign country, you will have that influence. Now, the answer to your question is, Iran doesn’t have any ambitions in Syria, and as a country, as Syria, we would never allow any country to have influence our sovereignty. We don’t accept and the Iranians don’t want it either. We allow cooperation. But if you allowed any country to have influence, why not allow the Americans to have influence in Syria? That’s the problem with the Americans and with the West: they want to have influence without cooperation.

Question 22: Let me just push you a little bit further. Last week, a commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, of their airspace command, Haji Zadeh, said in an interview that Iran’s Supreme Leader has ordered his forces to build and operate missile plants in Syria. That suggests that Iran is playing a greater role and doing it on its own.

President Assad: No, playing a role through cooperation is different from playing a role through hegemony.

Question 23: So everything that Iran is doing…?

President Assad: Of course, in full cooperation with the Syrian government, and that’s always the case.

Question 24: Now Iran is one thing to deal with because it’s a country. But you also have militias which are sub-state actors, and therefore more complicated. One problem with working with these groups is that, unlike a government, they may not be willing to cooperate and it’s not always clear who to talk to. Are you worried about your ability to control these forces and to rein them in if you need to? And, a related question, this week Israel attacked Hezbollah forces in the Golan, and the Israelis suggest that they attacked them because Hezbollah was planning an attack on Israel from Syrian territory. Doesn’t this also highlight the danger of allowing militias with their own agendas, not necessarily your agenda, to come into the war?

President Assad: Do you mean Syrian, or any other militias in general?

Journalist: I mean especially Hezbollah and the Iraqi Shi’a militias.

President Assad: It’s natural to say that only the institutions of the government, of the state, let’s say, are the guarantee for stability and order. Any other factor that would play a role in parallel with the government could be positive, could be good in certain circumstances, but it will always have side effects, negative side effects. That is a natural thing. And having militias who support the government is a side effect of the war. You have it, but you’re going to try to control this side effect. So, to have the way, if you ask any Syrian about that, he will give you a similar answer. Nobody will feel more comfortable than if they are dealing with government institutions, including the army and the police and so on. But talking about what happened in Quneitra is something completely different. Never has an operation against Israel happened through the Golan Heights since the ceasefire in 1974. It has never happened. So, for Israel to allege that there was a plan for an operation, that’s a far cry from reality, just an excuse, because they wanted to assassinate somebody from Hezbollah.

Question 25: But the Israelis have been very careful since the war began to not get involved except when they felt when their interests were directly threatened.

President Assad: That’s not true, because they’ve been attacking Syria now for nearly two years, without any reason.

Journalist: But in each case, they say it’s because Hezbollah was being given weapons from Iran through Syria.

President Assad: They attacked army positions. What is the relation between Hezbollah and the army?

Journalist: Those were cases where the army accidentally shelled-

President Assad: Those are false allegations.

Question 26: So what do you think Israel’s agenda is?

President Assad: They are supporting the rebels in Syria. It’s very clear. Because whenever we make advances in some place, they attack in order to undermine the army. It’s very clear. That’s why some in Syria joke, how can you say that al Qaeda doesn’t have an air force? They have the Israeli air force.

Question 27: To return to my question about militias, do you feel confident that you’ll be able to control them when this war end, because after all, any government, to have effective sovereignty, has to have what’s called a monopoly of force, and that’s very hard when you have these independent armed groups running around.

President Assad: That’s self-evident, the state cannot fulfill its commitment to society if it’s not the only master of order.

Journalist: But you see in Iraq how hard that is, because it is now very difficult for the government to control all these Shia militia which were empowered during the war.

President Assad: There’s a very important reason in Iraq: it’s because Paul Bremmer didn’t create a constitution for the state; he created one for factions. Whereas in Syria why did the army stand fast for four years in spite of this embargo, this war, tens of countries around the world attacking Syria and supporting the rebels? Because it has a real constitution, a real, secular constitution. That is the reason. In Iraq, it is sectarian. When you talk about a sectarian constitution, it’s not a constitution.

Question 28: But what will you do about these militias when the war ends?

President Assad: Things should go back to normal like before the war.

Question 29: And you’re confident-?

President Assad: Yes, we don’t have any other option. That is the role of the government. This is self-evident.

Question 30: What impact are falling oil prices having on the war in Syria? After all, your two closest allies and supporters, Iran and Russia, are very dependent on oil prices and they have suffered tremendous damage to their budgets in recent months as the price of oil has fallen. Do you worry about their ability to continue helping you?

President Assad: No, because they don’t give us money, so it has no effect on Syria. Even if they are going to help us, it would be in the forms of loans We’re like any other country, Sometimes we pay, sometimes we take loans.

