Showing posts with label Syrian President. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Syrian President. Show all posts

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on 60 Minutes

Aired Mar 29, 2015



Charlie Rose interviews the Syrian President

Charlie Rose: How much of a benefit are you getting from American airstrikes in Syria reducing the power of ISIS?

President Assad: Sometimes you could have local benefit but in general if you want to talk in terms of ISIS actually ISIS has expanded since the beginning of the strikes. Not like some-- American-- wants to sugar coat the situation as the-- to say that it's getting better. As-- ISIS is being defeated and so on. Actually, no, you have more recruits. Some estimates that they have 1,000 recruits every month in Syria. And Iraq-- they are expanding in Libya and many other al Qaeda affiliate organizations have announced their allegiance to ISIS. So that's the situation.

Charlie Rose: How much territory do they control in Syria?

President Assad: Sorry?

Charlie Rose: ISIS. Controls how much territory. 50 percent?

President Assad: Yeah, it's not regular war. We cannot-- you don't have criteria. It's not an army that makes-- it make the incursion. They go to infidels. They try to infiltrate any area when there is no army and we have-- inhibitance. The question, how much incubator they have, that's the question. How much heart and minds they won so far.

Charlie Rose: And how much of that? How do you measure that--

President Assad: You cannot measure it but you can tell that the majority of the people who suffered from ISIS, they are supporting the government and, of course, the rest of the Syrian people are afraid from ISIS and I don't think they would-- I think they lost a lot of hearts and minds.

Charlie Rose: They've lost a lot?

President Assad: They have lost. Except the very ideological people who have Wahhabi state of mind and ideology.

Charlie Rose: There is another number that is alarming to me. It is that 90 percent of the civilian casualties, 90 percent come from the Syrian army.

President Assad: How did you get that result?

Charlie Rose: That was a report that was issued in the last six months.

President Assad: OK. As I said earlier, the war, it's not about-- it's not traditional war. It's not about capturing land and gaining land. It's about winning the hearts and minds of the Syrians. We cannot win the heart and minds of the Syrians while we are killing Syrians. We cannot sustain four years in that position as a government. And me as president, while the rest of the world, most of the world, the great powers, the regional power, are against me and my people are against me. That's impossible. I mean this logic has no leg to stand on. So this is not realistic and this is against our interests as government is to kill the people. What do we get? What the benefit of killing the people?

Charlie Rose: Well, the argument is that you-- there are weapons of war that have been used that most people look down on with great-- one is chlorine gas. They believe that has been used here. They said there is evidence of that and they would like to have the right to inspect to see where it's coming from. As you know, barrel bombs have been used. And they come from helicopters. And the only people who have helicopters is the Syrian army. And so those two acts of war, which has-- society looks down on as--

President Assad: Let me fully answer this.

Charlie Rose: --barbaric acts.

President Assad: It's very important. This is part of the malicious propaganda against Syria. First of all, the chlorine gas is not military gas. You can buy it anywhere.

Charlie Rose: But it can be weaponized--

President Assad: No, because it's not very effective it's not used as military gas. That's very self-evident. Traditional arms is more important than chlorine. And if it was very effective the terrorists would have used this on a larger scale. Because it's not effective, it's not used very much.

Charlie Rose: Then why doesn't somebody come in and inspect it and see whether it's been used or not?

President Assad: Well, we-- well, we-- we--

Charlie Rose: You'd be--

President Assad: --we-- we would--

Charlie Rose: --you're happy for that?

President Assad: Of course. We all--we always ask a delegation, impartial delegation to come and investigate. But I mean logically and realistically it cannot be used as a military. This is part of the propaganda because, as you know, in the media when it bleeds it leads. And they always look for something that bleeds, which is the chlorine gas and the barrel bombs.

Charlie Rose: You do use barrel bombs? You're just saying--

President Assad: No, no. There's no such a thing called barrel bombs. We have bombs. And any bomb is about killing.

Charlie Rose: You have often spoken about the danger of a wider war in the Middle East.

President Assad: Yeah.

Charlie Rose: Can you talk about the parties involved? And characterize how you see them. Let me begin with Saudi Arabia.

President Assad: Saudi Arabia is--an (unintel) autocracy. Medieval system that's based on the Wahhabi dark ideology. Actually, say it's a marriage between the Wahhabi and the political system for 200 years now. That's how we look at it.

Charlie Rose: And what is their connection to ISIS?

President Assad: The same ideology. The same background.

Charlie Rose: So ISIS and Saudi Arabia are one and the same?

President Assad: The same ideology. Yes.

Charlie Rose: Same ideology.

President Assad: I don't-- it's Wahhabi ideology. They base the--their ideology is based on the books of the Wahhabi and Saudi Arabia.

Charlie Rose: So you believe that all Wahhabis have the same ideology as ISIS--

President Assad: Exactly. Definitely. And that's by ISIS, by al Qaeda, by al Nusra. It's not something we discover or we try to promote. It's very-- I mean their book-- they use the same books to indoctrinate the people. The Wahhabi books-

Charlie Rose: What about Turkey?

President Assad: Turkey-- let's say it's about Erdogan. His Muslim Brotherhood fanatics.

Charlie Rose: And you--

President Assad: It doesn't mean that he is a member. But he's a fanatic.

Charlie Rose: President Erdogan is--

President Assad: Is a Muslim Brotherhood fanatic. And he's somebody who's suffering from political megalomania. And that he thinks that he is becoming the sultan of the new era of the 21st century.

Charlie Rose: You think he could stop the border if he wanted to?

President Assad: Yeah, of course. Definitely. He doesn't only ignore the terrorists from coming to Syria. He support them, logistically and militarily. Directly. On daily basis.

Charlie Rose: Tell us what the Russians want. They are a strong ally of you.

President Assad: Yeah.

Charlie Rose: What do they want?

President Assad: Definitely they want to have balance in the world. It's not only about Syria. And small country. It's not about having a huge interest in Syria, they could have it anywhere else. So, it's about the future of the world. They want to be a great power that-- have-- their own say in the future of this world.

Charlie Rose: And what do they want for Syria?

President Assad: Stability. They want--

Charlie Rose: Stability.

President Assad: --stability, and political solution.

Charlie Rose: And what does Iran want?

President Assad: The same. The same. Syria, and Iran, and Russia, see eye-to-eye regarding these conflicts.


.Charlie Rose: And what is your obligation to both of them?

President Assad: What do you mean obligation?

Charlie Rose: What is your-- what do you owe them?

President Assad: Yeah, I know. But, they didn't ask me for anything. Nothing at all. That's why what I said-- they don't do that for Syria. They do it for the region, and for the world. 'Cause stability is very important for them.

