#NAM will make world listen to it

The 16th Summit of the world’s second largest international body, the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), has started in Iran’s capital city of Tehran with more than 120 countries participating in the event at highest levels.

Al-Moallem: The Syrian Delegation Withdrew from NAM Summit during Speech of the Summit’s Former President

Aug 30, 2012

Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign and Expatriates Minister, Walid al-Moallem, on Thursday stressed that the Syrian delegation went out from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit currently held in Tehran while the former president of the summit, Mohammad Mursi, was delivering his speech.

Al-Moallem said the Syrian delegation’s withdrawal from the meeting came in protest of the content of Mursi’s speech which constituted a breach of the conventions of the summit’s presidency and an interference in Syria’s internal affairs and in rejection of the instigation for continuing the shedding of the Syrian blood included in the speech.

The Minister added that the Syrian delegation to the NAM summit reentered to follow up the summit’s activities after the end of Mursi’s speech.

The following is the full text of Ayatollah Khamenei’s inaugural address delivered on August 30, 2012 at the 16th Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Summit in Tehran.

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

All praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the Two Worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon the greatest and trustworthy Messenger and on his pure progeny, his select companions, and all the prophets and divine envoys.

I welcome you honorable guests, the leaders and delegations representing the member states of the Non-Aligned Movement, and all the other participants of this great international summit.

We have gathered here to continue a movement with God’s guidance and assistance and to give it new life and momentum on the basis of the current conditions and needs in the world. The movement was founded almost six decades ago thanks to the intelligence and courage of a few caring and responsible political leaders who were aware of the conditions and circumstances of their time.

Our guests have gathered here from different geographical locations, far and near, and they belong to different nationalities and races with different ideological, cultural and historical characteristics, but just as Ahmad Sukarno, one of the founders of this movement said in the famous Bandung Conference in the year 1955, the basis of establishing the Non-Aligned Movement is not geographical or racial and religious unity, but rather unity of needs. At that time, the member states of the Non-Aligned Movement were in need of a bond that could safeguard them against authoritarian, arrogant and insatiable networks and today with the progress and spread of the instruments of hegemony, this need still exists.

I would like to point out another truth. Islam has taught us that in spite of their racial, linguistic and cultural differences, human beings share the same nature, which calls them to purity, justice, benevolence, compassion and cooperation. It is this universal human nature which – if it can safely steer away from misleading motives – guides human beings to monotheism and understanding of God’s transcendent essence.

This brilliant truth has such potential that it can form the foundation of societies which are free and proud and at the same time enjoy progress and justice. It can extend the light of spirituality to all material and worldly endeavors of humankind and it can create a paradise on earth for human beings in advance of the other-worldly paradise, which has been promised by divine religions. And it is this common and universal truth that can form the foundations of brotherly cooperation among the nations that do not share any similarities in terms of outward structures, historical background and geographical location.

Whenever international cooperation is based on such a foundation, governments will build their relationships with each other not on the basis of fear and threats, or greed and unilateral interests, or mediation of treasonous and venal individuals, but on the basis of wholesome and shared interests and more importantly, the interests of humanity. In this way, governments can relieve their awakened consciences and put the minds of their peoples at ease.

This values-based order is the exact opposite of the hegemony-based order, which has been upheld, propagandized and led by hegemonic Western powers in the recent centuries and by the domineering and aggressive government of America today.

Dear guests, today after the passage of nearly six decades, the main values of the Non-Aligned Movement remain alive and steady: values such as anti-colonialism, political, economic and cultural independence, non-alignment with any power blocs, and improving solidarity and cooperation among the member states. The realities of today’s world fall short of those values, but the collective will and comprehensive efforts to change the existing realities and achieve these values, though full of challenges, are promising and rewarding.

In the recent past, we have been witness to the failure of the policies of the Cold War era and the unilateralism that followed it. Having learnt lessons from this historical experience, the world is in transition towards a new international order and the Non-Aligned Movement can and should play a new role. This new order should be based on the participation of all nations and equal rights for all of them. And as members of this movement, our solidarity is an obvious necessity in the current era for establishing this new order.

Fortunately, the outlook of global developments promises a multi-faceted system in which the traditional power blocs are replaced with a group of countries, cultures and civilizations from different economic, social and political origins. The striking events that we have witnessed over the past three decades clearly show that the emergence of new powers has coincided with the decline of the traditional powers. This gradual transition of power provides the non-aligned countries with an opportunity to play a significant and worthy role on the world stage and prepare the ground for a just and truly participatory global management. In spite of varying perspectives and orientations, we member states of this movement have managed to preserve our solidarity and bond over a long period of time within the framework of the shared values and this is not a simple and small achievement. This bond can prepare the ground for transitioning to a just and humane order.

Current global conditions provide the Non-Aligned Movement with an opportunity that might never arise again. Our view is that the control room of the world should not be managed by the dictatorial will of a few Western countries. It should be possible to establish and ensure a participatory system for managing international affairs, one that is global and democratic. This is what is needed by all the countries that have been directly or indirectly harmed as a result of the transgression of a few bullying and hegemonic countries.

The UN Security Council has an illogical, unjust and completely undemocratic structure and mechanism. This is a flagrant form of dictatorship, which is antiquated and obsolete and whose expiry date has passed. It is through abusing this improper mechanism that America and its accomplices have managed to disguise their bullying as noble concepts and impose it on the world. They protect the interests of the West in the name of “human rights”. They interfere militarily in other countries in the name of “democracy”. They target defenseless people in villages and cities with their bombs and weapons in the name of “combating terrorism”. From their perspective, humanity is divided into first-, second- and third-class citizens. Human life is considered cheap in Asia, Africa and Latin America, and expensive in America and Western Europe. The security of America and Europe is considered important, while the security of the rest of humanity is considered unimportant. Torture and assassination are permissible and completely ignored if they are carried out by America, the Zionists and their puppets. It does not trouble their conscience that they have secret prisons in various places on different continents, in which defenseless prisoners who have no legal representation and have not been tried in a court of law are treated in the most hideous and detestable way. Good and evil are defined in a completely one-sided and selective way. They impose their interests on the nations of the world in the name of “international law”. They impose their domineering and illegal demands in the name of “international community”. Using their exclusive and organized media network, they disguise their lies as the truth, their falsehood as true, and their oppression as efforts to promote justice. In contrast, they brand as lies every true statement that exposes their deceit and label every legitimate demand as roguish.

Friends, this flawed and harmful situation cannot continue. Everybody has become tired of this faulty international structure. The 99 percent movement of the American people against the centers of wealth and power in America and the widespread protests of the people in Western Europe against the economic policies of their governments show that the people are losing their patience with this situation. It is necessary to remedy this irrational situation. Firm, logical and comprehensive bonds between member states of the Non-Aligned Movement can play an important role in finding a remedy.

Honorable audience, international peace and security are among the critical issues of today’s world and the elimination of catastrophic weapons of mass destruction is an urgent necessity and a universal demand. In today’s world, security is a shared need where there is no room for discrimination. Those who stockpile their anti-human weapons in their arsenals do not have the right to declare themselves as standard-bearers of global security. Undoubtedly, this will not bring about security for themselves either. It is most unfortunate to see that countries possessing the largest nuclear arsenals have no serious and genuine intention of removing these deadly weapons from their military doctrines and they still consider such weapons as an instrument that dispels threats and as an important standard that defines their political and international position. This conception needs to be completely rejected and condemned.

Nuclear weapons neither ensure security, nor do they consolidate political power, rather they are a threat to both security and political power. The events that took place in the 1990s showed that the possession of such weapons could not even safeguard a regime like the former Soviet Union. And today we see certain countries which are exposed to waves of deadly insecurity despite possessing atomic bombs.

The Islamic Republic of Iran considers the use of nuclear, chemical and similar weapons as a great and unforgivable sin. We proposed the idea of “Middle East free of nuclear weapons” and we are committed to it. This does not mean forgoing our right to peaceful use of nuclear power and production of nuclear fuel. On the basis of international laws, peaceful use of nuclear energy is a right of every country. All should be able to employ this wholesome source of energy for various vital uses for the benefit of their country and people, without having to depend on others for exercising this right. Some Western countries, themselves possessing nuclear weapons and guilty of this illegal action, want to monopolize the production of nuclear fuel. Surreptitious moves are under way to consolidate a permanent monopoly over production and sale of nuclear fuel in centers carrying an international label but in fact within the control of a few Western countries.

A bitter irony of our era is that the U.S. government, which possesses the largest and deadliest stockpiles of nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction and the only country guilty of its use, is today eager to carry the banner of opposition to nuclear proliferation. The U.S. and its Western allies have armed the usurper Zionist regime with nuclear weapons and created a major threat for this sensitive region. Yet the same deceitful group does not tolerate the peaceful use of nuclear energy by independent countries, and even opposes, with all its strength, the production of nuclear fuel for radiopharmaceuticals and other peaceful and humane purposes. Their pretext is fear of production of nuclear weapons. In the case of the Islamic Republic of Iran, they themselves know that they are lying, but lies are sanctioned by the kind of politics that is completely devoid of the slightest trace of spirituality. One who makes nuclear threats in the 21st century and does not feel ashamed, will he feel ashamed of lying?

I stress that the Islamic Republic has never been after nuclear weapons and that it will never give up the right of its people to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Our motto is: “Nuclear energy for all and nuclear weapons for none.” We will insist on each of these two precepts, and we know that breaking the monopoly of certain Western countries on production of nuclear energy in the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty is in the interest of all independent countries, including the members of the Non-Aligned Movement.

The Islamic Republic’s successful experience in resistance against the bullying and comprehensive pressures by America and its accomplices has firmly convinced it that the resistance of a unified and firmly determined nation can overcome all enmities and hostilities and open a glorious path to its lofty goals. The comprehensive advances made by our country in the last two decades are facts for all to see, as repeatedly attested by official international observers. All this has happened under sanctions, economic pressures and propaganda campaigns by networks affiliated with America and Zionism. The sanctions, which were regarded as paralyzing by nonsensical commentators, not only did not and will not paralyze us, but have made our steps steadier, elevated our resolve and strengthened our confidence in the correctness of our analyses and the inborn capacities of our nation. We have with our own eyes repeatedly witnessed divine assistance in these challenges.

Honored guests, I deem it necessary to speak about a very important issue, which though related to our region has dimensions extending far beyond it and which has influenced global policies for several decades. This issue is the agonizing issue of Palestine. The summary of this matter is that on the basis of a horrible Western plot and under the direction of England in the 1940s, an independent country with a clear historical identity called “Palestine” has been taken away from its people through the use of weapons, killings and deception and has been given to a group of people the majority of whom are immigrants from European countries. This great usurpation – which at the outset was accompanied with massacres of defenseless people in towns and villages and their expulsion from their homes and homeland to bordering countries – has continued for more than six decades with similar crimes and continues to this very day. This is one of the most important issues of the human community.

Political and military leaders of the usurping Zionist regime have not avoided any crimes during this time: from killing the people, destroying their homes and farms and arresting and torturing men and women and even their children, to humiliating and insulting that nation and trying to destroy it in order to digest it in the haraam-eating stomach of the Zionist regime, to attacking their refugee camps in Palestine itself and in the neighboring countries where millions of refugees live. Such names as Sabra and Shatila, Qana and Deir Yasin have been etched in the history of our region with the blood of the oppressed Palestinian people.

Even now after 65 years the same kind of crimes marks the treatment of Palestinians remaining in the occupied territories by the ferocious Zionist wolves. They commit new crimes one after the other and create new crises for the region. Hardly a day passes without reports of murder, injury and arrests of the youth who stand up to defend their homeland and their honor and protest against the destruction of their farms and homes. The Zionist regime, which has carried out assassinations and caused conflicts and crimes for decades by waging disastrous wars, killing people, occupying Arab territories and organizing state terror in the region and in the world, labels the Palestinian people as “terrorists”, the people who have stood up to fight for their rights. And the media networks which belong to Zionism and many of the Western and mercenary media repeat this great lie in violation of ethical values and journalistic commitment, and the political leaders who claim to defend human rights have closed their eyes on all these crimes and support that criminal regime shamelessly and boldly and assume the role of their advocates.

Our standpoint is that Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and that continuing its occupation is a great and intolerable injustice and a major threat to global peace and security. All solutions suggested and followed up by the Westerners and their affiliates for “resolving the problem of Palestine” have been wrong and unsuccessful, and it will remain so in the future. We have put forth a just and entirely democratic solution. All the Palestinians – both the current citizens of Palestine and those who have been forced to immigrate to other countries but have preserved their Palestinian identity, including Muslims, Christians and Jews – should take part in a carefully supervised and confidence-building referendum and chose the political system of their country, and all the Palestinians who have suffered from years of exile should return to their country and take part in this referendum and then help draft a Constitution and hold elections. Peace will then be established.

Now I would like to give a benevolent piece of advice to American politicians who always stood up to defend and support the Zionist regime. So far, this regime has created countless problems for you. It has presented a hateful image of you to the regional peoples, and it has made you look like an accomplice in the crimes of the usurping Zionists. The material and moral costs borne by the American government and people on account of this are staggering, and if this continues, the costs might become even heavier in the future. Think about the Islamic Republic’s proposal of a referendum and with a courageous decision, rescue yourselves from the current impossible situation. Undoubtedly, the people of the region and all free-thinkers across the world will welcome this measure.

Honorable guests, now I would like to return to my initial point. Global conditions are sensitive and the world is passing through a crucial historical juncture. It is anticipated that a new order shall be born. The Non-Aligned Movement, which includes almost two-thirds of the world community, can play a major role in shaping that future. The holding of this major conference in Tehran is itself a significant event to be taken into consideration. By pooling our resources and capacities, we members of this movement can create a new historic and lasting role towards rescuing the world from insecurity, war and hegemony.

This goal can be achieved only through our comprehensive cooperation with each other. There are among us quite a few countries that are very wealthy and countries that enjoy international influence. It is completely possible to find solutions for problems through economic and media cooperation and through passing on experiences that help us improve and make progress. We need to strengthen our determination. We need to remain faithful to our goals. We should not fear the bullying powers when they frown at us, nor should we become happy when they smile at us. We should consider the will of God and the laws of creation as our support. We should learn lessons from what happened to the communist camp two decades ago and from the failure of the policies of so-called “Western liberal democracy” at the present time, whose signs can be seen by everybody in the streets of European countries and America and in the insoluble economic problems of these countries. And finally, we should consider the Islamic Awakening in the region and the fall of the dictatorships in North Africa, which were dependent on America and were accomplices to the Zionist regime, as a great opportunity. We can help improve the “political productivity” of the Non-Aligned Movement in global governance. We can prepare a historic document aimed to bring about a change in this governance and to provide for its administrative tools. We can plan for effective economic cooperation and define paradigms for cultural relationships among ourselves. Undoubtedly, establishing an active and motivated secretariat for this organization will be a great and significant help in achieving these goals.