Journalist: But their military support costs them money, and if they have less money to pay for their own militaries, won’t that become a problem?

President Assad: No, because when you pay for armaments or any other goods, you don’t have a problem.

Question 31: So you’re saying everything you’re getting from the Russians and Iranians…?

President Assad: So far we haven’t seen any changes, so what the influence is on them, I cannot answer.

Question 32: You’ve said in past interviews that you and your government have made mistakes in the course of the war. What are those mistakes? Is there anything that you regret?

President Assad: Every government, every person, makes mistakes, so that’s again self-evident, it’s a given. But if you want to talk about political mistakes, you have to ask yourself, what are the major decisions that you took since the crisis started? We took three main decisions: first of all, to be open to all dialogue. Second, we changed the constitution and the law according to what many in the opposition were saying, allegedly, that this is the reason of the crisis. Third, we took the decision to defend our country, to defend our self, to fight terrorists. So I don’t think those three decisions can be described as wrong or mistakes. If you want to talk about practice, any official in any place can make mistakes, but there’s a difference between practice mistakes and policy mistakes.

Question 33: Can you describe some of the practical mistakes?

President Assad: I would have to go back to officials on the ground, there’s nothing in my mind. I would rather talk about policies.

Question 34: Do you feel there have been any policy mistakes that you’re responsible for?

President Assad: I mentioned the major decisions.

Journalist: But you said those are not mistakes.

President Assad: To defend the country from terrorism? If I wanted to say that it’s a mistake, then to be correct would be to support the terrorists.

Journalist: I’m just wondering if there’s anything you did that you wish in retrospect you had done differently.

President Assad: Regarding these three main decisions, they were correct, and I am confident about this.

Question 35: In terms of lower-level practical mistakes, are people being held accountable, say, for human rights abuses, for the excessive use of force, or the indiscriminate targeting of civilians, those kinds of things?

President Assad: Yes. Some people were detained because they breached the law in that regard, and that happens of course in such circumstances.

Journalist: In terms of their treatment of civilians or protestors, is that what you’re referring to?

President Assad: Yes, during the protests at the very beginning, yes.

Question 36: Since the U.S. began its air campaign against the Islamic State, Syria and the U.S. have become strange kinds of partners and are effectively cooperating in that aspect of the fight. Do you see the potential for increased cooperation with the U.S.?

President Assad: The potential is definitely always there, because we’ve been talking about or asking for international cooperation against terrorism for 30 years, but this potential needs will. The question that we have is, how much will does the United States have to really fight terrorism on the ground? So far, we haven’t seen anything concrete in spite of the attacks on ISIS in northern Syria. There’s nothing concrete. What we’ve seen so far is just, let’s say, window dressing, nothing real. Since the beginning of these attacks, ISIS has gained more land in Syria and Iraq.

Question 37: What about the airstrikes on Kobani? Those have been effective in slowing ISIS.

President Assad: Kobani is a small city, with about 50,000 inhabitants. It’s been more than three months since the beginning of the attacks, and they haven’t finished. The Same areas, With the al Qaeda factions occupying them, the Syrian Army liberated in less than three weeks. It means they’re not serious about fighting terrorism.

Question 38: So are you saying you want a greater U.S. involvement in the war against ISIS?

President Assad: It’s not about greater involvement by the military, because it’s not only about the military, it’s about politics, it’s about how much the United States wants to influence the Turks, because if the terrorists can withstand the airstrikes for this period, it means that the Turks keep sending them armaments and money. Did the United States put any pressure on Turkey to stop the support of al Qaeda? They didn’t, they haven’t. So, it’s not only about military involvement. This is first. Second, if you want to talk about the military involvement, American officials publically acknowledge that without troops on the ground, they cannot achieve anything concrete. Which troops on the grounds are you depending on?

Question 39: So are you suggesting there should be U.S. troops on the ground?

President Assad: Not U.S. troops. I’m talking about the principle, the military principle, I’m not saying American troops. If you want to say I want to make war on terrorism, you have to have troops on the ground. The question you have to ask the Americans is: which troops are you going to depend on? Definitely, it has to be Syrian troops. This is our land, this is our country. We are responsible. We don’t ask for American troops at all.

Question 40: So, what would you like to see from the United States? You mentioned more pressure on Turkey …

President Assad: Pressure on Turkey, pressure on Saudi Arabia, pressure on Qatar to stop supporting the rebels. Second, to make legal cooperation with Syria and start by asking permission from our government to carry out such attacks. They didn’t, so it’s illegal.

Question 41: I’m sorry, I’m not clear on that point. You want them to make legal…?

President Assad: Of course, if you want to make any kind of action in another country, you ask their permission.