Charlie Rose: You and your father have held power in Syria for how many years?

President Assad: Is it a calculation of years?

Charlie Rose: Yes.

President Assad: Or public support?

Charlie Rose: No, years. How long--

President Assad: There's a big difference. It doesn't matter, how many years, the question--

Charlie Rose: Well, it does matter. I mean--

President Assad: No, what's matter for us, do the Syrians support, these two presidents, doesn't matter is they are father and son. We don't say--W- George W. Bush is the son of George Bush. It's different. He's president, I'm president, he has support from that generation, I have support from this generation now.

Charlie Rose: But the question-- how do you--

President Assad: Doesn't matter how many. It's not-- it's not the family rule, as you want to imply.

Charlie Rose: It's not?

President Assad: No.

Charlie Rose: Why do you think that they-- people in the West, question your legitimacy?

President Assad: This intervention in Syria matters. I don't care about it, to be frank. I never care about it. As long as I have the public support of the Syrian people. That's my legitimacy; legitimacy comes from the inside, but why? I will tell you why. Because the West used to have puppets. Not independent leaders, or officials in any other country. And that the problem with Putin. They demonize Putin because he can say no, and he wants to be independent. Because the West, and especially the United States, don't accept partners. They only accept followers. Even Europe is not partner of the United States. That's to be very frank with you. So, this is their problem with Syria. They need somebody to keep saying yes. Yes-- a puppet. Marionette. And so on.

Charlie Rose: What circumstances would cause you to give up power?

President Assad: When I don't have the public support. When I don't represent the Syrian interests, and values.

Charlie Rose: And how do you determine that?

President Assad: I have daily contact with the-- with the people. How could any--

Charlie Rose: So, you're-- you determine whether they support you?

President Assad: No, no, no. I don't determine. I sense. I feel. I'm in contact with them. I'm a human. How can a human make that expectation of the population? I mean, the war was very important lab for this support. I mean, they could have-- if they don't support you, they could have-- go and support the other side. They didn't. Why? That's very clear. That's very concrete.

Charlie Rose: I came here after Secretary Kerry had made his remarks. My impression once I got here is that when you heard those remarks you were optimistic. The state department backed-- back a little bit, and said we still think there needs to be a new government. But you were optimistic after you heard that. You believe there is a way for your government and the American government to cooperate?

President Assad: Yeah.

Charlie Rose: And coordinate?

President Assad: That's not the main point-- after-- I mean-- regarding that statement. I think-- I think the main point we could have feeling, and we hope that we are right, that American administration started to abandon this policy of isolation. Which is very harmful to them, and to us. Because if you isolate country, isolate yourself, as the United States, from being influential, and effective, and the course of events, unless you are talking about the negative influence, like make embargo, that could kill the people slowly. Or launching war and supporting terrorists that could kill them in a faster way. So, our impression is that we are optimistic, more optimistic, I wouldn't exaggerate. That at least when they're thinking about dialogue, doesn't matter what kind of dialogue, and what the content of the dialogue. And even doesn't matter for the real intentions. But the word dialogue is something we haven't heard from the United States on the global level for a long time.

Charlie Rose: But you just did, from the secretary of state. We need to negotiate.

President Assad: Exactly, that's--

Charlie Rose: That's a dialogue.

President Assad: That's what I said. I mean, that's why I said it's positive. That's what I said, we are more optimistic. I mean, when they abandoned this policy of isolation, things should be better. I mean, when you start the dialogue things will be better.

Charlie Rose: Why don't you reach out to Secretary Kerry and say, "Let's talk."

President Assad: Are they ready to talk?

Charlie Rose: Let's talk.

President Assad: We are always open. We never close our doors. They should be ready for the talk, they should be ready for the negotiation. We didn't make an embargo on the United States. We didn't attack the American population. We didn't support terrorists who did anything in United States. Actually, the United States did. We were always-- we always wanted to have good relation with the United States. We never thought in the other direction. It's a great power. Nobody-- no-- not a wise person think of having bad relation with United States.

Charlie Rose: Yeah, but can you have good relationship with a country that thinks you shouldn't be in power?

President Assad: No, that's not going to be part of the dialogue that I mentioned earlier. This is not their business. We have Syrian citizens, who can decide this. No one else. Whether they want to talk about it or not. This is not something we're going to discuss with anyone.

Charlie Rose: This cannot end militarily. Do you agree with that?

President Assad: Yeah, definitely. Every conflict, even if it's a war, should end with a political solution.



....

BBC Interview with President Bashar al-Assad

10/02/2015

President al-Assad to BBC News: we are defending civilians, and making dialogue


Following is the full text and the video of the interview:


Welcome to a BBC News Special. I am Jeremy Bowen. I am in Damascus, in the Presidential Palace, the complex which overlooks Damascus city; and here we have been interviewing the president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad.

Question 1: Mr. President, you've lost control of large areas of Syria. The jihadist group that calls itself Islamic State has emerged. There are perhaps 200,000 Syrians dead, millions have lost their homes. The UN envoy Staffan de Mistura has called this the most serious humanitarian crisis in the world since the Second World War. Has Syria become a failed state?

President Assad: No, as long as the government and the state institutions are fulfilling their duty towards the Syrian people, we cannot talk about failed states. Talking about losing control is something completely different. It’s like if you have an invasion of terrorists coming from abroad, and the government is doing its job in fighting and defending its country.

Question 2: Can we briefly go back to when all this started in 2011? You said that there were mistakes made in the handling of those early demonstrations. Did you make mistakes yourself?

President Assad: No, I never said we made mistakes in handling this. I always say that anyone could make mistakes, but there’s a difference between-

Question 3: Did you make mistakes?

President Assad: There is a difference between talking, or asking your question, about policies and about practice. There’s a big difference. If we go back to polices, we took the decision to fight terrorism from the very beginning, we took the decision to make dialogue on the national level, and I think those policies are correct. While, if you want to talk about mistakes in practice and that some mistakes were committed towards some civilians, that happened from time to time, and some people were punished for these mistakes.

Question 4: But you didn’t make mistakes personally in the handling of the crisis?

President Assad: I said every person makes mistakes every day, otherwise if you deny the mistakes; you deny the human nature of the people.

Question 5: You talked about the influence of terrorism, as you called it, from the very beginning, but I was able as a reporter to go to some of those early demonstrations inside Damascus, in areas outside as well, and people there were not saying they wanted an Islamic caliphate. They were saying they wanted freedom, democracy, not the kind of vision that IS have now for the country. Do you think you’ve got it wrong?