Thank you

A peaceful solution should be implemented in Syria through Islamic states’ mediation,” #Maliki told reporters on the sidelines of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit here in #Tehran on Thursday.

He warned certain states against sending arms to the Syrian rebels, and cautioned that the crisis in Syria will spill over into other regional and neighboring states if it does not come to an end.

“Any kind of foreign meddling and arming the conflicting parties by certain countries is rejected,” the Iraqi prime minister said.

On Wednesday, Foreign Ministers of the Non-Aligned Movement agreed to take action to help resolve the Syrian crisis in cooperation with the United Nations.

Speaking to reporters after a two-day meeting of the foreign ministers of the NAM member states, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi reminded the problems in Syria as a member of the bloc, and said, “The NAM troika and a remarkable number of other countries stated in a straightforward manner at the ministerial meeting that when other parties and international bodies have stepped into the Syrian issue, it would be wrong for the Non-Aligned Movement to stay aside.”

“Therefore, it was recommended that the #NAM troika step into this issue in cooperation with other international bodies, specially the #UN which has taken good measures in this ground,” he continued.

Salehi said the international grouping is required to deal with the crisis in #Syria as a member state to help the country manage the present problems so that “the people of that country sustain the least harms and pressures”.
India’s prime minister has met with Leader of the Islamic Revolution in Tehran, where they talked about the long standing cultural and historical ties between Iran and India.

Manmohan Singh, who is in Tehran to attend the 16th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), held talks with Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei on Wednesday.

Ayatollah Khamenei described Tehran-New Delhi relations as a suitable basis to further develop bilateral ties in various fields, especially in business and infrastructure.

The Leader said Iran and India share similar viewpoints on Syria and Afghanistan, noting that Tehran and New Delhi should expand cooperation on regional issues.

For his part, Singh expressed his country’s willingness to develop ties with Iran in the energy and infrastructure sectors.

He emphasized that New Delhi is opposed to any foreign interference in Syria and the solution lies in the will of the Syrian people.

Head of Arab Relations of the Lebanese resistance movement Hezbollah, Sheikh Hassan Ezzedin, has said that cooperation between Iran and Egypt can put an end to the crisis in Syria.

Speaking to Press TV in the Iranian capital, Ezzedin said on Wednesday that there is no place for military intervention in Syria and described negotiations as the only solution to end the country’s months-long unrest.

“The American administration and some of their allies in the region unfortunately, instead of taking their responsibility in order to solve the problem in Syria they are taking part in that … contributing to the fight [and] playing a very dirty game,” he added.

Ezzedin also stated that “there is a very big conspiracy that is targeting Syria and its position in the region” and the conflict in the Arab state has been going on for one and a half years now because of the country’s support of the “resistance movement.”

The Hezbollah official referred to the presence of Egyptian President Mohammad Morsi in the ongoing Non-Aligned Movement summit in Tehran as “a positive indication” saying that “coordination and cooperation” of Egypt with “the Islamic republic of Iran which will receive the presidency of the NAM” will help to put an end to the conflict in Syria.

Ezzedin is currently in Tehran to attend the 16th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

Since March 2011, Syria has been experiencing unrest fuelled by a number of Western and Middle East states, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey which are arming and funding insurgents fighting against the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said last week that Tehran will present a “rational and acceptable” proposal to resolve the ongoing crisis in Syria during the 16th NAM summit in Tehran.

Salehi had previously said that Iran is ready to facilitate dialogue between the Syrian government and the opposition to end the violence in the country.
The two-day foreign ministerial meeting of the NAM summit began on Tuesday. The meeting of the heads of state will open on Thursday with an inaugural speech by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir has arrived in the Iranian capital Tehran to participate in the 16th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

The Sudanese president was welcomed by Iran’s Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini upon his arrival in Tehran’s Mehrabad Airport.

Al-Bashir is in Iran to take part in the meeting of the NAM heads of state which will open on Thursday with an inaugural speech by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

More than 100 countries are partaking in the NAM meeting which kicked off at the expert level in Tehran on Sunday.

At the opening ceremony of the NAM expert-level meeting, Iran assumed the rotating presidency of the movement for three years. Egypt’s Ambassador to the United Nations Mootaz Khalil formally handed over the presidency to Iran.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi says the Non-Aligned Movement countries oppose the adverse consequences of the current world order, stressing the United Nations must make fundamental reforms in its structure.

“Six decades since its establishment, the United Nations needs fundamental reforms in order to adapt to the modern global developments,” Salehi said during the opening ceremony of the NAM expert-level meeting in Tehran on Sunday.

Press TV has interviewed Iran’s former Ambassador to the United Nations Mohammad Kazem Sajjadpour to elaborate more on the issue of the NAM summit in Iran.

Sajjadpour is joined by political analyst Sara Marusek from Beirut.

What follows is an approximate transcription of the interview.

Press TV: We are looking at your former post here, so I would like to zoom in on the UN and Iran’s concerns regarding the UN, its concerns [which are] shared by many of the NAM countries; 120 of these countries and that is the power increase of the UN Security Council and also the need for reforms generally speaking.

Can you address the shortcomings of the UN and how NAM is going to be able to move towards, perhaps, solving some of these shortcomings?

Sajjadpour: Actually the most vivid shortcoming as you said is the decision-making process in the United Nations Security Council, where we have veto power of few world powers and they can veto the decisions.

Of course it is not a very white and black issue. It is very complicated but there has been a great, let us say, movement towards redefining it. However, it has not been successful because UN is not just about good words, it is real politics, you know, which works there, but politics is a matter of pressure, lobbying, putting your weight here and there, and I think in that context not just NAM in particular but the world at large requires reforming the United Nations.

But I have to underline that changing the United Nations’ system is going to be very incremental. There is a lot of resistance.

I would like to end at this specific point that the UN also should not be equated with the United Nations Security Council. If you put aside the United Nations Security Council, the UN system by and large is a ‘South Institution.’ Most of the members are from the South, most of the members are from developing countries and really it is reflective of the international society in that sense that every nation state is there with equal power, with equal voting, but the Security Council is different and we have not to equate the totality of the United Nations system with the Security Council.

So this is very important that when we look at NAM, NAM is a bloc within the United Nations, within the General Assembly and all its agencies and all its discussions and through this, let us say channel, NAM exerts power and influence on decision makings, on debates and in that respect you can see incremental changes come also from these sources.

Press TV: OK. That is a very important point that you made there and it is a point well-taken.

But I would like to, I guess, then zoom in on the UN Security Council and let us bring in the situation in Syria, in which, it is very vivid the statements that were made by the ambassador of the United States to the UN when the veto vote came in from Russia and China; and very blatantly she said, ‘we are going to work outside of the UN to support the [Syrian armed] opposition’.

So explain this to me how the United States, given that they hold veto wielding power, can come out in the open, say that, which means in essence, ‘We use the UN when we think it is to our advantage,’ is not it the conclusion that is reached by a statement like that?

Sajjadpour: Very good question, first of all as I said the United Nations is reflective of real politics, I mean it is not about morality or good behavior.

So her statement reflects the United Nations’ intention towards Security Council and the United Nations at large.

Every nation state, including world powers, use the United Nations for its own purposes, but what happened in the Security Council after the collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War, there was mostly a unanimity in the Security Council. That means China and Russia were onboard with the West mostly. You have just two or three situations were these two countries vetoed previously.

That is the case of human rights in Myanmar and also the election in Zimbabwe, but the other Security Council resolutions were all passed with China and Russia being onboard.

But what happened after the Libyan case, Resolution 1973, which was not exactly about using military forces, but the West, the United States and its partners, used a phrase in these resolutions to justify their military operations against Libya. China and Russia came to this conclusion, now [that] it is over, if we want to just yield to the pressure of the West and accept this resolution, we are going to be their followers.

So they had a different approach on Syria and now West came to this conclusion, including, I mean with the leadership of the United States, that they have to look at the alternative channels for military interaction.

I think that it is not going to be easy for them, it does not mean whatever the superpowers want immediately they can do it. It would lack international legitimacy and I think that international legitimacy is very required component of any action that they want to make, but they may use excuses here and there. However, the UN by itself, is not, let us say, a super place where everything should be gauged against certain values. I think it is reflection of world politics and we have to take into account that world politics changes and the changes have reflection there.

Press TV: Let us talk about that point, international legitimacy, here if we can Mr. Sajjadpour and I would like you to please elaborate more about how the UN can gain that, when you say international legitimacy, I am assuming obviously 120 countries need to be the ones that they have to get this legitimacy from and if you can combine that with the fact that the US and some of these Western countries are on the decline.

So they are in need more of these countries [NAM member states] because maybe before they could have dictated the rules of, let us say, finances but now they do not have that strong support base, financially speaking anymore.

So if you can describe how the UN can gain this international legitimacy from the NAM countries?

Sajjadpour: I think that your question first of all leads to international legitimacy then on the NAM and the international legitimacy.

In response to your question I have to say, you know, power cannot be exerted very nakedly. You have to have acceptance by those whom these powers or these instruments of power are going to be exerted.

So here comes legitimacy. You have to accept why this action is taken. The rationale, the reasoning comes usually with legitimacy.

The United Nations is one of the sources of international legitimacy, but it does not mean that it is complete or every, let us say, single international action should be approved by the United Nations. No! It is not the case. It is one of the sources.

When the majority of the United Nations member states approve a decision, it does not mean that that is absolutely right or 100 percent legitimate, but it means that it has support at least by the states and do not forget that the United Nations is the global states. It is assumed that the states are representatives of their nations.

So there is a linkage here where NAM comes to the picture when the decision is at a level where the General Assembly, where other institutions, save the Security Council, are involved.

In that case, of course the NAM can have its influence and I have to say that UN is a very technical issue… UN mechanism is very technical. When you want to have a discussion it should go through what we call it in the United Nations system ‘rules of procedure.’

the real Syrian Free Press

*

PRESIDENT BASHAR AL-ASSAD INTERVIEW WITH ADDOUNIA TV.

DAMASCUS – Aug 30, 2012 – President Bashar al-Assad gave the following interview to Addounia TV on the local and regional developments:

*

Dear viewers of Addounia TV… greetings,

We greet you from the People’s Palace in the Syrian capital of Damascus. We are honored to meet President Bashar al-Assad, President of the Syrian Arab Republic. Mr. President, welcome on Addounia TV.

President al-Assad: Welcome to you and to Addounia TV.

Question: Mr. President, allow me to discuss during today’s meeting the most important issues occupying the thoughts of Syrian citizens which they inquire about daily and in which they dwell upon in all issues, whether it pertains to the situation on the ground or the political situation… we start with the situation on the ground… of course, Aleppo… they talked a lot about Aleppo… what is the situation in Aleppo; how…

View original post 9,658 more words

29 August/Addounia interview with Mr President Bashar al Assad


President al-Assad confirmed in a meeting with Addounia TV channel, that the battle in Syria is a regional and international battle and there must be a time for it to end.
Al-Assad said: we are moving forward and the situation is better, but the settlement is not done yet.
The President pointed that we have to see the deference between what we want as Syrians only and not what the outside wants.
Adding that we have to remain the relationship with the outside people because the Logistic boost stays weak without the support of peoples.
About Homs, President al-Assad talked about the delay of settlement, revealing that we must separate between the situation in Homs and the rest of the provinces.
Saying that when our armed forces want to use all their powers, all areas will be crushed, but this solution is rejected.
Pointing that our armed forces must remain souls and infrastructure safe.
He added that the militants are still getting supplies, specifically in Homs.
About the isolated areas, President al-Assad affirmed that an isolated area is done under the approval of the country.
Pointing that the isolated zones and areas are unrealistic and does not exist.
He stressed that Syria does not need a green light from anyone for its sovereign and national cases.
About the republican role in the Syrian crisis, President al-Assad said that the essential challenge is to confront the involved people in the current circumstances.
Adding that the public togetherness has failed all the schemes of the enemies.
Al-Assad said that it is important for us to punish every person who committed mistakes or wanted to extend the crisis in Syria for any purposes.
President al-Assad stressed that all officials must be observed and media must move from the educational role to the investigative role and give solutions.
Adding that as long as the institutions do not grow, all the roles of any official, including the President, will be minor.
About the role of Syrian media and the attacks against it during the current period, President al-Assad said: the Syrian media can strike real media empires that are not only supported by money, but political decisions also.
President al-Assad about the defections, and specifically about the defection of the Prime Minister Riyadh Hijab and Manaf Tlas, commented: the defection is done inside the country, but what they did is an escape to the outside and not a defection.
He added that who escapes is a corrupt person who was given money, a coward person who has been threatened or an ambitious person who hoped for having positions. Al-Assad said that the defection operations are cleaning processes for the country and the nation.