Question 42: I see. So, a formal agreement between Washington and Damascus to allow for airstrikes?

President Assad: The format we can discuss later, but you start with permission. Is it an agreement, is it a treaty? That’s another issue.

Question 43: And would you be willing to take steps to make cooperation easier with Washington?

President Assad: With any country that is serious about fighting terrorism, we are ready to make cooperation, if they’re serious.

Question 44: What steps would you be prepared to make to show Washington that you’re willing to cooperate?

President Assad: I think they are the ones who have to show the will. We are already fighting on the ground, we don’t have to show that.

Question 45: The U.S. is currently training 5,000 Syrian fighters who are scheduled to enter Syria in May. Now, U.S. General John Allen has been very careful to say that these troops will not be directed at the Syrian government, but will be focused on ISIS alone. What will you do when these troops enter the country? Will you allow them to enter? Will you attack them?

President Assad: Any troops that don’t work in cooperation with the Syrian Army are illegal and should be fought. That’s very clear.

Question 46: Even if this brings you into conflict with the U.S.?

President Assad: Without cooperation with Syrian troops, they are illegal, and are puppets of another country, so they are going to be fought like any other illegal militia fighting against the Syrian Army. But that brings another question, about those troops. Obama said that they are a fantasy. How did fantasy become reality?

Journalist: I think with kind of training program.

President Assad: But you can’t make extremism moderate.

Journalist: There are still some moderate members of the opposition. They are weaker and weaker all the time, but I think the U.S. government is trying very carefully to ensure that the fighters it trains are not radicals.

President Assad: But the question is why is the moderate opposition – if you call them opposition, we call them rebels – why are they weaker and weaker? They are still weaker because of developments in the Syrian crisis. Bringing 5,000 from the outside will make most of them defect and join ISIS and other groups which is what happened during the last year. So that’s why I said it’s still illusory. It is not the 5,000 that are illusory, but the idea itself.

Question 47: Part of what makes Washington so reluctant to cooperate with you more formally are the allegations of serious human rights abuses by your government. These allegations aren’t just from the U.S. government, they are also from the UN Human Rights Commission, the Independent Special Investigative Commission of the UN. You are familiar with these allegations, I’m sure. They include denying access for relief groups to refugee camps, indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets, photo evidence provided by the defector code-named Cesar who made a presentation to the U.S. Congress showing terrible torture and abuse in Syrian prisons. Are you prepared to take action on these issues in order to make cooperation with the U.S. easier?

President Assad: The funny thing about this administration is that it’s the first one in history to build its evaluation and later decisions on social media. We call it a social media administration, which is not politics. None of these allegations you mentioned are concrete, all of them are allegations. You can bring photos from anyone and say this is torture. Who took the pictures? Who is he? Nobody knows. There is no verification of any of this evidence, so it’s all allegations without evidence.

Journalist: But Cesar’s photos have been looked at by independent European investigators.

President Assad: No, no. It’s funded by Qatar, and they say it’s an anonymous source. So nothing is clear or proven. The pictures are not clear which person they show. They’re just pictures of a head, for example, with some skulls. Who said this is done by the government, not by the rebels? Who said this is a Syrian victim, not someone else? For example, photos published at the beginning of the crisis were from Iraq and Yemen. Second, the United States in particular and the West in general are in no position to talk about human rights. They are responsible for most of the killings in the region, especially the United States after getting into Iraq, and the UK after invading Libya, and the situation in Yemen, and what happened in Egypt in supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorism in Tunisia. All these problems happened because of the United States. They were the first ones to trample international law and Security Council resolutions, not us.

Journalist: That may or may not be true, but those are separate issues, and that does not absolve your government of responsibility.

President Assad: No, no. The United States accused, so we have to answer that part. I’m not saying if there’s any human rights breach or infringement, the government has no responsibility. That is another issue. The second part of your question is about the allegations, they’re still allegations. If you want me to answer, I have to answer about something that is concrete, proved, and verified.

Question 48: Are you prepared to categorically deny that there’s torture and abuse of prisoners in Syria?

President Assad: If there’s any unbiased and fair way to verify all those allegations, of course we are ready. That would be in our interest.

Question 49: What impact would a U.S.-Iran nuclear deal have on Syria?

President Assad: Nothing, because the crisis here was never part of the negotiations, and Iran refused to make it such, and that is correct because there is no link between the two.

Journalist: But many in the U.S. anticipate that if Iran and the U.S. strike a deal, it will make cooperation between the two countries much easier. People therefore wonder if Iran might decide to reduce its support for Syria as a favor to the U.S. government.

President Assad: We have never had any positive information about such a thing, never. I cannot discuss something which I don’t have any information about.