President Assad: You in the West called it, at that time, and some still talk about that period as “peaceful-demonstration period” and I will tell you that during the first few weeks, many policemen were killed, shot dead. I don’t think they were shot dead and killed by the sound waves of the demonstrators. So, it was just a fantasy to talk about this. We have to talk about facts. From the very beginning, the demonstrations weren’t peaceful. Some who joined those demonstrations, they wanted democracy, that’s true, but that’s not the general case. This is first. Second, you’re talking about 140 – the highest number of demonstrations in one day, all over Syria – 140,000. Let’s make it one million, let’s say I’m minimizing the number. I’m not, but let’s say that. Make them one million. One million from 24 million Syrians is nothing.

Question 6: Now, in 2012, I spoke – I was in Duma which is a suburb of Damascus, as you know, which has been held by armed groups, armed rebel groups – and I spoke to a man there who said he defected from the Syrian Army and this is a quote, he said “I’ve escaped because I can’t see my people, my Syrian family, being killed by our hands,” and he meant the hands of the Syrian Armed Forces. Do you think that some of the activities of the Syrian Army helped create the nightmare that Syria is in right now?

President Assad: If you’re talking about the conflict taking the military shape, any war is a bad war, and in any war you have civilian casualties. That’s why every war is a bad war. So, you cannot talk about a benign war without casualties. It could have happened, but it was not policy. When you talk about governments, you talk about policy. What decisions we make on a political level? As I said; fighting terrorism, defending civilians, we are defending civilians, and making dialogue. And if we were the one who killed our people, as they said, how could we withstand four years while the people are against us, supposedly, and the West, and the regional countries, and I spent four years in my position with the government, with the army, with the institutions, without public support? That’s impossible. That’s mentally unpalatable.

Question 7: When you talk about terrorism versus what you represent, I mean, you know the accusation that has been made, that you have concentrated your forces in recent years against the non-jihadist parts of the armed resistance, the armed opposition to you, and that you have tried to give the Syrians, essentially, a false choice between you and between the likes of Al Qaeda and Islamic State, by trying to eliminate the middle ground. Perhaps it’s worked well as a political tactic, hasn’t it? Was that your idea?

President Assad: Anyway, Obama answered your question when he said a few months ago that waiting for, or depending on, what they called- the so-called moderate opposition, was a fantasy. It was but a dream. This is reality. So if I want to-

Question 8: They’re still trying to build up what they call this moderate opposition, aren't’ they? But this time to fight against the Islamic State.

President Assad: But they said it’s a fantasy, he said it’s a fantasy, we all know it’s a fantasy. Even in the Western media outlets, they are talking about the ISIS, and al-Nusra, and Al Qaeda affiliates, organizations and groups prevailing. It doesn’t happen suddenly. It’s illogical, unrealistic to suddenly shift from moderate to extremist. They have the same grassroots.

Question 9: I’ve met some of those fighters, and they’ve said to me explicitly “we are not extremists, we are not Al Qaeda, we are not ISIS.” They’ve said “if Islamic State came here, they’d kill us.” I met one group last year, actually in Damascus, who said “we’d like a country a bit more like Malaysia or Turkey.” I mean, that is not jihadist, that is not dangerous, is it?

President Assad: So, why did the so-called moderate opposition evaporate? That is the question. If you have answered-

Question 10: Some say that’s because you’ve attacked them. Because you’ve killed them.

President Assad: Why didn't we attack the extremists, like ISIS?

Question 11: That’s my question. Have you attacked them in the same force?

President Assad: You can say that the government and the President are shooting themselves in the foot. We ask the ISIS and al-Nusra to attack our military bases, to kill our soldiers, to kidnap our supporters, in order to eliminate the moderate opposition. Is that realistic? Nobody can accept it.

Question 12: I’ve spent time on the frontline with soldiers from the Syrian Army who insisted that they were patriotic, that they were patriots, they weren’t cold-blooded killers, but I’ve also interviewed people, and so have many other journalists and human rights people and so on, who say that they have suffered badly at the hands of Syrian soldiers. They can’t all have been lying, surely.

President Assad: How, how surely? Why are you sure?

Question 13: Well, because the weighted testimony, Human Rights Watch for example, 30th of January this year, has said that forces loyal to Bashar Assad, “have deliberately and viciously attacked civilians in opposition-held areas using indiscriminate weapons, notoriously barrel bombs.”

President Assad: This is a childish story they keep repeating in the West.

Question 14: It’s childish?

President Assad: Childish. Why? Again, if somebody who’s against his people, and against the regional powers, and the great powers, and the West, and survives, how? If you kill the Syrian people, do they support you, or do they become against you? As long as you have the public support, it means that you are defending the people. If you kill the people, they will be against you. That’s common logic, common sense.

Question 15: What about barrel bombs? You don’t deny that your forces use them?

President Assad: I know about the army. They use bullets, missiles, and bombs. I haven’t heard of an army using barrels or maybe cooking pots.

Question 16: Large barrels full of explosives and projectiles which are dropped from helicopters, and explode with devastating effect. There’s been a lot of testimony about this thing.

President Assad: They are called bombs. We have bombs, missiles, and bullets.

Question 17: But you wouldn't deny that, included under the category of bombs, are these barrel bombs, which are indiscriminate weapons?

President Assad: No, there are no indiscriminate weapons. When you shoot, you aim, and when you aim, you aim at terrorists in order to protect civilians. Again, if you’re talking about casualties, that’s war. You cannot have war without casualties.

Question 18: There are always casualties in war, and civilians die as well, but it is the responsibility under international humanitarian law for belligerents from both sides to do everything they can to protect civilians, and the accusation against the Syrian Army is that by using barrel bombs, indiscriminate weapons – and Staffan de Mistura, again, the UN envoy, he’s talked about the constant fear of barrel bombs – means that you are not respecting humanitarian law by protecting your own people. What do you say to that?

President Assad: First of all, we’ve been attacked in Damascus and in Aleppo, we’ve been attacked by rebels, not vice versa. They’ve been attacking the Syrians with mortars, so you have to retaliate and defend your people. That’s self-evident. Second, again, you are talking about somebody, the government, who is killing its people, and the people supporting the government. This is contradiction. There’s no logic. But answer, how can you have support and kill people at the same time?

Question 19: Of course you have many supporters among part of the Syrian population, but in areas held by the rebels, the accusation is your people have used indiscriminate weapons which they may well have attacked places where there are armed rebels, but because there are civilians there, civilians have also died, and if you used less indiscriminate weapons, like barrels bombs, then this kind of thing would not be happening.