*************************************************************************************************************

From SANA – 30 AUGUST 2012



President Bashar al-Assad gave the following interview to Addounia TV on the local and regional developments:
Dear viewers of Addounia TV… greetings,
We greet you from the People’s Palace in the Syrian capital of Damascus. We are honored to meet President Bashar al-Assad, President of the Syrian Arab Republic. Mr. President, welcome on Addounia TV.
We greet you from the People’s Palace in the Syrian capital of Damascus. We are honored to meet President Bashar al-Assad, President of the Syrian Arab Republic. Mr. President, welcome on Addounia TV.
President al-Assad: Welcome to you and to Addounia TV.
President al-Assad: Welcome to you and to Addounia TV.
Question: Mr. President, allow me to discuss during today’s meeting the most important issues occupying the thoughts of Syrian citizens which they inquire about daily and in which they dwell upon in all issues, whether it pertains to the situation on the ground or the political situation… we start with the situation on the ground… of course, Aleppo… they talked a lot about Aleppo… what is the situation in Aleppo; how do you view it?
Question: Mr. President, allow me to discuss during today’s meeting the most important issues occupying the thoughts of Syrian citizens which they inquire about daily and in which they dwell upon in all issues, whether it pertains to the situation on the ground or the political situation… we start with the situation on the ground… of course, Aleppo… they talked a lot about Aleppo… what is the situation in Aleppo; how do you view it?
President al-Assad: We cannot separate the situation in Aleppo from the situation in Syria. The difference is that Aleppo and Damascus are the two biggest cities and the two most important cities. One is the political capital and the other is the economic capital. The normal citizen’s evaluation of the situation in general – including Aleppo – comes through escalation; when he sees escalation he considers the situation to be worse and when he sees calm he considers  the situation to be better… matters aren’t measured like this. When there are military or security operations then there could be constant escalation and suddenly the situation ends well or the opposite, a continuing calm ends with escalation. In the end, the issue is a battle of wills in the first degree. They have a will to destroy the country. They started with Daraa, moved to Homs and Damascus and Aleppo and Deir Ezzor and Lattakia; to all provinces. They try to move from one place to another. The importance is in the difference in scale or weight of the city in the Syrian context, but if we take into account the scale of the complex battles waged by the armed forces on the technical, tactical and strategic levels, then they are among the most complex types of battles, yet the armed forces achieve great successes in this regard. Everyone hopes that the achievement or the resolution to be within weeks or days and hours. This is illogical; we’re involved in a regional and global battle, so time is needed to resolve it. But I can summarize all this explanation in a sentence: we are moving forward and the situation is practically better but resolution hasn’t been achieved and this takes time.
President al-Assad: We cannot separate the situation in Aleppo from the situation in Syria. The difference is that Aleppo and Damascus are the two biggest cities and the two most important cities. One is the political capital and the other is the economic capital. The normal citizen’s evaluation of the situation in general – including Aleppo – comes through escalation; when he sees escalation he considers the situation to be worse and when he sees calm he considers  the situation to be better… matters aren’t measured like this. When there are military or security operations then there could be constant escalation and suddenly the situation ends well or the opposite, a continuing calm ends with escalation. In the end, the issue is a battle of wills in the first degree. They have a will to destroy the country. They started with Daraa, moved to Homs and Damascus and Aleppo and Deir Ezzor and Lattakia; to all provinces. They try to move from one place to another. The importance is in the difference in scale or weight of the city in the Syrian context, but if we take into account the scale of the complex battles waged by the armed forces on the technical, tactical and strategic levels, then they are among the most complex types of battles, yet the armed forces achieve great successes in this regard. Everyone hopes that the achievement or the resolution to be within weeks or days and hours. This is illogical; we’re involved in a regional and global battle, so time is needed to resolve it. But I can summarize all this explanation in a sentence: we are moving forward and the situation is practically better but resolution hasn’t been achieved and this takes time.
Question: Mr. President, regarding areas or provinces to which problems moved, starting from Daraa to Damascus Countryside, Homs, Lattakia, Aleppo and Idleb. Of course, there are those who broached the issue of neighboring countries. In this case, many ask what is the position of the Syrian state towards neighboring countries, particularly since some countries facilitate, train, finance and arm in all manners which may constitute a violation of the Syrian state, the security of Syria and the safety of Syrian citizens?
Question: Mr. President, regarding areas or provinces to which problems moved, starting from Daraa to Damascus Countryside, Homs, Lattakia, Aleppo and Idleb. Of course, there are those who broached the issue of neighboring countries. In this case, many ask what is the position of the Syrian state towards neighboring countries, particularly since some countries facilitate, train, finance and arm in all manners which may constitute a violation of the Syrian state, the security of Syria and the safety of Syrian citizens?
President al-Assad: Some neighboring countries stand by Syria but maybe they’re not exactly able to control the smuggling of logistic supplies to terrorists. Some countries overlook or keep their distance, and some countries participate in this matter, but we have to distinguish between what we as Syria and as Syrian people and as a country want from these countries. Do we seek a relation or a dispute with the country or with the people? As for Turkey for example; the position of the Turkish state is known, and it assumes direct responsibility for the blood that bled and was shed in Syria. But when we began developing our relation with Turkey, we didn’t look for a relation with individuals or a transient government; rather we looked to a history of tense and turbulent relation for nearly nine decades approximately. We wanted to erase it, then do we go backwards because of the ignorance of some Turkish officials, or do we look at the relation with the Turkish people, particularly since this people practically stood with us during this crisis and didn’t drift despite the media and financial pressure to go in the other direction. We must think first of peoples, because governments are transient and we must preserve relations with the peoples because these people are the ones who will practically protect us, as logistic supply will remain weak if the people don’t embrace the issue.
President al-Assad: Some neighboring countries stand by Syria but maybe they’re not exactly able to control the smuggling of logistic supplies to terrorists. Some countries overlook or keep their distance, and some countries participate in this matter, but we have to distinguish between what we as Syria and as Syrian people and as a country want from these countries. Do we seek a relation or a dispute with the country or with the people? As for Turkey for example; the position of the Turkish state is known, and it assumes direct responsibility for the blood that bled and was shed in Syria. But when we began developing our relation with Turkey, we didn’t look for a relation with individuals or a transient government; rather we looked to a history of tense and turbulent relation for nearly nine decades approximately. We wanted to erase it, then do we go backwards because of the ignorance of some Turkish officials, or do we look at the relation with the Turkish people, particularly since this people practically stood with us during this crisis and didn’t drift despite the media and financial pressure to go in the other direction. We must think first of peoples, because governments are transient and we must preserve relations with the peoples because these people are the ones who will practically protect us, as logistic supply will remain weak if the people don’t embrace the issue.
Question: But here we ask about the stances of these peoples towards their governments. Some Syrians expect a movement on the part of these people as their governments polices harm neighboring countries and harm the reputation and dignity of the people.
Question: But here we ask about the stances of these peoples towards their governments. Some Syrians expect a movement on the part of these people as their governments polices harm neighboring countries and harm the reputation and dignity of the people.
President al-Assad: Correct, but this needs time, and we mustn’t forget that these peoples themselves are waging battles against these governments. Political battles, of course, and this needs time. We need to be objective, but we must account for winning and losing. Animosity with peoples will not reduce the supply of terrorists; on the contrary, it will make this supply more available. We must improve relations and help these peoples by presenting facts; when these peoples discover the reality of what is happening in Syria and the truth about the position of their officials, they will become stronger in their political battle and the longevity of these governments and these officials will be short in political work., we can withstand this short spell and we can adapt to it while we resolve the battle in Syria.
President al-Assad: Correct, but this needs time, and we mustn’t forget that these peoples themselves are waging battles against these governments. Political battles, of course, and this needs time. We need to be objective, but we must account for winning and losing. Animosity with peoples will not reduce the supply of terrorists; on the contrary, it will make this supply more available. We must improve relations and help these peoples by presenting facts; when these peoples discover the reality of what is happening in Syria and the truth about the position of their officials, they will become stronger in their political battle and the longevity of these governments and these officials will be short in political work., we can withstand this short spell and we can adapt to it while we resolve the battle in Syria.
Question: Mr. President, many talked about Homs; Homes which witnessed since the beginnings strong armed activities and high feelings of all types. Many ask: what is the situation in Homs? Why isn’t the situation over in Homs?
President al-Assad: We cannot separate the situation of Homs from the situation of the rest of the provinces. As for the delay of resolving the situation in the city, it’s known that when armed forces wage battles in cities they must take two things into consideration: first, concern for human life, and second, concern for properties. Apart from that, if the armed forces wanted to use all their military capabilities including firepower then they can crush the enemy in a short time, but this is unacceptable and doesn’t achieve the desired results. This type of operations needs time. On the other hand, we cannot forget that there’s constant supply of gunmen in Homs, specifically because they considered Homs to be the center from which the victory they hope for will move, in addition to its proximity to the Lebanese borders.
President al-Assad: We cannot separate the situation of Homs from the situation of the rest of the provinces. As for the delay of resolving the situation in the city, it’s known that when armed forces wage battles in cities they must take two things into consideration: first, concern for human life, and second, concern for properties. Apart from that, if the armed forces wanted to use all their military capabilities including firepower then they can crush the enemy in a short time, but this is unacceptable and doesn’t achieve the desired results. This type of operations needs time. On the other hand, we cannot forget that there’s constant supply of gunmen in Homs, specifically because they considered Homs to be the center from which the victory they hope for will move, in addition to its proximity to the Lebanese borders.
Question: Can we call it a buffer zone?
Question: Can we call it a buffer zone?
President al-Assad: Most Syrian provinces are border provinces; Deir Ezzor, Hasaka, Raqqa, Idleb, Lattakia, Daraa, Sweida, and even Homs partly borders Iraq too. This maybe a reason (why some use buffer zones) but I can’t analyze on behalf of the planners. This issue isn’t important for us, whether they consider them buffer zones or not. A buffer zone is a zone established with the state’s approval through specific agreements between two countries, and we as a state never in any day decided to assume that there’s an area outside Syrian control. When the army wants to enter an area then it can do that. They considered many areas to be outside the state’s control and the army entered most of these areas with ease, which means that they weren’t able to create this zone. Therefore, I believe that talking about buffer zones is firstly nonexistent, and secondly unrealistic, even for countries playing a hostile role.
President al-Assad: Most Syrian provinces are border provinces; Deir Ezzor, Hasaka, Raqqa, Idleb, Lattakia, Daraa, Sweida, and even Homs partly borders Iraq too. This maybe a reason (why some use buffer zones) but I can’t analyze on behalf of the planners. This issue isn’t important for us, whether they consider them buffer zones or not. A buffer zone is a zone established with the state’s approval through specific agreements between two countries, and we as a state never in any day decided to assume that there’s an area outside Syrian control. When the army wants to enter an area then it can do that. They considered many areas to be outside the state’s control and the army entered most of these areas with ease, which means that they weren’t able to create this zone. Therefore, I believe that talking about buffer zones is firstly nonexistent, and secondly unrealistic, even for countries playing a hostile role.
Question: Mr. President, as the Commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Force and with your knowledge of the situation on the ground and its details; there are those among the opposition who talk and ask why the Syrian forces and the Syrian army are inside Syrian cities, while not a single bullet has been fired in the Golan for nearly forty years. They ask in this regard if tanks’ natural place is inside Syrian cities and not on the Golan front.
Question: Mr. President, as the Commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Force and with your knowledge of the situation on the ground and its details; there are those among the opposition who talk and ask why the Syrian forces and the Syrian army are inside Syrian cities, while not a single bullet has been fired in the Golan for nearly forty years. They ask in this regard if tanks’ natural place is inside Syrian cities and not on the Golan front.
President al-Assad: The task of the army and armed forces in all countries of the world is to protect the homeland. Protecting the homeland doesn’t only mean protecting it from outside, but from within as well; any enemy that comes from any place. You have to defend your country through relevant institutions, primarily the army and armed forces. This time, the enemy moved from within, not from without, and you may tell me that they’re Syrians  and I tell you that any Syrian who carries out a foreign and hostile plan becomes an enemy and is no longer Syrian. The proof being that if a Syrian commits espionage then he is sentenced to death by law is execution. In fact, those who implement an enemy’s plan are considered an enemy. The enemy moved from within, so the armed forces moved.
President al-Assad: The task of the army and armed forces in all countries of the world is to protect the homeland. Protecting the homeland doesn’t only mean protecting it from outside, but from within as well; any enemy that comes from any place. You have to defend your country through relevant institutions, primarily the army and armed forces. This time, the enemy moved from within, not from without, and you may tell me that they’re Syrians  and I tell you that any Syrian who carries out a foreign and hostile plan becomes an enemy and is no longer Syrian. The proof being that if a Syrian commits espionage then he is sentenced to death by law is execution. In fact, those who implement an enemy’s plan are considered an enemy. The enemy moved from within, so the armed forces moved.
Question: So this doesn’t contradict the concept of resistance and that Syria adopts the ideas of resistance.
Question: So this doesn’t contradict the concept of resistance and that Syria adopts the ideas of resistance.
President al-Assad: Not at all, on the contrary, Syria adopts the ideas of resistance. But the other idea is that if Syria adopts resistance, then why there isn’t resistance towards the Golan – this may be the idea you mean – then resistance is emerges when a state abandons its responsibility in reclaiming its land, which didn’t happen in Syria like in Lebanon, maybe because of the civil war at the time, and like in Palestine when there’s no state in the first place to reclaim rights, so the resistance had to exist. When we abandon, as a creed, policy and armed forces our primary goal of reclaiming land, then there will be a Syrian resistance.
President al-Assad: Not at all, on the contrary, Syria adopts the ideas of resistance. But the other idea is that if Syria adopts resistance, then why there isn’t resistance towards the Golan – this may be the idea you mean – then resistance is emerges when a state abandons its responsibility in reclaiming its land, which didn’t happen in Syria like in Lebanon, maybe because of the civil war at the time, and like in Palestine when there’s no state in the first place to reclaim rights, so the resistance had to exist. When we abandon, as a creed, policy and armed forces our primary goal of reclaiming land, then there will be a Syrian resistance.
Question: Mr. President, regarding the military operations taking place inside Syria now; there is talk on the Syrian street that Syria received a green light, a Russian green light and Chinese green light, with some going as far as to even say an American green light maybe or a western green light. Does Syria need a green light to carry out what it’s doing now?
Question: Mr. President, regarding the military operations taking place inside Syria now; there is talk on the Syrian street that Syria received a green light, a Russian green light and Chinese green light, with some going as far as to even say an American green light maybe or a western green light. Does Syria need a green light to carry out what it’s doing now?