Question 50: Describe whether you think the war is going well from the government’s perspective. Independent analysts have suggested that your government currently controls 45 to 50 percent of the territory of Syria.

President Assad: First of all, if you want to describe the arena, it’s not a war between two countries, between two armies where you have an incursion and you lost some territory that you want to regain. It’s not like this. We’re talking about rebels that infiltrate areas inhabited by civilians. You have Syrian terrorists that support foreign terrorists to come and hide among civilians, they launch what you call guerrilla attacks. That is the shape of this war, so you cannot look at it as being about territory. Second, wherever the Syrian Army has wanted to go, it has succeeded, but the Syrian army cannot have a presence on every kilometer of Syrian territory. That’s impossible. We made some advances in the past two years. But if you want to ask me “is it going well,” I say that every war is bad, because you always lose, you always have destruction in a war. The main question is what have we won in this war? What we won in this war is that the Syrian people have rejected the terrorists, the Syrian people support their government more, the Syrian people support their army more. Before talking about winning territory, talk about winning the hearts and minds and the support of the Syrian people. That’s what we have won. What’s left is logistical, it’s technical. That is a matter of time. The war is moving in a positive way, but that doesn’t mean you’re not losing on the national level, because you lose lives, you lose infrastructure, the war itself has very bad social effects.

Question 51: Do you think you will eventually defeat the rebels militarily?

President Assad: If they don’t have external support, and supply and recruitment of new terrorists within Syria, there will be no problem defeating them. Even today we don’t have a problem militarily. The problem is that they still have this continuous supply, mainly from Turkey.

Question 52: So, Turkey seems to be the neighbor that you’re most concerned about?

President Assad: Exactly, logistically, and about terrorist financing from Saudi Arabia and Qatar but through Turkey.

Question 53: Do you blame Erdogan personally? This is a man you once had a fairly good relationship with.

President Assad: Exactly, because he belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood ideology, which is the base of al Qaeda because it was the first political Islamic organization that promoted violent political Islam in the early 20th century. He belongs strongly and is a staunch believer in these values, he’s very fanatical, and that’s why he still supports ISIS. He is personally responsible for what happened.

Question 54: Do you see any other potential partners in the region? For example, General al-Sisi in Egypt?

President Assad: I wouldn’t talk about him personally, but as long as Egypt and the Egyptian army and the government are fighting the same kind of terrorists as in Iraq, of course, we can consider these countries eligible to cooperate with in fighting the same enemy.

Question 55: Two final questions, if I may. Can you imagine a scenario in which Syria returns to the status quo as it was before the fighting started almost four years ago?

President Assad: In what sense?

Journalist: In the sense that Syria is whole again, it is not divided, it controls its borders, it starts to rebuild, and it is at peace and a predominantly secular country.

President Assad: If you look at a military map now, the Syrian Army exists in every corner. Not every place; by every corner I mean north, south, east, west, and between. If you didn’t believe in a unified Syria, that Syria can go back to its previous position, you wouldn’t send the army there, as a government. If you don’t believe in this as a people, you would have seen people in Syria isolated in different ghettos, people isolated in different ghettos based on ethnic and sectarian or religious identity. As long as this is not the situation, the people live with each other, the army is everywhere, the army is made up of every color of Syrian society, or the Syrian fabric. This means that we all believe Syria should go back to the way it was. We don’t have any other option, because if it doesn’t go back to its previous position, that will affect every surrounding country. It’s one fabric, it’s a domino effect that will have influence from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

Question 56: If you were able to deliver a message to President Obama today, what would it be?

President Assad: I think the normal thing that you ask any official in the world is to work for the interests of his people. And the question I would ask any American is: what do you get from supporting terrorists in our country, in our region? What did you get from supporting the Muslim Brotherhood a few years ago in Egypt and other countries? What did you get from supporting someone like Erdogan? One of the officials from your country asked me seven years ago in Syria at the end of a meeting: how do you think we can solve the problem in Afghanistan? I told him, you have to be able to deal with officials who are not puppets, who can tell you “no.” So, for the United States only looking for puppet officials and client states is not how you can serve the interests of your country. You are the greatest power in the world now, you have many things to disseminate around the world: knowledge, innovation, IT with its positive repercussions. How can you be the best in these fields yet the worst in the political field? This is a contradiction. That is what I think the American people should analyze and question. Why do you fail in every war? You can create war, you can create problems, but you cannot solve any problem. Twenty years of the peace process in Palestine and Israel and you cannot do anything with this in spite of the fact that you are a great country.

Question 57: But in the context of Syria, what would a better policy look like?