President Assad: During the war, you can have any kind of incrimination, any kind of allegations, every party could blame the others, but you have to talk about the reality. The families of those fighters, they came to the government in order to have refuge, not vice versa. You can go now and see where they live and who takes care of them. If we would kill civilians, civilians should have fled to the other side, not come to us.

Question 20: Now, if you stopped barrel bombing, and it does happen, would you not help your own case internationally? There are people now who are saying that you are a potential partner in the fight against the Islamic State and that you could be part of the solution, not part of the problem, and it would be quite an easy thing, wouldn’t it, simply to order your generals, to say “look, no more of these attacks,” and that would be… that would no doubt would improve your international standing, would it not?

President Assad: So, the first part of your question is about asking us to stop fulfilling our duty to defend our people against the terrorists?

Question 21: So, that’s legitimate use of force?

President Assad: Of course.

Question 22: Including barrel bombs?

President Assad: There are no barrel bombs.

Question 23: You don’t have barrel bombs at all?

President Assad: We don’t have barrels. Again, it’s like talking about cooking pots. So, we don’t have cooking pots. We only have, like any regular army, we have bombs, we have missiles, we have bullets, and etcetera.

Question 24: You've given up your chemical weapons arsenal, but as you know that this last week, the international organization which disposed of the weapons, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, condemned the use of chlorine gas here in Syria, saying with a high degree of confidence it was used last summer, not blaming any side, but saying that at the same time as these attacks, 32 out of 37 people interviewed said they heard or seen helicopters near the village. Now, the armed groups, the rebels, don’t have helicopters. Your side has helicopters. Have they been using chlorine gas to attack?

President Assad: Chlorine gas exists in any factory, in any house in Syria, in anywhere in the world. It’s not a military material.

Question 25: It can be militarized.

President Assad: Anything can be militarized. This is first-

Question 26: Is chlorine gas being militarized?

President Assad: Second, if you want to use gas as a WMD, you have to talk about thousands or maybe tens of thousands of victims in a few hours. That didn’t happen in Syria. Third, we could with our ordinary armaments-

Question 27: It did happen, last summer, in August of the previous year, 2013, of course.

President Assad: Who verified who threw that gas on who? Who verified the numbers?

Question 28: Your side didn’t do that attack?

President Assad: No. definitely not. We were close to the degree that we could affect ourselves. Second, the number of the victims wasn’t as they exaggerated in the media. So it’s not a WMD, it’s not about gas, it’s something… we don’t know what it is, because we didn’t exist in that region.

Question 29: So you’re not using chlorine gas?

President Assad: No, definitely not.

Question 30: On the fight against the Islamic State and Al Qaeda, the U.S. and others have said you cannot be a partner in that fight. Would you like to be a partner, would you like to join-

President Assad: Partner with who?

Question 31: Partner with the countries that are attacking Islamic State at the moment.

President Assad: Do you mean the alliance?

Question 32: The Jordanians-

President Assad: No, definitely, we cannot, and we don’t have the will, and we don’t want, for one simple reason; because we cannot be in an alliance with a country who supports terrorism.

Question 33: Which country?

President Assad: Because you are fighting terrorism. Those countries who make up the alliance, mainly most of them, support terrorism.

Question 34: You’ve been very harsh in your criticism of the Saudis. Now, the Saudis say they are against Islamic State. They are frightened of Islamic State because Islamic State do not want a royal family in Saudi Arabia, so isn’t it logical that they want them out? Why would they support them?

President Assad: First of all, the source of this Islamic State ideology and other Al Qaeda-affiliated groups is the Wahabis that are being supported by the royal family in Saudi Arabia. So, just to say that we do and we don’t, this doesn’t matter; it’s what you do, what is the action you are taking in order to prove that what you are saying is correct.

Question 35: So, you are saying then that the Saudis bear a high degree of responsibility for the emergence of these ideologies and of these armed groups.

President Assad: Definitely, there’s no question

Question 36: So, why have they rounded up and imprisoned so many Al Qaeda sympathizers inside Saudi Arabia itself?

President Assad: I think what they think is that once it’s going to be their turn, because the society in that kingdom is more inclined to be ISIS and to accept such ideologies as the Islamic State, that’s why.

Question 37: Let’s talk about American attitudes. Your departure from office is still official American policy, but there are signs that they are softening. Secretary of State John Kerry recently said that instead of saying… he said that you should change your policies, that it’s time for President Assad to put the people first, think about the consequences. So, is that a lifeline that he’s offering? Is he softening in his attitude? Do you believe that you are now being seen as part of the solution?

President Assad: First of all, we don’t breathe through the Americans, we only breathe through our citizens. That’s how we breathe. This is first. So, it’s not a lifeline for us. Second, it depends on what he means by changing… what has he said? What’s the word?

Question 38: Put the people first, think about the consequences of their actions. This is seen as a softening because in the past, they’ve said “first of all, Assad must go.”

President Assad: So, second, it depends on what Kerry meant by his statement, or any other official. It’s not about him as a person. Whatever they say, doesn’t mean for us to be puppets. Whatever they say, for us it’s about being independent, to work for our interest, to work for the common interest of others, but we’ll never be puppets who work against our interests for their interests. So you have to ask them what they meant by that statement.

Question 39: But you must… surely… Syria has been very isolated. You’re under sanctions here, people can’t use credit cards, you’ve been cut off from a lot of the commerce of the world. I mean, you must surely welcome a situation which might get you back into the family of nations in a way that you haven’t been since 2011.

President Assad: We’re not against cooperation with any country, we’ll never be. We didn’t start this conflict with the others. They started, they supported terrorists, they gave them the umbrella. It’s not about isolating Syria now; it’s about embargo on the Syrian population or the Syrian citizens. It’s different from isolation. It’s completely different.

Question 40: Do you talk to the Americans? There are American planes in the air above Syria the whole time. Do you coordinate?

President Assad: No, because they don’t talk to anyone unless he’s a puppet, and they easily trampled over the international law, which is about our sovereignty now. So, they don’t talk to us, we don’t talk to them.

Question 41: But I’m curious, that at a time when there are… there’s the American military in the air above Syria, and your people are in the air, your air force, the Syrian air force, is in the air above Syria, that there haven’t been any incidents between the two. No shots seem to have been traded, no planes have been shot down. That suggests to me surely that someone is talking to someone here.

President Assad: That’s correct, but again, there’s no direct cooperation.

Question 42: Direct? Is it via Iraq? That’s what some people say.

President Assad: Through third parties, more than one party, Iraq and other countries. Sometimes they convey messages, general messages, but there’s nothing tactical.

Question 43: So, they don’t tell you “we’re going to be bombing at Raqqa at 10 o’clock this evening, please keep out of the way?”