President al-Assad: In various stages there was talk of a green light. For example, when Syria entered Lebanon in 1976 there was such talk and it was repeated at other stages. In fact, Syria doesn’t need a green light in sovereign issues, in local issues neither and in national issues, from friends nor from enemies nor from opponents. If we didn’t possess the green light then there’s no need for our existence as a homeland and as a state.
President al-Assad: In various stages there was talk of a green light. For example, when Syria entered Lebanon in 1976 there was such talk and it was repeated at other stages. In fact, Syria doesn’t need a green light in sovereign issues, in local issues neither and in national issues, from friends nor from enemies nor from opponents. If we didn’t possess the green light then there’s no need for our existence as a homeland and as a state.
Question: Mr. President, there are those who say that the popular movement in Syria remained peaceful for four or five months and became armed after it was oppressed by the state. Some quote or distort a speech by Your Excellency, the speech before the last in which you said that in Ramadan it became an armed movement and all activities that were out peaceful became armed.
Question: Mr. President, there are those who say that the popular movement in Syria remained peaceful for four or five months and became armed after it was oppressed by the state. Some quote or distort a speech by Your Excellency, the speech before the last in which you said that in Ramadan it became an armed movement and all activities that were out peaceful became armed.
President al-Assad: No, this explanation is inaccurate for a simple reason; if they were unarmed then what explains that in the first week of turbulence and events there were a number of martyrs among security and police forces? Then how did these people die? Did they die from screams? From the sound waves of protestors? This is illogical. The truth is they died by weapons, but the type of arming and the goal of arming were different. At that time, the main goal was rallying the people by shooting protesters, security men and the police so that the police and security respond and kill more civilians; thereby spreading a state of hostility towards the state. After the failure of this project, they shifted since the last Ramadan to armed action through which they reached rebellious areas that the state cannot enter like Baba Amr and other areas, and of course these areas were entered so the gunmen’s tactic changed. Now, after Baba Amr was entered and after the fall of their sites in various other provinces that they had considered to be fortified, they switched to another method that involved more assassinations and more terrorism against citizens and more of punishing citizens by blocking roads, preventing the arrival of flour for bread, and fuel like diesel, gas oil and gas, and other daily necessities. In fact, the gunmen appeared since the first days. The images broadcast by Syrian TV on what happened in Daraa, the shootings by gunmen which they said at the time were fabricated, were real.
President al-Assad: No, this explanation is inaccurate for a simple reason; if they were unarmed then what explains that in the first week of turbulence and events there were a number of martyrs among security and police forces? Then how did these people die? Did they die from screams? From the sound waves of protestors? This is illogical. The truth is they died by weapons, but the type of arming and the goal of arming were different. At that time, the main goal was rallying the people by shooting protesters, security men and the police so that the police and security respond and kill more civilians; thereby spreading a state of hostility towards the state. After the failure of this project, they shifted since the last Ramadan to armed action through which they reached rebellious areas that the state cannot enter like Baba Amr and other areas, and of course these areas were entered so the gunmen’s tactic changed. Now, after Baba Amr was entered and after the fall of their sites in various other provinces that they had considered to be fortified, they switched to another method that involved more assassinations and more terrorism against citizens and more of punishing citizens by blocking roads, preventing the arrival of flour for bread, and fuel like diesel, gas oil and gas, and other daily necessities. In fact, the gunmen appeared since the first days. The images broadcast by Syrian TV on what happened in Daraa, the shootings by gunmen which they said at the time were fabricated, were real.
Question: It is said on the street that the state delayed the resolution, meaning that after people saw the progress of military operations they said that the state was capable of doing the sort of military and security operations now which are in the framework of resolution, so why did it delay in this regard, which implied to many who thought that the state is weak so they acquired more weapons, were misled more, and moved forward with this project on a larger scale?
Question: It is said on the street that the state delayed the resolution, meaning that after people saw the progress of military operations they said that the state was capable of doing the sort of military and security operations now which are in the framework of resolution, so why did it delay in this regard, which implied to many who thought that the state is weak so they acquired more weapons, were misled more, and moved forward with this project on a larger scale?
President al-Assad: The state did not delay, and the proof is that when the armed forces sensed a major escalation in Daraa during the beginning of the events in the first months, the army entered Daraa. We never hesitated for a second for the resolution. But with every step the state took, there was a development in their modus operandi, so in turn the state needed more counter steps. Some want us to handle that stage as we handle the stage today. This is illogical. The stage is different, their modus operandi was different, even the public understanding of what is happening was different. Many people were misled in the beginning, thinking that what is happening is a state of excitement a wave of The Arab spring that will affect Syria, that these youths are excitable, that there are no gunmen, that the state is fabricating,  all the these things we used to hear. For us as a state, the lack of public understanding was a problem. What helped the state in the resolution in recent months was the clarity of the picture for the larger part of the Syrian population as there’s a change in political conditions and in the security in the security conditions themselves.
President al-Assad: The state did not delay, and the proof is that when the armed forces sensed a major escalation in Daraa during the beginning of the events in the first months, the army entered Daraa. We never hesitated for a second for the resolution. But with every step the state took, there was a development in their modus operandi, so in turn the state needed more counter steps. Some want us to handle that stage as we handle the stage today. This is illogical. The stage is different, their modus operandi was different, even the public understanding of what is happening was different. Many people were misled in the beginning, thinking that what is happening is a state of excitement a wave of The Arab spring that will affect Syria, that these youths are excitable, that there are no gunmen, that the state is fabricating,  all the these things we used to hear. For us as a state, the lack of public understanding was a problem. What helped the state in the resolution in recent months was the clarity of the picture for the larger part of the Syrian population as there’s a change in political conditions and in the security in the security conditions themselves.
There’s a change in the public mood towards what is happening and towards the gunmen as they discovered that what is happening isn’t a revolution nor a spring; they are rather it is terrorist acts in the full meaning of the word, and the clarification of the external factor which wasn’t clear at the beginning. When I delivered my first speech at the People’s Assembly and talked about a conspiracy and confrontation, many wondered what conspiracy and what confrontation, accusing us of saying that everything is a conspiracy and considering what was happening to be a mere case of excitement as I mentioned before, and that if the President had said a few kind and sentimental words then the problem would have been solved. I told them that the problem didn’t begin with sentiments and won’t end with sentiments; there’s a plan and there are internal tools, so from the beginning we took a decision for resolution because the picture was clear, but the method of resolution differs depending on the different stages of the crisis.
There’s a change in the public mood towards what is happening and towards the gunmen as they discovered that what is happening isn’t a revolution nor a spring; they are rather it is terrorist acts in the full meaning of the word, and the clarification of the external factor which wasn’t clear at the beginning. When I delivered my first speech at the People’s Assembly and talked about a conspiracy and confrontation, many wondered what conspiracy and what confrontation, accusing us of saying that everything is a conspiracy and considering what was happening to be a mere case of excitement as I mentioned before, and that if the President had said a few kind and sentimental words then the problem would have been solved. I told them that the problem didn’t begin with sentiments and won’t end with sentiments; there’s a plan and there are internal tools, so from the beginning we took a decision for resolution because the picture was clear, but the method of resolution differs depending on the different stages of the crisis.
Question: Mr. President, this crisis included and was exacerbated by the presence of some personalities who partook in corruption at this stage and exploited the crisis among officials, whether they were in the army security forces or in the state or businessmen and merchants and many activities who exploited the crisis and even contributed to increase it. What about those?
Question: Mr. President, this crisis included and was exacerbated by the presence of some personalities who partook in corruption at this stage and exploited the crisis among officials, whether they were in the army security forces or in the state or businessmen and merchants and many activities who exploited the crisis and even contributed to increase it. What about those?
President al-Assad: I wish to distinguish between crisis traders who appear in every crisis in any country, whether they are merchants in the economic or material sense or other people who want to exploit the crisis for other private interests, and they could be inside the state or outside the state, and on the other hand, the mistakes that occur within the crisis and have no relation to prolonging the crisis. There were mistakes that happened, there were transgressions that happened, there were violations, thefts, some of which was uncovered but in a limited number and those were referred to the judiciary many months ago. Everyone who made a mistake or wanted to prolong the crisis for different reasons must be held accountable. This issue is final and isn’t up for discussion or debate, but the Question is how to identify them. You hold accountable the known not the anonymous; and most lawsuits filed and complaints that come in are against anonymous sides, and in the cases in which the individuals were identified and held accountable the wronged party brought the name and there was scrutiny and investigation and the misdemeanor or crime was proven and referred to the judiciary. The main challenge is how to find out who these people are, particularly since that in the conditions of security work and during chaotic circumstances investigation becomes harder than before. As a matter of principle, these individuals must be held accountable even if it were after overcoming these conditions and restoring calm.
President al-Assad: I wish to distinguish between crisis traders who appear in every crisis in any country, whether they are merchants in the economic or material sense or other people who want to exploit the crisis for other private interests, and they could be inside the state or outside the state, and on the other hand, the mistakes that occur within the crisis and have no relation to prolonging the crisis. There were mistakes that happened, there were transgressions that happened, there were violations, thefts, some of which was uncovered but in a limited number and those were referred to the judiciary many months ago. Everyone who made a mistake or wanted to prolong the crisis for different reasons must be held accountable. This issue is final and isn’t up for discussion or debate, but the Question is how to identify them. You hold accountable the known not the anonymous; and most lawsuits filed and complaints that come in are against anonymous sides, and in the cases in which the individuals were identified and held accountable the wronged party brought the name and there was scrutiny and investigation and the misdemeanor or crime was proven and referred to the judiciary. The main challenge is how to find out who these people are, particularly since that in the conditions of security work and during chaotic circumstances investigation becomes harder than before. As a matter of principle, these individuals must be held accountable even if it were after overcoming these conditions and restoring calm.
Question: Meaning that if they were in positions of power, then dismissal isn’t enough, but also trial?
Question: Meaning that if they were in positions of power, then dismissal isn’t enough, but also trial?
President al-Assad: When you don’t have proof but rather inconclusive indicators, then you may dismiss that individual for lack of confidence in their performance, but when you have conclusive evidence that this individual did something then he must be referred to the judiciary immediately regardless of the position he occupies.
President al-Assad: When you don’t have proof but rather inconclusive indicators, then you may dismiss that individual for lack of confidence in their performance, but when you have conclusive evidence that this individual did something then he must be referred to the judiciary immediately regardless of the position he occupies.
Question: There are those who say that after nearly a year and a half of the crisis there’s still a problem with the matter of appointments, with some wondering why appoint someone who isn’t qualified, who doesn’t have the ability and qualification needed and who might later cause us problems leading to dismissing and trying them for example. Mr. President, is there a flaw in the appointment mechanism, particularly since the crisis didn’t influence in or maybe didn’t motivate instruments in a bigger way in this regard?
Question: There are those who say that after nearly a year and a half of the crisis there’s still a problem with the matter of appointments, with some wondering why appoint someone who isn’t qualified, who doesn’t have the ability and qualification needed and who might later cause us problems leading to dismissing and trying them for example. Mr. President, is there a flaw in the appointment mechanism, particularly since the crisis didn’t influence in or maybe didn’t motivate instruments in a bigger way in this regard?
President al-Assad: There’s an objective side to this proposition and a subjective side. The objective sides is that we don’t have in Syria so far human resources management in the scientific sense, and this is a standalone science, and this is what we’re doing by putting the final touches on a project related to public employment, which evaluates the person since entering the government employment and until leaving it with a full course that specifies the development of their work. Someone good may come along and the evaluation is correct but after a while they deviate. The mechanism of entry alone isn’t enough. As for saying that this person came and didn’t prove to be good in the current mechanism in the absence of human resources management then you can only try as you don’t know if this person will fail. You must try to know that they will fail, and as long as they failed and you can replace them then where’s the problem? Of course, this takes time, but you don’t have other options. There are cases where a person is successful in a place and we assume that his success in this place will lead to his success elsewhere, only to discover that this isn’t true after trying. In fact, with the absence of human resources in their scientific form, then you have no option except to try, and the important thing in this case is not to keep quiet over someone who makes mistakes or fails, nor keep them in place, and in turn there’s someone who fails in a place not because they’re bad, but because this place doesn’t suit them, when you transfer them elsewhere they might succeed.
President al-Assad: There’s an objective side to this proposition and a subjective side. The objective sides is that we don’t have in Syria so far human resources management in the scientific sense, and this is a standalone science, and this is what we’re doing by putting the final touches on a project related to public employment, which evaluates the person since entering the government employment and until leaving it with a full course that specifies the development of their work. Someone good may come along and the evaluation is correct but after a while they deviate. The mechanism of entry alone isn’t enough. As for saying that this person came and didn’t prove to be good in the current mechanism in the absence of human resources management then you can only try as you don’t know if this person will fail. You must try to know that they will fail, and as long as they failed and you can replace them then where’s the problem? Of course, this takes time, but you don’t have other options. There are cases where a person is successful in a place and we assume that his success in this place will lead to his success elsewhere, only to discover that this isn’t true after trying. In fact, with the absence of human resources in their scientific form, then you have no option except to try, and the important thing in this case is not to keep quiet over someone who makes mistakes or fails, nor keep them in place, and in turn there’s someone who fails in a place not because they’re bad, but because this place doesn’t suit them, when you transfer them elsewhere they might succeed.
Question: Mr. President, many people link everything to the President, saying the President appointed this minister or issued that or discussed this, confusing a presidential decree with a mistake or something the government is in charge of. Your Excellency talked on more than one occasion about a true supervision that the media should perform on government performance. How can the media have the bigger role in supervision?