President Assad: One that preserves stability in the Middle East. Syria is the heart of the Middle East. Everybody knows that. If the Middle East is sick, the whole world will be unstable. In 1991, when we started the peace process, we had a lot of hope. Now, after over 20 years, things are not at square one; they’re much below that square. So the policy should be to help peace in the region, to fight terrorism, to promote secularism, to support this area economically, to help upgrade the mind and society like you did in your country. That is the supposed mission of the United States, not to launch wars. Launching war doesn’t make you a great power.

SOURCED FROM | http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=26278

---

"Been pointed out before and should be noted again: Ain’t no head of state in the world - apart from Russian Prez Vlad “The Bad” Putin - that handles the media quite like Syrian President Dr. Bashar al-Assad. His eloquence and defiance, as well as his confident yet humble demeanor, come across with every answer delivered, even when dealing with an arrogant, combative, disrespectful “journalist” like the Foreign Affairs correspondent who just interviewed him. When pressed on the matter of the illegitimate Israeli regime’s role in the conspiracy against Syria, the Syrian leader dropped a bomb on this imperialist mouthpiece: “They [the Zionists] are supporting the rebels in Syria. It’s very clear. Because whenever we make advances in some place, they attack in order to undermine the Syrian Arab Army. It’s very clear. That’s why some in Syria joke, how can you say that Al-Qaeda doesn’t have an air force? They have the Israeli Air Force.” Simply said, the man puts his Western and regional adversaries to shame. "
~ S. Abdallah

President's Interview with Czech Newspaper Literarni Noviny

15/01/2015
The Czech newspaper Literarni Noviny has interviewed President Bashar al-Assad. Find the full text of the interview below.

Question 1: Mr. President, I would like to start from the beginning. Less than a decade ago, Syria was building its relations with the west, and you were implementing World Bank-proposed reforms, and Mr. Kerry, until 2010, I believe, used to call you “my dear friend,” and somehow, overnight, everything changed, and you became a dictator and a Hitler and so on. What’s your opinion about that? How can you explain this dramatic change?

President Assad: In fact, I haven’t changed, neither have we changed our policies, values or principles. The problem lies with the West, and it’s not a new problem. It is related to the independence of our country. In fact, this is the problem of the west with many other countries, including Syria. During the period you refer to concerning relations with the West, between 2008 and 2010, relations were good, but in fact they were not based on mutual respect. For instance, France wanted Syria to play a role with Iran concerning the nuclear file. What was required was not to be part of that file, but to convince Iran to take steps which are against its interests. We refused to do that. They also wanted us to take a position against resistance in our region before putting an end to Israeli occupation and aggression against the Palestinians and other neighboring countries. We refused that too. They wanted us to sign the Euro-Association Agreement which was against our interests and was meant to turn our country into an open market for their products while giving us a very small share of their markets. We refused to do that because it is against the interests of the Syrian people.

These are a few examples of that relationship, and that’s why they took that decision. The same is happening now with Russia; two decades ago, Russia was a close friend of the West. Suddenly, Russia became an aggressive country; and the West started to demonize President Putin, and the same propaganda was used in both the Syrian and Russian cases. So, the problem has to do with the independence of these countries. The West wants client states ruled by puppets. This is the core issue with the West. It has nothing to do with democracy, freedom, or supporting the people in the region. An example is what happened in Libya and the continuing killing in Syria with Western support.

Question 2: But in those times, the beginning of the so-called American war on terrorism, Syria used to help the CIA in the rendition programs and interrogating and torturing people. Why did you join that program?

President Assad: You mean before the crisis?

Journalist: Yes

President Assad: We have been suffering from extremism for more than five decades. And terrorism, in its stark shape, appeared in Syria in the 1970s. At that time we called for international cooperation to fight terrorism. Nobody cared about that then. In the West, they were not aware of this problem. That’s why we have always been ready to help and cooperate with any country that wants to fight terrorism. And for that reason we helped the Americans, and we are always ready to join any country which is sincere about fighting terrorism. We will never change our position in that regard, before, during, or after the crisis. The problem of the west is that it did not understand how to deal with this issue. They believed that fighting terrorism is similar to a computer game, which is not true. Fighting terrorism should be through culture, the economy, and in different fields.

Question 3: Regarding this question of terrorism, you heard about events in France recently, what are your comments about that?

President Assad: When you talk about terrorism, about killing civilians, and regardless of the political position, agreement or disagreement with the people who have been killed, this is a case of terrorism; and we are against killing innocent people anywhere in the world. This is our principle.

We are one of the countries which best understand this issue because we have been suffering from terrorism for the past four years and we lost thousands of innocent lives in Syria. That’s why we sympathize with the families of those victims. However, and at the same time, we want to remind many people in the West that we have been talking about these repercussions since the beginning of the crisis in Syria. We have been saying, you shouldn't support terrorism and provide it with a political umbrella, because this will reflect on your countries and your people.