President Assad: We knew about the campaign before it’s started, but we didn’t know about the details.

Question 44: And is that a continuing dialogue that you have through third parties?

President Assad: There’s no dialogue. There’s, let’s say, information. But not dialogue.

Question 45: They tell you things?

President Assad: Something like this.

Question 46: Do you tell them things?

President Assad: No.

Question 47: And apart from Iraq, which other countries-

President Assad: When we do something in our territory, or on our territory, we don’t ask anyone, we don’t tell anyone. We just do it.

Question 48: You don’t say, “Look, if you see Syrian helicopters over a certain area at this hour, please don’t shoot them down?”

President Assad: No. That’s I mean, there’s no tactical cooperation, or through third party cooperation.

Question 49: Does the bombing of IS benefit your government? Chuck Hagel, the former U.S. Defense Secretary, certainly said that the bombing benefitted you, and he resigned shortly after he said that. Do you feel safer as a result of the fact that the Americans are helping you take care of your enemies?

President Assad: That question is contradicting with the first question when you said that we were supporting ISIS in order to get rid of the moderates. If we are against ISIS, we don’t support ISIS. So, this question is more realistic. Yes, it will have some benefits, but if it was more serious and more effective and more efficient. It’s not that much.

Question 50: Can we talk about the humanitarian situation a little bit? One of the effective military tactics your… the Syrian Army has used, is to isolate areas held by rebels, and effectively to starve them out. But that has had the effect also to starve the civilians, and that, again, is against the laws of war, starving civilians.

President Assad: That’s not correct for one reason, because in most of the areas where the rebels took over, the civilians fled and came to our areas, so in most of the areas that we encircle and attack are only militants.

Question 51: They may have come to your areas, not because they want to come, but because their areas are being heavily bombed. I’ve been in some of the suburbs of Damascus, which are a huge contrast to here in the center, where sometimes rubble, you know, 20 meters high. And no wonder people want to get out of there.

President Assad: No, that’s not realistic for one reason, because the natural reaction of any person, of the people, of the families, of the population, is to flee from any area where they expect a conflict. That’s why they flee that area, because they expect fighting between the army and the militants. They flee that area, and they come to the government.

Question 52: It is the case though, that your government has restricted the supply of medicines to rebel-held areas. Elizabeth Hoff, Syria representative of the World Health Organization, said at the end of last year that the government is restricting what is sent to rebel-held areas. Do you accept that is a problem for the civilians who are still in those areas?

President Assad: You know the northern city of al-Raqqa, that’s been taken over by al-Nusra first then later ISIS, you know that?

Question 53: Yeah.

President Assad: You know that till this moment, we still send them food and medicines and everything. So how can we do it for any other area in Syria?

Question 54: Valerie Amos, who is the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, said in a statement to the UN Security Council in the end of January of this year, that… she criticized very harshly what Islamic State and others are doing, but she also said the government’s failing, she said, for example, last year, there were 16 requests for aid convoys, 8 convoys, into Eastern Ghouta, near Damascus, only 4 were carried out, the other 12 requests were, “unanswered, denied, or subject to conditions that could not be accommodated.” And so, for them, that adds up to the Syrian government blocking aid convoys to civilians in those areas.

President Assad: These same areas are shelling Damascus every day. The same area that she’s talking about. How can we prevent them from food, and we cannot prevent them from having armaments?

Question 55: What are you saying, that they should bring in food themselves rather than just shells?

President Assad: No, I mean that if we can prevent the food from accessing those areas, can’t we prevent the armaments from accessing the same areas? How can we allow the armaments to cross?

Question 56: I don’t know how you run the war, but what I said, the UN is saying-

President Assad: Yes, that’s what I’m asking. I’m just pointing to the contradictions in their statements, just to know. If you can prevent food from accessing, you can prevent armaments, and definitely the priority for us as a government is to prevent the armaments from crossing.

Question 57: So, if civilians suffer as a result of the lack of these convoys, that for you is unavoidable, collateral damage?

President Assad: No, we are talking about unrealistic, non-objective statements. We cannot discuss it as a fact. You know, this is part of the propaganda against Syria for the last four years. So, whenever Amos or any other official or any other organization says something against us, it doesn’t mean it’s real. We have to verify what they say, and is it part of the propaganda, is it politicized, or what.


Question 58: Do you see yourself as the great survivor now of Middle Eastern leaders? President Obama called for you to step down as early as 2011. In 2013, there were lots of reports that you fled to a Russian warship in the Mediterranean, but you’re still here, your family is still here. Do you think that, looking back on it, that you’ve had a lucky escape?

President Assad: No, for one reason; because it wasn’t about me, to survive, it was about Syria, it was about terrorism, it was about changing the state and president because they don’t like the state or the president, they don’t like their polices. That’s what this is about. It’s not a personalized problem, they want to personalize it to link everything to the president.

Question 59: But what a price to pay! Syria is in ruins, there are hundreds of thousands of people dead. You’ve been the commander, you must bear command responsibility for some of that.

President Assad: Yes, according to the constitution and according to the ethics of your job, it is your duty to protect your country when it’s under attack, not to flee and run away, and that’s what we’ve been doing.

Question 60: I spoke a teacher who comes from Qaboun, which is an area which is being held by the rebels, after her school was hit, and she said the shelling is coming from the Syrian Army side. She said it’s the president’s responsibility to keep children out of this war. It’s okay for him to fight the terrorists, but what have children done to deserve this? They don’t have weapons. He needs, both sides she said, but he needs to stop shelling the schools. What is your message to her?

President Assad: What is the aim of shelling schools, realistically? Why would a government shell a school? What do we gain from that?

Question 61: Have you shelled schools?

President Assad: Why? No, definitely not. Why? Because we don’t have an interest. Put aside the duty, put aside the morals of the issue, talk realistically: what is the aim of any army to shell a school?

Question 62: Do you deny any-

President Assad: The government is going to pay to rebuild the school. We’re still paying to maintain the destroyed schools. How can we shell schools? Why do you want to kill students and children? What do we get?

Question 63: You’d say that teacher had the wrong idea?

President Assad: Again, it’s different between having casualties during the war, because that’s a war, and every war in the world has these side effects, and between aiming at schools. That’s the big difference. There’s no way to aim at schools.

Question 64: What keeps you awake at night?

President Assad: What keeps me awake at night? Many reasons that could affect any human. Life. Could be personal, could be work.

Question 65: Your job?

President Assad: Could be the job, could be personal, like anyone, I’m human. Anything could affect any human, I’m human; I will be affected by the same factors.