Question: Mr. President, many people link everything to the President, saying the President appointed this minister or issued that or discussed this, confusing a presidential decree with a mistake or something the government is in charge of. Your Excellency talked on more than one occasion about a true supervision that the media should perform on government performance. How can the media have the bigger role in supervision?
President al-Assad: Officials must be monitored from above and monitored form below, which means the public base, but demands so far are to monitor officials from above only, and this isn’t enough. It might be enough for certain levels of responsibility; a minister, a general director and the like, but there are lower levels like employees who need popular oversight in which the media plays a main role. The media tried in various stages to play this role, but this isn’t only through articles highlighting general issues, as the media’s role is to prepare a full case like, in countries that are advanced in what happens this field; the journalist presents a full case containing evidence, and in this case there’s no choice for officials but to refer this case as it is to investigation and later to the judiciary. This is what the media lacks. Of course, for the media to succeed in this, we also need more transparency by the state, as those affected will attempt to shut all doors in the face of the media, but the media must remain persistent and determined in this framework. Of course, for the President’s role, he’s responsible for the entire state and cannot evade or say I’m not responsible for a certain aspect of the state, but there’s a certain reality:  no-one can see all corners of the country.
President al-Assad: Officials must be monitored from above and monitored form below, which means the public base, but demands so far are to monitor officials from above only, and this isn’t enough. It might be enough for certain levels of responsibility; a minister, a general director and the like, but there are lower levels like employees who need popular oversight in which the media plays a main role. The media tried in various stages to play this role, but this isn’t only through articles highlighting general issues, as the media’s role is to prepare a full case like, in countries that are advanced in what happens this field; the journalist presents a full case containing evidence, and in this case there’s no choice for officials but to refer this case as it is to investigation and later to the judiciary. This is what the media lacks. Of course, for the media to succeed in this, we also need more transparency by the state, as those affected will attempt to shut all doors in the face of the media, but the media must remain persistent and determined in this framework. Of course, for the President’s role, he’s responsible for the entire state and cannot evade or say I’m not responsible for a certain aspect of the state, but there’s a certain reality:  no-one can see all corners of the country.
Question: From this comes the emphasis on the role of institutions which Your Excellency talked about since the oath speech, that in a state of establishment each point must assume its true role?
Question: From this comes the emphasis on the role of institutions which Your Excellency talked about since the oath speech, that in a state of establishment each point must assume its true role?
President al-Assad: Exactly. As long as establishments aren’t mature, any official’s role including the President’s will remain a lacking role. The President supervises in a general manner the policies of establishments and intervenes in some cases, but here we’re dealing with thousands of cases each day, cases that relate to citizens who cannot be supervised daily unless there are institutions of establishments or   participation on the part of citizens in managing the state’s affairs.
President al-Assad: Exactly. As long as establishments aren’t mature, any official’s role including the President’s will remain a lacking role. The President supervises in a general manner the policies of establishments and intervenes in some cases, but here we’re dealing with thousands of cases each day, cases that relate to citizens who cannot be supervised daily unless there are institutions of establishments or   participation on the part of citizens in managing the state’s affairs.
Question: You Excellency said that the media should persist, but is there a mechanism that organizes work more effectively and thus gives – we don’t want to say authority in the literal sense but rather a bigger role for the media? Are we allowed to intervene more in affairs which may be related to oversight?
Question: You Excellency said that the media should persist, but is there a mechanism that organizes work more effectively and thus gives – we don’t want to say authority in the literal sense but rather a bigger role for the media? Are we allowed to intervene more in affairs which may be related to oversight?
President al-Assad: It’s more than a question of being allowed or not. For me as an official, when you do your duty, I succeed, and your role is a success for me, and it’s in my personal interest that the media succeeds in this regard, and there’s national interest too as the homeland succeeds, institutions succeed and citizens succeed and become comfortable. In these matters, we all win when you play your role. The media playing its role isn’t a matter of allowing or not, but rather a matter of knowing exactly how to play the role objectively, and for the media not to exploit their role for personal interest. The media, in the end, is one of the authorities that can exploit authority for personal interest, and this relies on the profession’s professional ethics of those working in the field.
President al-Assad: It’s more than a question of being allowed or not. For me as an official, when you do your duty, I succeed, and your role is a success for me, and it’s in my personal interest that the media succeeds in this regard, and there’s national interest too as the homeland succeeds, institutions succeed and citizens succeed and become comfortable. In these matters, we all win when you play your role. The media playing its role isn’t a matter of allowing or not, but rather a matter of knowing exactly how to play the role objectively, and for the media not to exploit their role for personal interest. The media, in the end, is one of the authorities that can exploit authority for personal interest, and this relies on the profession’s professional ethics of those working in the field.
Question: Meaning that if the issue is within the supervision framework oversight and the framework of serving the country, then the media, as Your Excellency said, has the green light.
Question: Meaning that if the issue is within the supervision framework oversight and the framework of serving the country, then the media, as Your Excellency said, has the green light.
President al-Assad: Exactly, but by overcoming the educational role and playing a more investigative role, and by having the media’s role become investigating cases and finding evidence in addition to solutions, thereby assisting the judiciary and the investigating authorities, and at the same time proposing solutions to officials that we can benefit from in our decisions in the future.
President al-Assad: Exactly, but by overcoming the educational role and playing a more investigative role, and by having the media’s role become investigating cases and finding evidence in addition to solutions, thereby assisting the judiciary and the investigating authorities, and at the same time proposing solutions to officials that we can benefit from in our decisions in the future.
Question: Mr. President, the media is being targeted now in Syria, and Your Excellency highlighted this on more than one occasion. In a previous stage we faced a media war from abroad, then it shifted to targeting the Syrian media politically. We saw the decision of the Arab foreign ministers when they decided to block Syrian channels from satellites which is also a precedent, and bloody targeting that manifested itself in al-Ikhbariya bombing, the bombing of the General Establishment of Radio and Television, and the targeting of Addounia TV and journalists with kidnapping and murder. Where do you place the media in this context?
Question: Mr. President, the media is being targeted now in Syria, and Your Excellency highlighted this on more than one occasion. In a previous stage we faced a media war from abroad, then it shifted to targeting the Syrian media politically. We saw the decision of the Arab foreign ministers when they decided to block Syrian channels from satellites which is also a precedent, and bloody targeting that manifested itself in al-Ikhbariya bombing, the bombing of the General Establishment of Radio and Television, and the targeting of Addounia TV and journalists with kidnapping and murder. Where do you place the media in this context?
President al-Assad: The answer lies in the question, and it takes us to an important point which is that we must stop self flagellation, despite the presence of shortcomings in all fields including the media, and we wish things had been better. But if this tool has been a failure, as some claim, then it wouldn’t have been targeted. If it were bad, harmful and a failure then they would have provided you, as national media whether public or private, free satellite channels. This affirms that Syrian media managed to expose them and undermine true media empires behind which is not just money but also political decisions  in major capitals of the world. This in itself is proof of the success of Syrian media. Of course, we can be stronger and more successful, and this is natural. We haven’t reached our aspirations and you haven’t reached your aspirations as media, and this is the course of life. But to those who say that the media is a failure, this is our answer.
President al-Assad: The answer lies in the question, and it takes us to an important point which is that we must stop self flagellation, despite the presence of shortcomings in all fields including the media, and we wish things had been better. But if this tool has been a failure, as some claim, then it wouldn’t have been targeted. If it were bad, harmful and a failure then they would have provided you, as national media whether public or private, free satellite channels. This affirms that Syrian media managed to expose them and undermine true media empires behind which is not just money but also political decisions  in major capitals of the world. This in itself is proof of the success of Syrian media. Of course, we can be stronger and more successful, and this is natural. We haven’t reached our aspirations and you haven’t reached your aspirations as media, and this is the course of life. But to those who say that the media is a failure, this is our answer.
Question: Mr. President, the issue of defections is one of the things that concerned Syrian society lately as well. There were those who promoted the defection of figures like Riyad Hijab, Manaf Tlas, some diplomats and some officers of various ranks, and they said that if these people hadn’t seen something dark in Syria’s future and that the state isn’t stable and isn’t strong, then they wouldn’t have abandoned fortune, power and positions to the unknown.
Question: Mr. President, the issue of defections is one of the things that concerned Syrian society lately as well. There were those who promoted the defection of figures like Riyad Hijab, Manaf Tlas, some diplomats and some officers of various ranks, and they said that if these people hadn’t seen something dark in Syria’s future and that the state isn’t stable and isn’t strong, then they wouldn’t have abandoned fortune, power and positions to the unknown.
President al-Assad: Regardless of the names, and assuming that the future is dark, is this a reason to leave the country? What is this limited proposition, it is an accusation of being unpatriotic. But let us examine the term. First, defection is when one establishment separates from a bigger establishment that presides over it or the defection of a part of an establishment from the main establishment, and at the top of this establishment is an individual or individuals who rebel against the higher levels or the main establishment. This didn’t happen. What happened was that individuals who were occupied certain positions fled the country, which is a process of desertion and escape, not defection. The defection is internal, not external. It’s a rebellion against the state within the country, which didn’t happen. Therefore, these are desertions outside the country, and those who desert or flee are either people who were presented with money and left, and are therefore corrupt and accept bribes, or cowards who were threatened by terrorists or the other side or, as you said, had no hope of a bright future, so they got scared of this future and fled abroad, or maybe it was someone with ambition who believed that he should have gotten gains or benefits or specific ranks but didn’t and decided to flee. Of course, there other reasons. In the end, those who flee are practically either weak or bad, because a patriotic and good person doesn’t runaway and doesn’t flee abroad. Practically, this process is positive and a process of self-cleansing of the state first and the country in general, so we mustn’t be upset by this process because it’s positive. Many people we didn’t know had these qualities and they exposed their truth themselves, which is positive. Add to that that more than one person was said to want to defect before, and what did we do? We told those who proposed that let’s facilitate it for him and let him go. It’s a positive process. Of course, we weren’t sure in all cases, and in return in some cases we were very sure yet we didn’t mind, and despite that many people were discussed before and lately and were allegedly to flee Syria under the slogan of defection, did you hear that the state arrested any of those? Of course not, because we view this positively.
President al-Assad: Regardless of the names, and assuming that the future is dark, is this a reason to leave the country? What is this limited proposition, it is an accusation of being unpatriotic. But let us examine the term. First, defection is when one establishment separates from a bigger establishment that presides over it or the defection of a part of an establishment from the main establishment, and at the top of this establishment is an individual or individuals who rebel against the higher levels or the main establishment. This didn’t happen. What happened was that individuals who were occupied certain positions fled the country, which is a process of desertion and escape, not defection. The defection is internal, not external. It’s a rebellion against the state within the country, which didn’t happen. Therefore, these are desertions outside the country, and those who desert or flee are either people who were presented with money and left, and are therefore corrupt and accept bribes, or cowards who were threatened by terrorists or the other side or, as you said, had no hope of a bright future, so they got scared of this future and fled abroad, or maybe it was someone with ambition who believed that he should have gotten gains or benefits or specific ranks but didn’t and decided to flee. Of course, there other reasons. In the end, those who flee are practically either weak or bad, because a patriotic and good person doesn’t runaway and doesn’t flee abroad. Practically, this process is positive and a process of self-cleansing of the state first and the country in general, so we mustn’t be upset by this process because it’s positive. Many people we didn’t know had these qualities and they exposed their truth themselves, which is positive. Add to that that more than one person was said to want to defect before, and what did we do? We told those who proposed that let’s facilitate it for him and let him go. It’s a positive process. Of course, we weren’t sure in all cases, and in return in some cases we were very sure yet we didn’t mind, and despite that many people were discussed before and lately and were allegedly to flee Syria under the slogan of defection, did you hear that the state arrested any of those? Of course not, because we view this positively.
Question: Despite knowing and being aware of this.
Question: Despite knowing and being aware of this.
President al-Assad: In some cases, we have information and high suspicions. We don’t say fully aware. But the question put by relevant authority was what to do, how to act, should we prevent them? There was a call to prevent them but we told them no, prevention isn’t right, these people’s departure is the right thing. First, they’re exposed before the Syrian people. Second, every person who leaves the country is finished. If they have political ambition or goals then they’re over for the simple reason which is that the Syrian people don’t respect those who run away, and that Syrian people cannot be led by remote control with wireless devices, and they cannot lead them from abroad. This issue has been resolved historically, so I can say that if there’s a Syrian citizen who knows that about someone who is hesitant and wants to flee, then they should encourage them.
President al-Assad: In some cases, we have information and high suspicions. We don’t say fully aware. But the question put by relevant authority was what to do, how to act, should we prevent them? There was a call to prevent them but we told them no, prevention isn’t right, these people’s departure is the right thing. First, they’re exposed before the Syrian people. Second, every person who leaves the country is finished. If they have political ambition or goals then they’re over for the simple reason which is that the Syrian people don’t respect those who run away, and that Syrian people cannot be led by remote control with wireless devices, and they cannot lead them from abroad. This issue has been resolved historically, so I can say that if there’s a Syrian citizen who knows that about someone who is hesitant and wants to flee, then they should encourage them.
Question: Within the major campaign targeting Syria, can we expect more desertion? Do you have a problem in this regard?
Question: Within the major campaign targeting Syria, can we expect more desertion? Do you have a problem in this regard?
President al-Assad: If desertion is by this kind of people then it’s a positive case, and it’s natural for this sort of people come to the surface during crises, and this a positive thing that we must anticipate and be optimistic about, not pessimistic.
President al-Assad: If desertion is by this kind of people then it’s a positive case, and it’s natural for this sort of people come to the surface during crises, and this a positive thing that we must anticipate and be optimistic about, not pessimistic.
Question: Your Excellency indicated on all occasions the scale of the conspiracy and pressure against Syria and the many things for which all available methods and means have been rallied politically and non-politically, morally and immorally. The Syrians ask: why us? Why are we being targeted with this enormous amount of resources aimed at Syria?