They didn't listen to us. Western politicians were short-sighted and narrow-minded. What happened in France proved that what we said was true. At the same time, this incident brought European policies to account, because they are responsible for what happened in our region, for what happened in France, and maybe what happened earlier in other European countries.

Question 4: In your opinion, what is the best way to fight terrorism?

President Assad: If we want to talk about the reality now, we need to fight terrorists because they are killing innocent people, and we have to defend these people. This is the most important and urgent method to deal with it. But if we want to talk about the crisis, fighting terrorism doesn’t need an army, but needs good policies. We should fight ignorance with culture and education, should build a good economy to fight poverty, and there should be an exchange of information among the countries concerned with fighting terrorism.

The problem cannot be addressed in the way they addressed it in Afghanistan, I mean what they did in Afghanistan in 2001. A group of Congressmen visited Damascus at that time and they were talking about invading Afghanistan in revenge for what happened in New York earlier. I said this is not how you should do it, because fighting terrorism is similar to treating cancer. You do not treat cancer by cutting it, but by extracting it. What happened in Afghanistan is that they cut the cancer, and the result was that it spread much faster. That’s why, as I said, we should focus on good policies, on the economy, and on culture and education.

Journalist: So, you used to repeat that to European politicians but they didn’t listen.

President Assad: Exactly.

Question 5: Do you feel that the European Union policies or the policies of European Union member states have changed towards Syria in the past year somehow?

President Assad: There is a slow and shy change, but they do not acknowledge that they were mistaken. They do not dare do that because they went too far: they demonized Syria, the state, the president, the army, and everything. What can they say to their public opinion now after four years? Shall they say they were mistaken? They cannot do that. That’s why they say that they acknowledge the existence of terrorism in our region, but add that it was all because of the president. They do not acknowledge anything else. So, there is some change, and we have contacts with some officials on different levels. These contacts are not announced of course, so we do not mention the names of the officials or the countries. These officials said that the European policies were wrong and that they wanted to rectify these policies. We don’t have a problem with that, because it is not a problem of love and hate, it is about the interests of states. But I don’t think they will make fast changes, because we haven’t seen any serious efforts made by any European country so far.

Question 6: Do you have some special opinion about the foreign policy of the Czech Republic towards Syria?

President Assad: If we look at the European Union in general, we see that its member states did not have the same position during the crisis. The Czech Republic and Romania were among the countries which maintained their relationship with Syria during the crisis, and this is important, although it doesn’t mean that they supported our government or agreed with it about everything or about some things, or anything of that kind. It means that as long as these relations were maintained, they were able to understand what’s going on in a better manner. So, concerning the Czech Republic, I can say that our relations were not very good before the crisis, but during the crisis it was shown that it had a much clearer vision than other countries. That has a number of reasons, but most importantly by maintaining these relations, it was able to see, analyze, and understand what is actually happening, and by so doing it can be more objective than other European countries.

Question 7: You mentioned demonizing Syria and yourself personally. I just want to hear your explanations about a couple of these allegations. For example, there is still a popular thesis that your refusal to step down is the sole reason for the war, for what is going on in the country. What do you have to say about this?

President Assad: No president can remain in his position, in such circumstances, without the support of the Syrian public opinion and the Syrian people, particularly that we are facing an aggression by the United States, most European countries, many regional countries, including some countries neighboring Syria like Turkey, Jordan, and some parties in Lebanon, and the Gulf countries with the billions of dollars they spend in Syria. How can we stand fast without the support of the Syrian people? This is self evident and cannot be denied by anyone except if they are talking about a superman; and in Syria we do not have a superman, we have a man. So, this shows that the Syrian people support their president; and consequently, can we talk about people supporting their president in order to have more killing and terrorism? We are talking here about the majority of the Syrian people, in their millions. Is it possible that all these people support the president only to be exposed to more terrorism? Isn't that an accusation to the Syrian people that they do not have a realistic vision? This doesn't make sense.

In fact, they support the president because they know that what happened in Syria from the beginning was because of the money spent by Qatar in support of demonstrations to create propaganda that there is a revolution in Syria. It was also because of the money spent by Qatar and Saudi Arabia to support terrorists with money, weapons, and logistic support. And then it was because of Turkey which has provided all logistic support and supply chancels to terrorists in Syria. There is also Jordan and some parties in Lebanon. This is the reality. This is what happened in Syria. It is not about the president or about him being in this position. The other question is: what is the relationship between the existence of ISIS and al-Qaeda in Syria and the president? Can we say that the cause of 9/11 in New York was President Bush, and that if Bush was changed, then 9/11 wouldn’t have happened? This is unrealistic and illogical. They know that, but they insist on continuing to tell these lies for the reasons I mentioned earlier. They do not dare acknowledge that they were mistaken, that they misread the situation in Syria, that they listened to ignorant officials in countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia and that they sold their values for petrodollars. They allowed themselves to be led by these countries. This is the real reason for what happened in Syria not that the president did not step down or that he remained in his position.