Question 66: Have you thought about those casualties, and felt or understood the pain of their families and of the people wounded and killed and injured?

President Assad: This is something we live in every day. Whether they are from the opposition, from the other side, or whether they are supporters, we live with it. We are humans, we live with casualties, with the death issues on daily basis. There are families who lost their dear ones, I lost members of my family, I lost friends, I lost people I work with. This is something we live with every day in pain.

Question 67: President Assad, thank you very much.

President Assad: Thank you


Source | SANA | http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=28047
Video of the INTERVIEW 
.

Interview with Agence France Presse AFP - 20 Jan 2014

20 Jan 2014


AFP: Mr. President, what do you expect from the Geneva conference?

President Assad: The most basic element, which we continuously refer too, is that the Geneva Conference should produce clear results with regard to the fight against terrorism in Syria. In particular, it needs to put pressure on countries that are exporting terrorism, - by sending terrorists, money and weapons to terrorist organisations, - especially Saudi Arabia and Turkey, and of course the Western countries that provide political cover for these terrorist organisations. This is the most important decision or result that the Geneva Conference could produce. Any political solution that is reached without fighting terrorism has no value. There can be no political action when there is terrorism everywhere, not only in Syria but in neighbouring countries as well. From the political side, it is possible for Geneva to contribute to a process of dialogue between Syrians. There has to be a Syrian process within Syria and whilst Geneva could support this, it cannot be a substitute for it.

AFP: After nearly three years of devastating war and the big challenge of reconstruction in the country, is it likely that you will not be a candidate for the presidency?

President Assad: This depends on two things: It depends on personal aspirations or a personal decision, on the one hand, and on public opinion in Syria, on the other. As far as I am concerned, I see no reason why I shouldn’t stand; as for Syrian public opinion, there is still around four months before the election date is announced. If in that time, there is public desire and a public opinion in favour of my candidacy, I will not hesitate for a second to run for election. In short, we can say that the chances for my candidacy are significant.

AFP: In these past years, have you thought for a moment about losing the battle, and have you thought of an alternative scenario for you and your family?

President Assad: In any battle, there is always the possibility of winning and losing; but when you're defending your country, it's obvious that the only choice is to win. Should Syria lose this battle that would mean the spread of chaos throughout the Middle East. This battle is not confined to Syria and is not, as Western propaganda portrays, a popular uprising against a regime suppressing its people and a revolution calling for democracy and freedom. These lies have now become clear to people. A popular revolution doesn’t last for three years only to fail; moreover, a national revolution cannot have a foreign agenda. As for the scenarios that I have considered, of course these types of battles will have numerous scenarios – 1st, 2nd, 3rd……tenth, but they are all focused on defending the country not on running away from it. Fleeing is not an option in these circumstances. I must be at the forefront of those defending this country and this has been the case from day one.

AFP: Do you think you are winning this war?

President Assad: This war is not mine to win; it's our war as Syrians. I think this war has, if you will, two phases. The first phase, which took the form of plans drawn up at the beginning, was the overthrow of the Syrian state in a matter of weeks or months. Now, three years on, we can safely say that this has failed, and that the Syrian people have won. There were countries that not only wanted to overthrow the state, but that also wanted to partition the country into several ‘mini-states;’ of course this phase failed, and hence the win for the Syrian people. The other phase of the battle is the fight against terrorism, which we are living on a daily basis. As you know, this phase isn’t over yet, so we can't talk about having won before we eliminate the terrorists. What we can say is that we are making progress and moving forward. This doesn't mean that victory is near at hand; these kinds of battles are complicated, difficult and they need a lot of time. However, as I said, and I reiterate, we are making progress, but have not yet achieved a victory.

AFP: Returning to Geneva, do you support a call from the conference for all foreign fighters to leave Syria, including Hezbollah?

President Assad: Clearly the job of defending Syria is responsibility of the Syrian people, the Syrian institutions, and in particular the Syrian Army. So, there would be no reason for any non-Syrian fighters to get involved had there not been foreign fighters from dozens of countries attacking civilians and Hezbollah especially on the Syrian-Lebanese border. When we talk about fighters leaving Syria, this would need to be part of a larger package that would see all the foreign fighters leave, and for all armed men – including Syrians – to hand over their weapons to the Syrian state, which would consequently achieve stability. So naturally, yes, one element of the solution in Syria – I wouldn’t say the objective – is for all non-Syrian fighters to leave Syria. AFP: In addition to the prisoner exchange and a ceasefire in Aleppo, what initiatives are you ready to present at Geneva II? President Assad: The Syrian initiative was put forward exactly a year ago, in January of last year. It's a complete initiative that covers both political and security aspects and other dimensions that would lead to stability. All of these details are part of the initiative that Syria previously put forward. However, any initiative, whether this one or any other, must be the result of a dialogue between Syrians. The essence of anything that is proposed, whether it's the crisis itself, fighting terrorism, or the future political vision and political system for Syria, requires the approval of Syrians. Our initiative was based on a process to facilitate this dialogue rather than a process to express the government's point of view. It has always been our view that any initiative must be collective and produced by both the political actors in Syria and the Syrian people in general.

AFP: The opposition that will participate in Geneva is divided and many factions on the ground don't believe it represents them. If an agreement is reached, how can it be implemented on the ground?

President Assad: This is the same question that we are asking as a government: when I negotiate, who am I negotiating with? There are expected to be many sides at Geneva, we don't know yet who will come, but there will be various parties, including the Syrian government. It is clear to everyone that some of the groups, which might attend the conference, didn't exist until very recently; in fact they were created during the crisis by foreign intelligence agencies whether in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, France, the United States or other countries. So when we sit down with these groups, we are in fact negotiating with those countries. So, is it logical that France should be a part of the Syrian solution? Or Qatar, or America, or Saudi Arabia, or Turkey? This doesn't make any sense. Therefore, when we negotiate with these parties, we're in fact negotiating with the countries that are behind them and that support terrorism in Syria. There are other opposition forces in Syria that have a national agenda; these are parties that we can negotiate with. On the issue of the vision for Syria's future, we are open for these parties to participate in governing the Syrian state, in the government and in other institutions. But as I mentioned earlier, anything that is agreed with any party, whether in Geneva or in Syria, must be subject to people's endorsement, through a referendum put to Syrian citizens. AFP: In this context, could the ceasefire agreements that have been started in Moadimiya and Barzeh be an alternative to Geneva? President Assad: The truth is that these initiatives may be more important than Geneva, because the majority of those fighting and carrying out terrorist operations on the ground have no political agenda. Some of them have become professional armed robbers, and others, as you know, are takfiri organisations fighting for an extremist Islamic emirate and things of that kind. Geneva means nothing for these groups. For this reason, the direct action and the models that have been achieved in Moadamiyeh, in Barzeh and other places in Syria has proven to be very effective. But this is separate from the political process, which is about the political future of Syria. These reconciliations have helped stability and have eased the bloodshed in Syria, both of which help pave the way for the political dialogue I mentioned earlier.