Question: Your Excellency indicated on all occasions the scale of the conspiracy and pressure against Syria and the many things for which all available methods and means have been rallied politically and non-politically, morally and immorally. The Syrians ask: why us? Why are we being targeted with this enormous amount of resources aimed at Syria?
President al-Assad: this is the history of Syria, conflict on Syria took place even when we were part of the Ottoman Empire, because the Levant is a strategic region, following independence and the French evacuation all the coups were funded from outside and aimed at controlling Syria and the Syrian policy as well as dragging it into axes which were present at that time when Syria started to adopt an independent policy, practically after March 8th Revolution and consolidated after the Corrective  Movement when the attack on Syria became more powerful than before. Now, we are paying the price of different stances, some of them related to the principled polices linked to the Syrian rights, our stance on the resistance and our relation with Iran which means with this axes that is not liked by the West.
President al-Assad: this is the history of Syria, conflict on Syria took place even when we were part of the Ottoman Empire, because the Levant is a strategic region, following independence and the French evacuation all the coups were funded from outside and aimed at controlling Syria and the Syrian policy as well as dragging it into axes which were present at that time when Syria started to adopt an independent policy, practically after March 8th Revolution and consolidated after the Corrective  Movement when the attack on Syria became more powerful than before. Now, we are paying the price of different stances, some of them related to the principled polices linked to the Syrian rights, our stance on the resistance and our relation with Iran which means with this axes that is not liked by the West.
Some of those are linked to our latest stances, a lot of people aren’t aware that our stance on the shelling of Libya was a lonely stance at the Arab League against the no-fly zone. We objected, and not merely abstained. As we fully understood that the no-fly zone means the start of aggression on Libya and this is what has happened. We pay the price of these stances and the price of the west’s openness towards us in 2008, 2009 and 2010 during which time some have mistakenly believed that it was a real openness stage, but it was a stage through which they aimed to change the way of dealing with Syria , and to reach the needed goals, conspiring against resistance, particularly in Lebanon and targeting relations between Syria and Iran which stands by us and the Arab right, and when they failed during that stage, the Arab Spring was the new justification for them in front of their peoples to conspire once again against Syria. For all these reasons we pay the price.
Some of those are linked to our latest stances, a lot of people aren’t aware that our stance on the shelling of Libya was a lonely stance at the Arab League against the no-fly zone. We objected, and not merely abstained. As we fully understood that the no-fly zone means the start of aggression on Libya and this is what has happened. We pay the price of these stances and the price of the west’s openness towards us in 2008, 2009 and 2010 during which time some have mistakenly believed that it was a real openness stage, but it was a stage through which they aimed to change the way of dealing with Syria , and to reach the needed goals, conspiring against resistance, particularly in Lebanon and targeting relations between Syria and Iran which stands by us and the Arab right, and when they failed during that stage, the Arab Spring was the new justification for them in front of their peoples to conspire once again against Syria. For all these reasons we pay the price.
Question: Mr. President, Was anything were demanded to be done by your side, and you refused to do so during the openness and interest stage which was practiced on Syria between 2008 and 2010, so the ways and means have changed?
Question: Mr. President, Was anything were demanded to be done by your side, and you refused to do so during the openness and interest stage which was practiced on Syria between 2008 and 2010, so the ways and means have changed?
President al-Assad: Yes, they clearly and continuously asked us to move away from Iran, and our answer was clear as much as Iran stands by us, supports us and stands by our rights without any hesitation and even without discussions of the details just as it is a Syrian right or a Syrian opinion. So how could we move away from it. In principle, rejecting or inverting on a side or faithful country, this is unacceptable .In terms of interest, a country which changed the Israeli Embassy into a Palestinian one and stood with the Palestinian right. As Arab states, we don’t talk but with the Palestinian right, do we come and turn the table on this country ?? on the other side, the attempts which were made during that time were related to conspiring on the Iranian nuclear file though we are not part of this file, and Iran didn’t ask assistance in this issue, the issue is proposed on the international arena, not on the regional one, what was needed from Syria was to convince Iran with matters against its interest, we saw that issue as an issue which relates to our future interest, our national security in the future, because what is applied to Iran as a state which seeks to get peaceful nuclear energy will be applied to us in future, particularly as this energy is basic in the future, and the West wanted to monopolize the knowledge and prevent it from the developing countries. There is another side related to the resistance, they also wanted us to conspire against the resistance in Palestine, the resistance in Lebanon through some measures which might be happening in Lebanon to prevent it, we rejected all these issues, they relied on the principle of openness and that the Arabs like honoring, and appreciation, and flattery, this openness and the repeated visits and drumming by the western media against Syria whose president was a criminal a few years ago according to their media in 2005 after al-Hariri issue, and suddenly became a peace maker, this gives you an idea of western hypocrisy, and when they failed during that stage, the Arab spring was the opportunity to terminate the Syrian policy.
President al-Assad: Yes, they clearly and continuously asked us to move away from Iran, and our answer was clear as much as Iran stands by us, supports us and stands by our rights without any hesitation and even without discussions of the details just as it is a Syrian right or a Syrian opinion. So how could we move away from it. In principle, rejecting or inverting on a side or faithful country, this is unacceptable .In terms of interest, a country which changed the Israeli Embassy into a Palestinian one and stood with the Palestinian right. As Arab states, we don’t talk but with the Palestinian right, do we come and turn the table on this country ?? on the other side, the attempts which were made during that time were related to conspiring on the Iranian nuclear file though we are not part of this file, and Iran didn’t ask assistance in this issue, the issue is proposed on the international arena, not on the regional one, what was needed from Syria was to convince Iran with matters against its interest, we saw that issue as an issue which relates to our future interest, our national security in the future, because what is applied to Iran as a state which seeks to get peaceful nuclear energy will be applied to us in future, particularly as this energy is basic in the future, and the West wanted to monopolize the knowledge and prevent it from the developing countries. There is another side related to the resistance, they also wanted us to conspire against the resistance in Palestine, the resistance in Lebanon through some measures which might be happening in Lebanon to prevent it, we rejected all these issues, they relied on the principle of openness and that the Arabs like honoring, and appreciation, and flattery, this openness and the repeated visits and drumming by the western media against Syria whose president was a criminal a few years ago according to their media in 2005 after al-Hariri issue, and suddenly became a peace maker, this gives you an idea of western hypocrisy, and when they failed during that stage, the Arab spring was the opportunity to terminate the Syrian policy.
Question: Syria has and still encounters all forms of sanctions that targeted some Ministers, companies, among them medical, food ones, so the Syrian people was the target. Those sanctions were seemingly imposed on a number of personalities, but the reality is that they impacted the people as a whole, who could Syria avoid all these sanctions, particularly as they say that through economic pressure, or through making Syria collapse economically they might achieve their political goals?
Question: Syria has and still encounters all forms of sanctions that targeted some Ministers, companies, among them medical, food ones, so the Syrian people was the target. Those sanctions were seemingly imposed on a number of personalities, but the reality is that they impacted the people as a whole, who could Syria avoid all these sanctions, particularly as they say that through economic pressure, or through making Syria collapse economically they might achieve their political goals?
President al-Assad: This kind of sanctions will undoubtedly affect Syria, but it will affect with specific degrees. This depends on how we could we adapt with these conditions. Look to Iran, it progresses forwards in light of severe sanctions throughout many decades. We are a nation that has intelligence throughout history, we have a great ability to adapt, we have lived the crises throughout our history. The stages which were calm were limited stages in the Syrian history, undoubtedly we have capability to adapt with them as we are a productive state, we are not an importer country in principle, we are productive state from agriculture, crafts into small industries, but we have to reformulate our economy in a way that suits with this new condition, in this case we can make achievement. The Syrian industry has developed in light of the eighties siege, you remember at that time we had not even the basic materials, that condition was  more difficult than this stage, we had no minimum reserve in our banks, even though we could develop industry, today we have bigger capabilities but  they need some thinking, a number of practical plans, not theorization, I believe that we will get benefit, these outcomes will occur after the crisis though self-dependence and keeping away from some unimportant consumer- habits which we have adopted mainly because we live years of welfare, so we have the ability to remain and develop, and what we need is to specify what the best formula for our economy.
President al-Assad: This kind of sanctions will undoubtedly affect Syria, but it will affect with specific degrees. This depends on how we could we adapt with these conditions. Look to Iran, it progresses forwards in light of severe sanctions throughout many decades. We are a nation that has intelligence throughout history, we have a great ability to adapt, we have lived the crises throughout our history. The stages which were calm were limited stages in the Syrian history, undoubtedly we have capability to adapt with them as we are a productive state, we are not an importer country in principle, we are productive state from agriculture, crafts into small industries, but we have to reformulate our economy in a way that suits with this new condition, in this case we can make achievement. The Syrian industry has developed in light of the eighties siege, you remember at that time we had not even the basic materials, that condition was  more difficult than this stage, we had no minimum reserve in our banks, even though we could develop industry, today we have bigger capabilities but  they need some thinking, a number of practical plans, not theorization, I believe that we will get benefit, these outcomes will occur after the crisis though self-dependence and keeping away from some unimportant consumer- habits which we have adopted mainly because we live years of welfare, so we have the ability to remain and develop, and what we need is to specify what the best formula for our economy.
Question: Mr. President, You called for dialogue, and the state calls for dialogue, some opposition parties talk now about dialogue, they were rejecting dialogue, but now they accept, some reject, other accept, how the State deals with the call for dialogue since the convening of the conference last year?
Question: Mr. President, You called for dialogue, and the state calls for dialogue, some opposition parties talk now about dialogue, they were rejecting dialogue, but now they accept, some reject, other accept, how the State deals with the call for dialogue since the convening of the conference last year?
President al-Assad: This is a very long story though it lasted a year and a half, but it was very rich and a lot of people don’t know what things were happening and what was the reality of the dialogue, what was the stance of the state and the opposition’s. At the beginning of the crisis, we asked to conduct dialogue with all the forces and personalities even those who were novice in politics, we went beyond all the political forces reaching social and cultural personalities, etc, we considered the issue as not a political issue, but a national issue, each person in Syria is engaged in resolving this crisis, at that time, the issue of dialogue was proposed on all levels by different sides, and by the states which came to advise us, with good or bad faith, the same thing by the powers existing in Syria which wanted to exploit the crisis, or those who wanted to take a national and real position.  We said that the notion of dialogue is good and we started to work for that purpose, here the sorting out began, particularly regarding the forces of opposition. There was a national opposition which wanted to put aside all its interests and visions which we differ on to put the interest of the Homeland first. Subsequently in the political process, some of them entered elections, others participated in the People’s Assembly and the government. On the other side, there was the non-national opposition whom we didn’t talk about directly, without specifying who was this opposition, the people will later know who they are, but we have to specify what is happening. In the beginning, that opposition presented a reform process, reforming, amending, changing laws or amending the constitution.  It believed that we would reject this logic, of course, this is what has been proposed by it publically, At the same time, it was bargaining with us through hidden channels that it had no interest in all this and that this speech was for the media or popular consumption, but it wanted to take part in the government. Of course, in principle we said we have no problem in the issue of participation in the government. The government is not restricted to one side, the government is for all people.  We have always let independent people participate. Other forces could come, we have no problem, but we don’t accept blackmail.  The basis in dealing with any side is the moral and principled dealing.  We reached dialogue.  Those forces were calling for dialogue, we were surprised that they didn’t come, I stress that I talk about part of the opposition, why did those forces refuse to come to dialogue? Because, before dialogue starts, they supposed it to be restricted to the State and those groups, to sit at the dialogue table in the absence of other sides.
President al-Assad: This is a very long story though it lasted a year and a half, but it was very rich and a lot of people don’t know what things were happening and what was the reality of the dialogue, what was the stance of the state and the opposition’s. At the beginning of the crisis, we asked to conduct dialogue with all the forces and personalities even those who were novice in politics, we went beyond all the political forces reaching social and cultural personalities, etc, we considered the issue as not a political issue, but a national issue, each person in Syria is engaged in resolving this crisis, at that time, the issue of dialogue was proposed on all levels by different sides, and by the states which came to advise us, with good or bad faith, the same thing by the powers existing in Syria which wanted to exploit the crisis, or those who wanted to take a national and real position.  We said that the notion of dialogue is good and we started to work for that purpose, here the sorting out began, particularly regarding the forces of opposition. There was a national opposition which wanted to put aside all its interests and visions which we differ on to put the interest of the Homeland first. Subsequently in the political process, some of them entered elections, others participated in the People’s Assembly and the government. On the other side, there was the non-national opposition whom we didn’t talk about directly, without specifying who was this opposition, the people will later know who they are, but we have to specify what is happening. In the beginning, that opposition presented a reform process, reforming, amending, changing laws or amending the constitution.  It believed that we would reject this logic, of course, this is what has been proposed by it publically, At the same time, it was bargaining with us through hidden channels that it had no interest in all this and that this speech was for the media or popular consumption, but it wanted to take part in the government. Of course, in principle we said we have no problem in the issue of participation in the government. The government is not restricted to one side, the government is for all people.  We have always let independent people participate. Other forces could come, we have no problem, but we don’t accept blackmail.  The basis in dealing with any side is the moral and principled dealing.  We reached dialogue.  Those forces were calling for dialogue, we were surprised that they didn’t come, I stress that I talk about part of the opposition, why did those forces refuse to come to dialogue? Because, before dialogue starts, they supposed it to be restricted to the State and those groups, to sit at the dialogue table in the absence of other sides.
Interposition: which means monopolization.
Interposition: which means monopolization.
President al-Assad: Yes, for a simple reason: they wanted to pretend to be defenders of the people and representatives for them, and that we are against the people.
President al-Assad: Yes, for a simple reason: they wanted to pretend to be defenders of the people and representatives for them, and that we are against the people.