Question 8: A second, very popular and still unchallenged allegation in the Czech Republic is that you are the mass killer of your own people. What do you think about that?

President Assad: It is the same answer. How can a president kill his people, and consequently his people become against him, and the whole world against him; and nevertheless he remains in his position? What is the power that keeps the president in this position? It is the same answer. This is unrealistic, as I said. The issue has nothing to do with stepping down. We are defending our people. I enjoy the support of the Syrian people because I defend this country. No president can kill his people, fight terrorists, fight the world, and yet remain in his position. This is unrealistic.

Question 9: And the newest one is that you are partner with ISIS, because the Syrian Army is not fighting ISIS, and ISIS isn’t fighting the Syrian Army.

President Assad: So, this means that I support ISIS in order for them to kill our soldiers, take our military bases, and at the same time benefit from ISIS. How is that? Once again, there is a contradiction in this. There is another widespread allegation in the west: that we are benefitting from the American strikes. Some of them said that. How? If we support ISIS, then we do not benefit from the American strikes, and if they say that we benefit from the American strikes, then we are against ISIS. Regardless of all that, I stress once more that we are fighting all sorts of terrorists, whether ISIS, Jabhet al-Nusra, or others. There is no single reason to say that we support ISIS. We don’t have any reason.

Question 10: Regarding ISIS, it looks like, at least from Europe, that radical Islam is gaining ground in the region, and it will be spreading and spreading. Do you think so, or is it just some kind of fad which will disappear in ten years’ time, or something like that?

President Assad: This radical Islam, from our perspective as moderate Muslims, is not Islam. There is no extremism in any religion, whether it is Islam, Christianity, or Judaism. All religions are moderate; and when there is extremism, it is a deviation from religion. If we want to use the term “radical Islam” as you said, I think it is true, because radical Islam has been instilled in the minds of the people of the region for more than four decades with the influence of Saudi money and the Wahabi interpretation of Islam, which is a very extreme interpretation, a deviation from true Islam, and constitutes the base of terrorism in this region. So, as long as money continued to flow in the same direction and for the same reasons, through religious schools and religious TV channels, and similar things, it will become more widespread, not only in our region, but in Europe too. What happened in France yesterday is a strong indication of that. I mean that this terrorist incident which happened in Paris did not happen in vacuum. It did not happen because some people wanted to avenge that publication of some cartoons of Prophet Mohammad. In fact, this is the normal and natural result of the extremist, closed-mined, and Dark Ages ideology which originates from Saudi Arabia. So, there is no reason to say that this ideology will recede in the near future unless the world puts an end to the flow of money in the wrong direction and in support of this extremist ideology which leads to this kind of terrorism.

Question 11: Last year, you said that the major battles in the Syrian war will be over, and now it will be time to start reconstruction in the country. Is that statement still valid?

President Assad: In fact, when war happens in any country, the most important area of the economy becomes the reconstruction of the country. This will be the largest part of our economy, and we have started to draw plans for the process of reconstruction. It’s not only about rebuilding the infrastructure, but also about rebuilding human beings. But now I’m talking about the economy.

Journalist: I’m asking about reconstruction because many countries support the war against Syria now, but as soon as reconstruction starts, they will be eager to take part in the process in order to make some money from rebuilding the same Syria which they are destroying now. Do you have some plans for this reconstruction, and what countries will be joining this effort?

President Assad: We have our plans of course, and we started in some areas where national reconciliation has been achieved and life is back to normal. It is a long-term plan and will include different parts of Syria where terrorists have caused destruction. As for the countries which might take part in reconstruction, the process will be selective and will not be open to everyone. I don’t believe that the Syrian people will accept the participation of any company from a hostile country which has been responsible, directly or indirectly, for shedding Syrian blood during the crisis. But since you are a Czech journalist, I can say that the Czech Republic might be one of the countries that might take part in the reconstruction process because it was more objective than most European countries, despite the pressures exercised on its government and officials to cut relations with Syria. That’s why we should show our appreciation for this position, and I can say that the door will be open for this kind of cooperation in this field of the economy.

Journalist: This sounds good for us, but I can’t imagine reconciliation happening in Syria after four years of war. I believe it is a very difficult process to try to overcome the hostilities which grew during this period. Can you describe to us the efforts you are making in this direction?