AFP: Are you prepared to have a prime minister from the opposition in a future government?

President Assad: That depends on who this opposition represents. When it represents a majority, let’s say in parliament, naturally it should lead the government. But to appoint a prime minister from the opposition without having a majority doesn’t make any political sense in any country in the world. In your country, for example, or in Britain or elsewhere, you can’t have a prime minister from a parliamentary minority. This will all depend on the next elections, which we discussed in the Syrian initiative; they will reveal the real size of support for the various opposition forces. As to participation as a principle, we support it, of course it is a good thing.

AFP: Are you prepared to have, for example, Ahmed Jarba or Moaz Khatib, be your next prime minister?

President Assad: This takes us back to the previous question. Do any of these people represent the Syrian people, or even a portion of the Syrian people? Do they even represent themselves, or are they just representatives of the states that created them? This brings us back to what I mentioned earlier: every one of these groups represents the country that created them. The participation of each of these individuals means the participation of each of those states in the Syrian government! This is the first point. Second, let’s assume that we agreed to the participation of these individuals in the government. Do you think that they would dare to come to Syria to take part in the government? Of course they wouldn’t. Last year, they claimed that they had control of 70% of Syria, yet they didn’t even dare to come to the areas that they had supposed control of. They did come to the border for a 30-minute photo opportunity and then they fled. How can they be ministers in the government? Can a foreigner become a Syrian minister? That’s why these propositions are totally unrealistic, but they do make a good joke!

AFP: Mr. President, you said that it depends on the results of the elections, but how can you hold these kinds of elections if part of Syria's territory is in the hands of insurgents?

President Assad: During this crisis, and after the unrest started in Syria, we have conducted elections twice: the first was municipal elections and the second was parliamentary elections. Of course, the elections cannot be conducted in the same way they are conducted in normal circumstances, but the roads between Syrian regions are open, and people area able to move freely between different regions. Those who live in difficult areas can go to neighbouring areas and participate in the elections. There will be difficulties, but it is not an impossible process.

AFP: Now that opposition fighters are battling jihadists, do you see any difference between the two?

President Assad: The answer I would have given you at the beginning of the events or during its various phases, is completely different to the answer today. Today, there are no longer two opposition groups. We all know that during the past few months the extremist terrorist groups fighting in Syria have wiped out the last remaining positions that were held by the forces the West portrays as moderates, calling them the moderate or secular forces, or the Free Syrian Army. These forces no longer exist. We are now dealing with one extremist group made up of various factions. As to the fighters that used to belong to what the West calls ‘moderate forces,’ these have mostly joined these extremist factions, either for fear or voluntarily through financial incentives. In short, regardless of the labels you read in the Western media, we are now fighting one extremist terrorist group comprising of various factions.

AFP: Would it be possible for the army and the opposition to fight against the jihadists side by side?

President Assad: We cooperate with any party that wants to join the army in fighting terrorists, and this has happened before. There are many militants who have left these organisations and joined the army to fight with it. So this is possible, but these are individual cases. This is not an alliance between ‘moderate’ forces and the army against terrorists. That depiction is false and is an illusion that is used by the West only to justify its support for terrorism in Syria. It supports terrorism under the pretext that it is backing moderation against extremist terrorism, and that is both illogical and false.

AFP: The state accuses the rebels of using civilians as human shields in areas under their control, but when the army shells these areas, do you not think this kills innocent people?

President Assad: The army does not shell neighbourhoods. The army strikes areas where there are terrorists. In most cases, terrorists enter particular areas and force out the civilians. Why do you think we have so many displaced people? Most of the millions of displaced people in Syria have fled their homes because terrorists forcefully entered their neighbourhoods. If there are civilians among these armed groups, why do we have so many displaced people? The army is fighting armed terrorists, and in some cases, terrorists have used civilians as human shields. Civilian casualties are unfortunately the consequences of any war. There is no such thing as a clean war in which there are no innocent civilian victims. This is the unfortunate nature of war, and that is why the only solution is to put an end to it.

AFP: Mr. President, some international organisations have accused the government and the opposition of committing abuses. After this war ends, would you be ready for there to be an investigation into these abuses?

President Assad: There is no logic to this claim made by these organisations. How can the Syrian state be killing its own people, and yet it is still standing three year on, despite the fact that there are dozens of countries working against it. Had the Syrian state been killing its people, they would have revolted against it long ago. Such a state could not survive for more than few months; the fact that it has resisted for three years means that it has popular support. Such talk is more than illogical: it is unnatural. What these organizations are saying is either a reflection of their ignorance of the situation in Syria, or, in some cases, it shows they are following the political agenda of particular states. The Syrian state has always defended its civilians; it is well documented, through all the videos and the photos circulating, that it is the terrorists who are committing massacres and killing civilians everywhere. From the beginning of this crisis, up until today, these organizations do not have a single document to prove that the Syrian government has committed a massacre against civilians anywhere.

AFP: Mr. President, we know of foreign journalists who were kidnapped by the terrorist groups. Are there any foreign journalists in state prisons?

President Assad: It would be best for you to ask the relevant, specialised agencies on this issue. They would be able to give you an answer.

AFP: Would a reconciliation be possible, one day, between Syria on the one hand, and Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey on the other?

President Assad: Politics changes constantly, but this change depends on two factors: principles and interests. We share no common principles with the states you mention; these states support terrorism and they have contributed to the bloodshed in Syria. As for interests, we need to ask ourselves: will the Syrian people agree to shared interests with these countries after everything that has happened and all the bloodshed in Syria? I don't want to answer on behalf of the Syrian people. If the people believe they share interests with these states, and if these states change their policy on supporting terrorism, it is plausible that the Syrian people might agree to restore relations. I can’t individually as President, answer on behalf of all the Syrian people at such a time. This is a decision for the people.

AFP: Mr. President, you were welcomed on the occasion of July 14 (Bastille Day) in the Elysee Palace in Paris. Are you now surprised by France's position, and do you think France may one day play some kind of role in Syria?