They had no popular base, but they tried to achieve a political position for them in as opportunists in order to negotiate with the State, so we rejected this speech and called on all different powers, on the dialogue table there was more than 100 personalities. They represent different Syrian spectrums, this is from one side. Another side was that some of these powers were continuously contacting the western embassies which were actively working in Syria at that time, they were told not to go for dialogue because the life span of the state, or what they call “regime”- and this word is rejected-, the life span of this state is in weeks or a number of months, so you don’t have to talk to a collapsed side. There were other sides which went to Egypt, received money from Gulf countries at the Arab League or through officials at the Arab League in order not to go to the dialogue. There was another reason, they proposed the issue of reform, I met some groups of them, they talked about the constitution and the 8th Article, before a month of the dialogue, I addressed the people at Damascus University, during which I announced reforms. According to them, what was needed from this dialogue was to propose reforms and put us in front of two options; if we accepted, they would say to the people that they brought the reform through negotiations with the state, and if we rejected, they would say that the State was against reform, so let us fight it.  So they monopolize the popular base as defenders of the people’s rights. This was clear for us, they are opportunists to a great deal, so we disregarded them, and moved to another stage after dialogue.  Of course, they continued their stance through betting on the embassies and the Gulf powers existed at the Arab League and contacted them till they lost hope. Lately, we heard that they started to talk about dialogue. Let us put aside all this opportunism, and suppose good well, let us say to come late is better than not to come, but if you wanted to come late, you have to be true, not to come once more as an opportunist to get on a wave that you see this ship didn’t sink, so let us ensure a place in it. You are talking now about rejecting violence and arming from all sides.  This is the word which some are ruminating from time to time, if you admitted of the weapon or arming, why did you reject it a year ago? Would you come and say clearly that you were mistaken or in maximum that you have lied to the people. We don’t expect the second, in minimum, the first. Let him say that he didn’t know, let him say that he made a mistake in evaluation. But to come as if nothing has happened, this speech is rejected, this opportunism is rejected, when they believe that they didn’t find a place for them on the other ship and that it drowned through councils abroad or through the outside’s discovering that the opportunist opposition has no real position in Syria, has no role.
Through betting on the military terrorist act and the failure of this armed terrorist work in Syria to achieve important outcomes, on the contrary it was a retreat and contraction. At that time they began to shift. This speech is unacceptable for us. This is on one side, but on the other, there are other initiatives at work.
Through betting on the military terrorist act and the failure of this armed terrorist work in Syria to achieve important outcomes, on the contrary it was a retreat and contraction. At that time they began to shift. This speech is unacceptable for us. This is on one side, but on the other, there are other initiatives at work.
Question: Initiatives of the opposition like Rome’s. Here we discussed the three stages of dialogue that first they demanded it, second they refrained from it, and now they demand it again, and with the belief that the ship hasn’t sunk.  The number may expand and new spectrums may come to join them.
Question: Initiatives of the opposition like Rome’s. Here we discussed the three stages of dialogue that first they demanded it, second they refrained from it, and now they demand it again, and with the belief that the ship hasn’t sunk.  The number may expand and new spectrums may come to join them.
President al-Assad: In addition to what I said in my previous answer on rejecting dealing with opportunism, we have a principled policy and what we said at the beginning of the crisis we say today. We didn’t change our positions at all towards the events and all the circumstances surrounding it. We say that our dealing with initiatives is also based on what side is making the initiative? What tools do they possess? What is their weight in Syria? If they’re countries like what is happening now when we hear about an initiative to be carried out by Iran and we supported it, first due to Iran’s role in the region and its importance and principled nature and other reasons, and because it will be with a group of other countries that aren’t necessarily as principled and of the same weight, but they can play a role in one way or another. We ask each side that makes an initiative: what is the weight of this side? Many initiatives came from various sides, some from foreign organizations like the one that sponsored the recent Rome initiative, and I’m surprised that foreign organizations are sponsoring Syrian initiatives by Syrian people. This is disgraceful for us on the national level. We disregarded many of these initiatives that have no value and no weight, as the crisis isn’t a place for some people to seek positions. This is part of trading in the crisis.
President al-Assad: In addition to what I said in my previous answer on rejecting dealing with opportunism, we have a principled policy and what we said at the beginning of the crisis we say today. We didn’t change our positions at all towards the events and all the circumstances surrounding it. We say that our dealing with initiatives is also based on what side is making the initiative? What tools do they possess? What is their weight in Syria? If they’re countries like what is happening now when we hear about an initiative to be carried out by Iran and we supported it, first due to Iran’s role in the region and its importance and principled nature and other reasons, and because it will be with a group of other countries that aren’t necessarily as principled and of the same weight, but they can play a role in one way or another. We ask each side that makes an initiative: what is the weight of this side? Many initiatives came from various sides, some from foreign organizations like the one that sponsored the recent Rome initiative, and I’m surprised that foreign organizations are sponsoring Syrian initiatives by Syrian people. This is disgraceful for us on the national level. We disregarded many of these initiatives that have no value and no weight, as the crisis isn’t a place for some people to seek positions. This is part of trading in the crisis.
Question: Those who watched the issue of the ship whether it will sink or not, bet on a time frame. We’re talking now about a year and a half. The ship is still strong and it seems that with the determination of this country’s people it will remain strong. We ask: who made Syria so far strong and steadfast in the face of all it went through?
Question: Those who watched the issue of the ship whether it will sink or not, bet on a time frame. We’re talking now about a year and a half. The ship is still strong and it seems that with the determination of this country’s people it will remain strong. We ask: who made Syria so far strong and steadfast in the face of all it went through?
President al-Assad: First, some made a mistake in believing that the ship is the ship of the state or, once again in quotes, a “regime.” The ship is the homeland either Syria drowns or Syria makes it. We must be clear on this point; the state cannot sink and the homeland persists for simple reason which is that despite the many mistakes that exist, there’s a deep bond between this state’s policies and this people’s creed. But if we said who made this country steadfast, the fact is it’s the people in general, and the popular base not its elite. To be clear for history: the wide base which maybe isn’t usually interested in politics.
President al-Assad: First, some made a mistake in believing that the ship is the ship of the state or, once again in quotes, a “regime.” The ship is the homeland either Syria drowns or Syria makes it. We must be clear on this point; the state cannot sink and the homeland persists for simple reason which is that despite the many mistakes that exist, there’s a deep bond between this state’s policies and this people’s creed. But if we said who made this country steadfast, the fact is it’s the people in general, and the popular base not its elite. To be clear for history: the wide base which maybe isn’t usually interested in politics.
Interposition: The common people.
Interposition: The common people.
President al-Assad: Yes, the common people who maybe aren’t interested in politics, maybe they don’t have degrees, maybe they don’t live in these atmospheres, but they have a deep natural feeling about the truth of the crisis and its substance and essence. This isn’t the first time I discover this or see this scene; we saw it in 2003 after the war on Iraq and its results when some jumped to criticize the Syrian position for opposing major countries and siding with Iraq at the time, and it showed clearly after 2005 when the west conspired against it on the background of the assassination of al-Hariri in Lebanon, and now we see it clearer; it’s the same image. This wide base of the people is the one that protects the country, not the elite, to be clear whether this satisfies some or upsets them. Doubtless the most important element of this people which made this country steadfast is the armed forces. This army and armed forces, with their security and police, carry out heroic acts in the full sense of the word. They have readiness for sacrifice which we heard of before and believed to be individual cases, and they’re present in any army in the world, individual cases of heroism. But the surprising thing was the general state of readiness for sacrifices, cases of which we saw directly and live on Addounia TV and on the Syrian TV during the battles that showed their bravery and the successes they achieved. Without the successes of the Syrian Arab Army during these complicated circumstances, the country’s situation would doubtless be in danger, and the people’s embracing of this army is essential. We say the people’s army, as this army is part of this people. If we look at society as sectors of doctors, intellectuals, university graduates, vocational workers, farmers, workers, etc., and if we go back to the beginning of the crisis, the crisis began or relied on sectarian propositions. They wanted in the beginning to create a sectarian divide among the Syrian people to open a large hole in Syria in which this plan can pass very easily and quickly. The sectarian proposition is a departure from religion and deviation from religion, because religions, and Islam in particular, cannot be sectarian and separatist. There are many tools for confronting sectarianism, but the most important tool for this is proper religion, and no-one can play this role like religious figures or scholars. Truth is, for history, the role of religious figures in this crisis was very important and vital, and many people don’t know that a number of respectable religious figures were tortured and imprisoned in basements and some were assassinated and paid with their lives not for standing by the state, but for saying a word of truth or for speaking of the true principles of religion. The essence of the crisis was primarily creating sectarian strife and religious figures had a primary role in combating it. Here we also talk about the media as we said before; if the role of the media in Syria wasn’t important then journalists wouldn’t have paid the price with their lives. There are many groups, there are people in various points. I don’t exclude groups; all groups have patriotic people and people who paid the price with their lives, but there was a focus by the opponents and enemies on specific direction, and these groups or sectors of the people had to fulfill their duty and they carried out their duty. On the other hand, there were of course deviant religious figures who played a negative role either due to ignorance in creed or due to hidden political reasons for which they exploited religion, but those were encircled by the religious figures of Syria. Therefore, I believe this stage is one that should be recorded for all these groups that protected the homeland.
President al-Assad: Yes, the common people who maybe aren’t interested in politics, maybe they don’t have degrees, maybe they don’t live in these atmospheres, but they have a deep natural feeling about the truth of the crisis and its substance and essence. This isn’t the first time I discover this or see this scene; we saw it in 2003 after the war on Iraq and its results when some jumped to criticize the Syrian position for opposing major countries and siding with Iraq at the time, and it showed clearly after 2005 when the west conspired against it on the background of the assassination of al-Hariri in Lebanon, and now we see it clearer; it’s the same image. This wide base of the people is the one that protects the country, not the elite, to be clear whether this satisfies some or upsets them. Doubtless the most important element of this people which made this country steadfast is the armed forces. This army and armed forces, with their security and police, carry out heroic acts in the full sense of the word. They have readiness for sacrifice which we heard of before and believed to be individual cases, and they’re present in any army in the world, individual cases of heroism. But the surprising thing was the general state of readiness for sacrifices, cases of which we saw directly and live on Addounia TV and on the Syrian TV during the battles that showed their bravery and the successes they achieved. Without the successes of the Syrian Arab Army during these complicated circumstances, the country’s situation would doubtless be in danger, and the people’s embracing of this army is essential. We say the people’s army, as this army is part of this people. If we look at society as sectors of doctors, intellectuals, university graduates, vocational workers, farmers, workers, etc., and if we go back to the beginning of the crisis, the crisis began or relied on sectarian propositions. They wanted in the beginning to create a sectarian divide among the Syrian people to open a large hole in Syria in which this plan can pass very easily and quickly. The sectarian proposition is a departure from religion and deviation from religion, because religions, and Islam in particular, cannot be sectarian and separatist. There are many tools for confronting sectarianism, but the most important tool for this is proper religion, and no-one can play this role like religious figures or scholars. Truth is, for history, the role of religious figures in this crisis was very important and vital, and many people don’t know that a number of respectable religious figures were tortured and imprisoned in basements and some were assassinated and paid with their lives not for standing by the state, but for saying a word of truth or for speaking of the true principles of religion. The essence of the crisis was primarily creating sectarian strife and religious figures had a primary role in combating it. Here we also talk about the media as we said before; if the role of the media in Syria wasn’t important then journalists wouldn’t have paid the price with their lives. There are many groups, there are people in various points. I don’t exclude groups; all groups have patriotic people and people who paid the price with their lives, but there was a focus by the opponents and enemies on specific direction, and these groups or sectors of the people had to fulfill their duty and they carried out their duty. On the other hand, there were of course deviant religious figures who played a negative role either due to ignorance in creed or due to hidden political reasons for which they exploited religion, but those were encircled by the religious figures of Syria. Therefore, I believe this stage is one that should be recorded for all these groups that protected the homeland.
Question: Of course, we remember the assassination of many activities; doctors, engineers, university professors, scientists in all fields.
Question: Of course, we remember the assassination of many activities; doctors, engineers, university professors, scientists in all fields.
President al-Assad: This is correct. But maybe what was wanted from each individual in these groups was limited compared to the big slogans that were posed at the beginning of the crisis, yet I go back and say that everyone belongs to this people, and when I started by saying that the people were the ones who protected this country, then this encompasses all groups.
President al-Assad: This is correct. But maybe what was wanted from each individual in these groups was limited compared to the big slogans that were posed at the beginning of the crisis, yet I go back and say that everyone belongs to this people, and when I started by saying that the people were the ones who protected this country, then this encompasses all groups.
Question: Your Excellency, the Syrians want to know where they are heading, Where are we going?  What next?  What do you say to the Syrians, Your Excellency?
Question: Your Excellency, the Syrians want to know where they are heading, Where are we going?  What next?  What do you say to the Syrians, Your Excellency?
President al-Assad: We take Syria to the destination we want to as Syrian People and not to any other place. The external factor has an effect as it can speed up a certain process or slow it down or divert the direction, but we can correct the direction.  All that is taking place in Syria was never to take place if we had not certain groups: specific groups, but they are influential in pace with the foreign scheme politically or criminally. In the absence of such groups, be sure that a conspiracy led by the entire world against Syria, and in which all the world takes part against Syria is unable to affect the future which we want to draw for ourselves. In short, the fate of Syria is in the hands of the Syrians, NOT in the hands of anybody else; and once we eliminate terrorism, we will have no problem, even the conspirator would return and change.
President al-Assad: We take Syria to the destination we want to as Syrian People and not to any other place. The external factor has an effect as it can speed up a certain process or slow it down or divert the direction, but we can correct the direction.  All that is taking place in Syria was never to take place if we had not certain groups: specific groups, but they are influential in pace with the foreign scheme politically or criminally. In the absence of such groups, be sure that a conspiracy led by the entire world against Syria, and in which all the world takes part against Syria is unable to affect the future which we want to draw for ourselves. In short, the fate of Syria is in the hands of the Syrians, NOT in the hands of anybody else; and once we eliminate terrorism, we will have no problem, even the conspirator would return and change.