President Assad: Fortunately, you are raising this question at a time that reconciliation efforts have succeeded in many areas, and we are not talking about an imaginary thing or about wishful thinking. This has actually happened. In the beginning, the question we put to ourselves was the same question you are raising now. Will we succeed? Can people forget the hostilities and the blood? This is not easy, and it wasn’t easy in the beginning, particularly if you are dealing with different groups, some of which are extremist groups and reject reconciliation, like Jabhet al-Nusra and ISIS in some regions.

These groups have actually succeeded in undermining these efforts. But in other regions, where the majority of the groups insisted on achieving reconciliation, reconciliation succeeded, and the groups involved in it were able to drive the groups opposed to it out of their areas. If we want to talk about reality, the people who used to fight each other, on the side of the government or against it, have gone back to their normal life, rebuilt their friendships, and are dealing with each other on daily basis because they were friends and neighbors before the crisis and before the events.

In fact, reconciliation efforts succeeded in most areas because the people who took part in them realized that before reconciliation they were moving in the wrong direction. They also realized that they were used as tools in return for the money flowing from Qatar and Saudi Arabia and in the service of the closed-minded Muslim Brotherhood ideology of Erdogan in Turkey. They realized that they have done harm to their country, so they turned in the right direction, and here reconciliation was successful. So, my answer is that the process has succeeded, and that the doors are open now more than any time before for reconciliation. By time, more Syrians will join the reconciliation and more Syrians will realize that they cannot go on in the same direction, unless we want to destroy our society, ourselves, and our country completely.

Question 12: A kind of reconciliation might happen at the end of January in Moscow where your government will be discussing with at least some members of the exiled opposition. Do you expect some concrete results, and what do you think of this Russian initiative?

President Assad: I think that the Russian position is that they support Syria in fighting terrorism, which is very important. At the same time, it paves the way before a political path. Our position is similar, for we do not want to miss any political opportunity, and this is what we are trying to do. If we succeed, it’s a good thing. If we don’t, we will not lose anything. So, we are going to Russia not to start a dialogue, but to meet these different personalities to discuss the basis of dialogue when it starts: like the unity of Syria, containing terrorist organizations, supporting the army, fighting terrorism, and things like this. As to what I expect from this meeting, I think we should be realistic, since we are dealing with personalities.

When we talk about opposition, we do not talk about someone opposing something. Anyone can oppose anything. Opposition, in the political sense, is a party or an entity which has representatives in the local administration or in parliament who can influence their people and act in the best interest of their country, not in the best interest of foreign powers. I believe this is a universal concept. Now, we are talking about different personalities, some of them are patriotic, some do not have any influence and do not represent an important part of the Syrian people, and some are puppets in the hands of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, France, or the United States, and consequently they do not act in the best interest of their country. There are other personalities which represent an extremist ideology.

Consequently, it is too early to judge the potential for the success of failure of this step. Nevertheless, we support this Russian initiative, and we believe that we should go as a government in order to listen to what they have to say. If they have something useful and is in the best interest of the Syrian people and the country, we will go forward, and if not, we will not deal with them seriously.

Question 13: According to media reports, Russians are coordinating this process with the United States, and it means that these two superpowers, as it looks, can find a common ground, maybe for the first time, regarding Syria. Do you think this is the beginning of the end of the Syrian war?

President Assad: You mean when they reach this common ground?

Journalist: Yes, if they managed to agree on something, this will be positive.

President Assad: Any good relation between Russia and the West, and especially the United States, will reflect positively on the region, particularly in this period, and especially concerning Syria. But I would like to say that the solution should come first and foremost from within Syria. Second, if we want to talk about international relations and their impact, they need to be serious. When we talk about a common ground, what is the nature of this common ground? How serious is the United States in fighting ISIS? So far, what it is doing is cosmetic, while the Russians are very determined to fight terrorism. In the same context, how serious is the United States in influencing Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia – and these countries are not allies of the United States, but puppets in its hands – to what extent the United States will influence them to stop the flow of money, weapons, and terrorists into Syria. Unless these questions are answered, it is impossible to reach this common ground.

So far, the United States is playing games and playing for time. What the United States ultimately wants is to use Russia against Syria. It wants Russia to exercise pressure on Syria. This is the common ground the Americans are looking for, and not the common ground necessary to fight terrorism, allow the Syrian people to determine their future, and respect the sovereignty of all countries including Syria. So far, we do not see this common ground. The Russians are trying their best to find it, but I don’t believe that the Americans will respond to this effort positively.

Journalist: Thank you very much, and I hope this year will be good for Syria.

President Assad: Thank you.

...

SOURCE | http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=25117

On Western Leaders and Values...

-