President Assad: No, I am not surprised, because when that reception took place, it was during the period - 2008 to 2011 - where there was a attempt to contain Syria's role and Syria's policy. France was charged with this role by the United States when Sarkozy became president. There was an agreement between France and the Bush administration over this, since France is an old friend of the Arabs and of Syria and as such it is better suited to play the role. The requirement at that time was to use Syria against Iran and Hezbollah, and to pull it away from supporting resistance organisations in the region. This French policy failed, because its goal was blatantly obvious. Then the so-called Arab Spring began, and France turned against Syria after it had failed to honour the pledge it had made to the United States. This is the reason behind the French position during that period why it changed in 2011. As for France's role in future, let's talk frankly. Ever since 2001 and the terrorist attacks on New York, there has been no European policy-making to speak of (and that's if we don't look back even further to the 1990s). In the West, there is only an American policy, which is implemented by some European countries. This has been the case on all the issues in our region in the past decade. Today, we see the same thing: either European policy is formulated with American blessing, or American policy is adopted by the Europeans as their own. So, I don't believe that Europe, and particularly France, which used to lead the European policy in the past, is capable of playing any role in the future of Syria, or in neighbouring countries. There is another reason too, and that is that Western officials have lost their credibility. They no longer have double standards; they have triple and quadruple standards. They have all kinds of standards for every political situation. They have lost their credibility; they have sold their principles in return for interests, and therefore it is impossible to build a consistent policy with them. Tomorrow, they might do the exact opposite of what they are doing today. Because of this, I don't think that France will play a role in the immediate future, unless it changes its policy completely and from its core and returns to the politically independent state it once was.

AFP: How long do you think Syria needs to rid itself completely of its chemical weapons stockpiles?

President Assad: This depends on the extent to which the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will provide Syria with the necessary equipment to carry out the process. So far, the process of making this equipment available has been quite slow. On the other hand, as you know dismantling and neutralizing the chemical materials is not taking place inside Syria nor by the Syrian state. A number of countries in different parts of the world have accepted to carry out that process; some have agreed to deal with the less dangerous materials, whilst others have refused completely. Since, the timeframe is dependent on these two factors - the role of the OPCW and the countries that accept to neutralize the materials on their territories – it is not for Syria to determine a timeframe on this issue. Syria has honoured its part by preparing and collecting data and providing access to inspectors who verified this data and inspected the chemical agents. The rest, as I said, is up to the other parties.

AFP: Mr. President, what has changed in your and your family's daily, personal lives? Do your children understand what has happened? Do you talk to them about this?

President Assad: There are a few things that haven't changed. I go to work as usual, and we live in the same house as before, and the children go to school; these things haven't changed. On the other hand, there are things which have affected every Syrian household, including mine: the sadness which lives with us every day - all the time, because of what we see and experience, because of the pain, because of the fallen victims everywhere and the destruction of the infrastructure and the economy. This has affected every family in Syria, including my own. There is no doubt that children are affected more deeply than adults in these circumstances. This generation will probably grow up too early and mature much faster as a result of the crisis. There are questions put to you by children about the causes of what’s happening, that you don’t usually deal with in normal circumstances. Why are there such evil people? Why are there victims? It’s not easy to explain these things to children, but they remain persistent daily questions and a subject of discussion in every family, including my own.

AFP: Through these years, what was the most difficult situation you went through?

President Assad: It’s not necessarily a particular situation but rather group of elements. There are several things that were hard to come to terms with, and they are still difficult. The first, I believe, is terrorism; the degree of savagery and inhumanity that the terrorists have reached reminds us of what happened in the Middle Ages in Europe over 500 years ago. In more recent modern times, it reminds us of the massacres perpetrated by the Ottomans against the Armenians when they killed a million and a half Armenians and half a million Orthodox Syriacs in Syria and in Turkish territory. The other aspect that is difficult to understand is the extent of Western officials' superficiality in their failure to understand what happened in this region, and their subsequent inability to have a vision for the present or for the future. They are always very late in realizing things, sometimes even after the situation has been overtaken by a new reality that is completely different. The third thing that is difficult to understand is the extent of influence of petrodollars in changing roles on the international arena. For instance, how Qatar was transformed from a marginal state to a powerful one, while France has become a proxy state implementing Qatari policies. This is also what we see happening now between France and Saudi Arabia. How can petrodollars make western officials, particularly in France, sell their principles and sell the principles of the French Revolution in return for a few billion dollars? These are only a few things, among others, which are difficult for one to understand and accept.

AFP: The trial of those accused of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri has begun. Do you think it will be a fair trial?

President Assad: Nine years have passed since the beginning of this trial. Has justice been served? Every accusation was made for political reasons. Even in the past few days, we have not seen any tangible proof put forward against the parties involved in the case. The real question should be: why the timing? Why now? This court was set up nine years ago. Have the things produced in the last few days been uncovered only now? I believe that the whole thing is politicized and is intended to put pressure on Hezbollah in Lebanon in the same way that it aimed at putting pressure on Syria in the beginning, immediately after al-Hariri’s assassination.

AFP: You have said the war will end when terrorism is eradicated. But the Syrians and everyone else want to know when this war will end. Within months? After a year? In years to come?

President Assad: We hope that the Geneva conference will be able to provide an answer to part of this by exercising pressure on these countries. This aspect has nothing to do with Syria; otherwise we would have put pressure on these states from the beginning and prevented terrorism from entering Syria. From our side, when this terrorism stops coming in, ending the war will not take more than a few months.

AFP: It appears Western intelligence agencies want to re-open channels of communication with Damascus, in order to ask you for help fighting terrorism. Are you ready for that?

President Assad: There have been meetings with several intelligence agencies from a number of countries. Our response has been that security cooperation cannot be separated from political cooperation, and political cooperation cannot be achieved while these states adopt anti-Syrian policies. This was our answer, brief and clear.

AFP: You have said in the past that the state has made mistakes. In your view, what were the mistakes that could have been avoided?

President Assad: I have said that mistakes can be made in any situation. I did not specify what those mistakes were because this cannot be done objectively until the crisis is behind us and we can assess our experience. Evaluating them whilst we are in the middle of the crisis will only yield limited results.

AFP: Mr. President, without Russia, China and Iran's help, would you have been able to resist in the face of the wars declared against you?

President Assad: This is a hypothetical question, which I cannot answer, because we haven’t experienced the alternative. Reality has shown that Russian, Chinese and Iranian support has been important and has contributed to Syria’s steadfastness. Without this support, things probably would have been much more difficult. How? It is difficult to draw a hypothetical picture at this stage.

AFP: After all that has happened, can you imagine another president rebuilding Syria?

President Assad: If this is what the Syrian people want, I don’t have a problem with it. I am not the kind of person who clings to power. In any case, should the Syrian people not want me to be president, obviously there will be somebody else. I don't have a personal problem with this issue.

--