The Syrians who took part in these events are responsible for encouraging the conspirators to persist in their conspiracies.  This is the truth.  That is why we need to address the internal situation.  The conspiracy is big; but as I said in every speech and every interview, the foundation lies in Syria.  When we get rid of those terrorists and return to search later for the causes behind the presence of such criminality which we did not believe existed in our country, then we will be assured.  This is the responsibility of society and the entire homeland to eliminate terrorists and search for the real causes and deal with them. Then we should be assured; and then Syria will return as we know it before the crisis and I am certainly confident of this thing.
The Syrians who took part in these events are responsible for encouraging the conspirators to persist in their conspiracies.  This is the truth.  That is why we need to address the internal situation.  The conspiracy is big; but as I said in every speech and every interview, the foundation lies in Syria.  When we get rid of those terrorists and return to search later for the causes behind the presence of such criminality which we did not believe existed in our country, then we will be assured.  This is the responsibility of society and the entire homeland to eliminate terrorists and search for the real causes and deal with them. Then we should be assured; and then Syria will return as we know it before the crisis and I am certainly confident of this thing.
Question: On more than one occasion, Your Excellency said that Syria is the mother of all her children; and consequently when the state grants an amnesty for those who have been involved in the events, there are those who say that such amnesties might be granted when the state is strong.  Some people also empty the amnesty of its significance.  The same applies to calls for the armed men to lay down their weapons. Those people say that the state is not in a position which enables it to grant such amnesties.
Question: On more than one occasion, Your Excellency said that Syria is the mother of all her children; and consequently when the state grants an amnesty for those who have been involved in the events, there are those who say that such amnesties might be granted when the state is strong.  Some people also empty the amnesty of its significance.  The same applies to calls for the armed men to lay down their weapons. Those people say that the state is not in a position which enables it to grant such amnesties.
President al-Assad: The answer is implied in the Question. You show mercy when you are strong, not when you are weak.  It is a sign of strength and self-confidence. It is confidence in ourselves and in the people, because the state represents the people and is part of it.  Many people have been misled and misguided. Put aside mistakes: some times, in security work, some people get arrested by mistake and are released individually or collectively.  But there are cases which are identified by law as offences, and which we might show some tolerance towards.  This approach has produced positive results during the past eighteen months. If amnesty achieves positive results, why shouldn’t we pursue it.  Solving the crisis is not only through the elimination of terrorism, or through force. We have to use all possible means including tolerance.  That is why we continue to embrace this policy.
President al-Assad: The answer is implied in the Question. You show mercy when you are strong, not when you are weak.  It is a sign of strength and self-confidence. It is confidence in ourselves and in the people, because the state represents the people and is part of it.  Many people have been misled and misguided. Put aside mistakes: some times, in security work, some people get arrested by mistake and are released individually or collectively.  But there are cases which are identified by law as offences, and which we might show some tolerance towards.  This approach has produced positive results during the past eighteen months. If amnesty achieves positive results, why shouldn’t we pursue it.  Solving the crisis is not only through the elimination of terrorism, or through force. We have to use all possible means including tolerance.  That is why we continue to embrace this policy.
Question: Part of the Syrian people say – and let us put this between quotation marks – that they no longer believe in pan-Arabism.  They say we should put “Syria first” and abandon pan-Arabism after the stances taken by the Arab League and suspending Syria’s membership and the role played by some Arab regimes. Does His Excellency President Bashar al-Assad still believe in pan-Arabism and what is called “Arab action”?
Question: Part of the Syrian people say – and let us put this between quotation marks – that they no longer believe in pan-Arabism.  They say we should put “Syria first” and abandon pan-Arabism after the stances taken by the Arab League and suspending Syria’s membership and the role played by some Arab regimes. Does His Excellency President Bashar al-Assad still believe in pan-Arabism and what is called “Arab action”?
President al-Assad: First, I repeat what I said in one of my speeches, that “Syria first” is self-evident.  Every homeland, every village to which a human being belongs is “first”.  But this does not contradict with what comes second, which is the city, the larger homeland and the Arab world to which we belong.  This talk is reductive and comes as a reaction.  When we say “Syria first”, or that we don’t want to belong to the Arab nation, it means that we are handing the Arab nation over to those conspiring against us.  On the contrary, I say that today I am more committed to pan-Arabism, more convinced of it and more comfortable with it. After more than a decade of working with some – not all – of those Arab officials at different levels – some of them heads of state – I know that they don’t belong to the Arab nation and it doesn’t belong to them. This assures one that the Arab nation is pure despite some people’s endeavours to make it murky with their existence.  As to the Arab league, it is not a standard of a criterion for pan-Arabism.  Pan-Arabism is not an organization, it is a state of civilization.  This region is based on a number of pillars, the biggest among them are pan-Arabism and Islam.  Without both of them as two big bases, the region can never exist in its present form.  Without believing in these two main pillars, we show that we do not believe in something which exists in reality whether we like it or not.  This is a fact.  If you don’t believe in it, you need to change it.  Can we cancel away pan-Arabism?  This is a different issue.
President al-Assad: First, I repeat what I said in one of my speeches, that “Syria first” is self-evident.  Every homeland, every village to which a human being belongs is “first”.  But this does not contradict with what comes second, which is the city, the larger homeland and the Arab world to which we belong.  This talk is reductive and comes as a reaction.  When we say “Syria first”, or that we don’t want to belong to the Arab nation, it means that we are handing the Arab nation over to those conspiring against us.  On the contrary, I say that today I am more committed to pan-Arabism, more convinced of it and more comfortable with it. After more than a decade of working with some – not all – of those Arab officials at different levels – some of them heads of state – I know that they don’t belong to the Arab nation and it doesn’t belong to them. This assures one that the Arab nation is pure despite some people’s endeavours to make it murky with their existence.  As to the Arab league, it is not a standard of a criterion for pan-Arabism.  Pan-Arabism is not an organization, it is a state of civilization.  This region is based on a number of pillars, the biggest among them are pan-Arabism and Islam.  Without both of them as two big bases, the region can never exist in its present form.  Without believing in these two main pillars, we show that we do not believe in something which exists in reality whether we like it or not.  This is a fact.  If you don’t believe in it, you need to change it.  Can we cancel away pan-Arabism?  This is a different issue.
As to the Arab League, let’s be realistic: in the past 10 years, since the outbreak of the Intifada – In the 1990s it only met once, since there was only one Arab summit.  Since the year 2000, what are the achievements of the Arab League in the interest of the Arab nation?  In fact, through my presence in all Arab Summits, Syria had no ambition to achieve anything. Our utmost ambition was to decrease losses. We always knew that there were traps and landmines which we needed to dismantle.  We never believed that in the Arab League there was real work in the interest of the Arab nation. One of his most difficult political activities was to attend an Arab Summit as to dismantle and deter the set-off of traps and mines, citing the lack of a belief in the presence of a genuine work in the League in the interest of the Arab Nation.
As to the Arab League, let’s be realistic: in the past 10 years, since the outbreak of the Intifada – In the 1990s it only met once, since there was only one Arab summit.  Since the year 2000, what are the achievements of the Arab League in the interest of the Arab nation?  In fact, through my presence in all Arab Summits, Syria had no ambition to achieve anything. Our utmost ambition was to decrease losses. We always knew that there were traps and landmines which we needed to dismantle.  We never believed that in the Arab League there was real work in the interest of the Arab nation. One of his most difficult political activities was to attend an Arab Summit as to dismantle and deter the set-off of traps and mines, citing the lack of a belief in the presence of a genuine work in the League in the interest of the Arab Nation.
Question: A number of Foreign media outlets said they want President Assad to appear on TV screens every day to dispel rumors about him.  They wonder where you are: in Lattakia, in Tehran, in Moscow?  Even his wife and children: where are they, inside Syria, outside Syria.  Mr. President, where are you now?
Question: A number of Foreign media outlets said they want President Assad to appear on TV screens every day to dispel rumors about him.  They wonder where you are: in Lattakia, in Tehran, in Moscow?  Even his wife and children: where are they, inside Syria, outside Syria.  Mr. President, where are you now?
President al-Assad: I am with you in the Republican Palace in Damascus.  Anyway, such rumors are not entirely negative, as we do not in most cases respond to the rumors which are like ‘bubbles’ exposing their lies and falsifications, though such rumors might confuse the citizen a little, but they confuse them more and confuse their fighters.  They try to improve the morale of their fighters through such rumors, and by so doing offer illusions to their tools.  This is a good thing and should not annoy us.  This means that these tools will soon fail.  We should not pay heed nor get upset by such rumors.  I am here on the ground, in reality.   They are incapable of making fear creep to my heart or into the hearts of the majority of Syrians. They will never achieve this.
President al-Assad: I am with you in the Republican Palace in Damascus.  Anyway, such rumors are not entirely negative, as we do not in most cases respond to the rumors which are like ‘bubbles’ exposing their lies and falsifications, though such rumors might confuse the citizen a little, but they confuse them more and confuse their fighters.  They try to improve the morale of their fighters through such rumors, and by so doing offer illusions to their tools.  This is a good thing and should not annoy us.  This means that these tools will soon fail.  We should not pay heed nor get upset by such rumors.  I am here on the ground, in reality.   They are incapable of making fear creep to my heart or into the hearts of the majority of Syrians. They will never achieve this.
Question: Thank you very much Mr. President.
Question: Thank you very much Mr. President.
President al-Assad: Thank you, and I want you to pass my best wishes to all the staff of Addounia TV, who are carrying on with their national duty, despite the threats they have received, in order to bring out the truth.
أدلى السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد بحديث لتلفزيون الدنيا بثه أمس حول الأوضاع المحلية والإقليمية أكد فيه أن سورية تخوض معركة إقليمية وعالمية ولا بد من توفر الوقت لحسمها وأن الوضع عمليا هو أفضل ولكن لم يتم الحسم بعد وهذا بحاجة للوقت.
وأوضح الرئيس الأسد أن سورية تدفع الآن ثمن مواقفها المبدئية المرتبطة بالحقوق السورية وموقفها من المقاومة وعلاقاتها مع إيران ومع هذا المحور الذي لا يعجب الغرب مؤكدا أن الحديث عن مناطق عازلة هو غير موجود عملياً وهو أمر غير واقعي حتى بالنسبة للدول التي تلعب دوراً معادياً لسورية.
وفيما يلي النص الكامل للحديث مع تلفزيون الدنيا..
فردا على سؤال حول الوضع في حلب قال الرئيس الأسد.. لا نستطيع أن نفصل الوضع في حلب عن الوضع في سورية الفرق أن حلب ودمشق أكبر مدينتين وأهم مدينتين واحدة العاصمة السياسية والأخرى العاصمة الاقتصادية.. تقييم المواطن العادي للوضع بشكل عام بما فيه حلب يأتي من خلال التصعيد.. عندما يرى تصعيداً يعتبر أن الوضع أسوأ وعندما يرى شيئاً من الهدوء يعتبر أن الوضع أفضل.. الأمور لا تقاس بهذا الشكل.. عندما تكون هناك عمليات عسكرية أو أمنية فقد يكون هناك تصعيد مستمر وفجأة ينتهي بوضع جيد أو بالعكس.. هدوء مستمر ينتهي بتصعيد.
القضية هي معركة إرادات بالدرجة الأولى.. والقوات المسلحة تحقق نجاحات كبيرة
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. في النهاية القضية هي معركة إرادات بالدرجة الأولى.. لديهم إرادة بتدمير البلد.. بدؤوا بدرعا.. انتقلوا إلى حمص ودمشق وحلب ودير الزور واللاذقية.. إلى كل المحافظات.. فهم يجربون الانتقال من مكان لآخر.. الأهمية تختلف باختلاف حجم أو وزن المدينة بالنسبة لسورية ولكن لو أخذنا بالاعتبار حجم المعارك المعقدة التي تخوضها القوات المسلحة.. من الناحية التقنية والتكتيكية والاستراتيجية فهي من أعقد أنواع المعارك ومع ذلك القوات المسلحة تحقق نجاحات كبيرة في هذا المجال.
وقال الرئيس الأسد.. إن الكل يتمنى أن يكون الإنجاز أو الحسم خلال أسابيع أو أيام أو ساعات.. هذا كلام غير منطقي.. نحن نخوض معركة إقليمية وعالمية.. فلا بد من وقت لحسمها لكن أستطيع أن أختصر كل هذا الشرح بجملة أننا نتقدم إلى الأمام والوضع عملياً هو أفضل ولكن لم يتم الحسم بعد وهذا بحاجة لوقت.
موقف الدولة التركية معروف وهي تتحمل مسؤولية مباشرة في الدماء التي سفكت في سورية
وحول موقف سورية من دول الجوار وخاصة بعض الدول التي تسهل وتدرب وتمول وتسلح بكل الأصناف التي يمكن أن تشكل انتهاكاً للدولة السورية أكد الرئيس الأسد أن بعض دول الجوار تقف مع سورية ولكن ربما لا تستطيع تماماً أن تسيطر على تهريب الإمدادات اللوجستية للإرهابيين.. بعض الدول تغض النظر وتنأى بنفسها.. بعض الدول تساهم في هذا الموضوع.. ولكن علينا أن نفرق بين ما نريده نحن كسورية وكشعب سوري وكوطن من هذه الدول.. هل نبحث عن علاقة أو خلاف مع الدولة أم مع الشعب.. على سبيل المثال تركيا.. موقف الدولة التركية معروف.. وهي تتحمل مسؤولية مباشرة في الدماء التي نزفت وسفكت في سورية.. ولكن نحن عندما بدأنا بتطوير العلاقة مع تركيا لم ننظر إلى علاقة مع أشخاص أو حكومة عابرة وإنما نظرنا إلى تاريخ علاقة متوترة مضطربة لنحو تسعة عقود تقريبا.. أردنا أن نمحوها فهل نعود إلى الوراء بسبب جهل بعض المسؤولين الأتراك… أم ننظر إلى العلاقة مع الشعب التركي وخاصة أن هذا الشعب وقف معنا عملياً خلال الأزمة ولم ينجرف على الرغم من الضخ الإعلامي والمادي كي يذهب بالاتجاه المعاكس.
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. علينا أن نفكر أولاً بالشعوب لأن الحكومات عابرة والمشاكل مع الدول هي مشاكل عابرة ويجب ألا ننفعل ونعمل برد الفعل في هذا الموضوع ويجب أن نحافظ على العلاقة مع الشعوب لأن هذه الشعوب هي التي ستقوم عملياً بحمايتنا فالإمداد اللوجستي إن لم يكن هناك احتضان شعبي له يبقى ضعيفاً.
وحول مواقف هذه الشعوب بالنسبة لدولها وانتظار بعض السوريين لتحركاتها مادامت سياسات دولها تسيء لدول الجوار أوضح الرئيس الأسد أن هذا بحاجة لوقت ولا ننسى أن هذه الشعوب نفسها تخوض معارك ضد تلك الحكومات.. معارك سياسية طبعا.. وهذا بحاجة لوقت.. يجب أن نكون موضوعيين لكن علينا أن نحسب الربح والخسارة.. العداء مع الشعوب لن يخفف الإمداد للإرهابيين.. بل على العكس سيجعل هذا الإمداد متاحاً بشكل أكبر.. علينا أن نحسن العلاقة ونساعد هذه الشعوب من خلال طرح الحقائق.. عندما تكتشف هذه الشعوب حقيقة ما يجري في سورية وحقيقة موقف مسؤوليها ستكون أقوى في معركتها السياسية وسيكون عمر هذه الحكومات وهؤلاء المسؤولين قصيراً في العمل السياسي وهذا العمر القصير نستطيع أن نتحمله ونستطيع أن نتأقلم معه ريثما نحسم المعركة في سورية.
وجوابا على سؤال حول وضع حمص ولماذا لم ينته بعد قال الرئيس الأسد.. لا نستطيع أن نفصل وضع حمص عن وضع باقي المحافظات.. أما بالنسبة لتأخر حسم الوضع في المدينة فالمعروف أن القوات المسلحة عندما تخوض معارك داخل المدن عليها أن تأخذ بالاعتبار شيئين.. أولاً الحرص على الأرواح وثانياً الحرص على الممتلكات.. عدا عن ذلك القوات المسلحة إذا أرادت أن تستخدم كل قدراتها العسكرية بما فيها القدرات النارية تستطيع أن تسحق العدو في وقت قصير.. ولكن هذا مرفوض ولا يحقق النتائج المطلوبة.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. هذا النوع من الأعمال بحاجة إلى وقت.. ومن جانب آخر لا ننسى أن هناك إمداداً مستمراً للمسلحين في حمص تحديداً لأنهم كانوا يعتبرون أن حمص هي المركز الذي سينطلق منه الانتصار المأمول بالنسبة لهم.. ويضاف إلى ذلك قربها من الحدود اللبنانية.
الحديث عن مناطق عازلة أولاً غير موجود عمليا.. وثانياً هو أمر غير واقعي حتى بالنسبة للدول التي تلعب دوراً معادياً
وفيما إذا كان ممكنا أن نسميها مناطق عازلة أوضح الرئيس الأسد أن معظم المحافظات السورية حدودية.. دير الزور حدودية.. الحسكة.. الرقة.. حلب.. إدلب.. اللاذقية.. درعا.. السويداء.. حتى حمص جانب منها حدودي مع العراق أيضا.. قد يكون هذا سبباً لاستخدام البعض المناطق العازلة ولكن لا أستطيع أن أحلل نيابة عن المخططين.. هذا الموضوع ليس هاماً بالنسبة لنا.. إذا كانوا يفكرون بمناطق عازلة أم لا.. المنطقة العازلة هي منطقة تتم بموافقة الدولة.. باتفاقيات معينة بين بلدين ونحن كدولة لم نقرر في يوم من الأيام أن نفترض بأن هناك منطقة خارج نطاق السيطرة السورية.. وعندما يريد الجيش الدخول إلى مكان فهو قادر على ذلك.
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. هم اعتبروا أن الكثير من المناطق هي خارج سلطة الدولة ودخل الجيش بسهولة إلى معظم هذه المناطق أي انهم لم يتمكنوا من خلق هذه المنطقة.. ولذلك أعتقد بأن الحديث عن مناطق عازلة أولاً غير موجود عمليا.. وثانياً هو أمر غير واقعي حتى بالنسبة للدول التي تلعب دوراً معادياً.
ورداً على سؤال حول وجود الجيش السوري داخل المدن وليس على جبهة الجولان.. قال الرئيس الأسد.. إن مهمة الجيش والقوات المسلحة في كل دول العالم هي حماية الوطن.. حماية الوطن لا تعني فقط الحماية من الخارج.. بل الحماية من الداخل أيضاً.. أي عدو يأتيك من أي مكان عليك أن تدافع عن وطنك عبر المؤسسات المعنية وفي مقدمتها الجيش والقوات المسلحة.. وفي هذه المرة تحرك العدو من الداخل وليس من الخارج.. وقد تقول لي إنهم سوريون وأقول لك إن أي سوري يقوم بتنفيذ مخطط أجنبي ومعاد يتحول إلى عدو ولا يعود سورياً.. الدليل إذا تجسس سوري حكمه في القانون هو الإعدام.. في الحقيقة من ينفذ مخطط عدو فهو كالعدو.. تحرك العدو من الداخل فتحركت القوات المسلحة.
وفيما اذا كان وجود الجيش في المدن يتنافى مع منطق المقاومة قال الرئيس الأسد.. لا أبدا.. بالعكس .. سورية تتبنى فكر المقاومة.. ولكن الطرح الآخر بأنه إذا كانت سورية تتبنى المقاومة لماذا لا تجري المقاومة باتجاه الجولان ربما يكون هذا هو الطرح الذي تقصده فالمقاومة تنشأ عندما تتخلى الدولة عن مسؤوليتها في استعادة الأرض وهذا شيء لم يحصل في سورية كما حصل في لبنان ربما بسبب الحرب الأهلية في ذلك الوقت وكما حصل في فلسطين حيث لا توجد دولة أساساً لكي تسترد الحقوق فكان لا بد من وجود المقاومة.. عندما نتخلى كعقيدة وكسياسة وكقوات مسلحة عن هدفنا الأساسي في استعادة الأرض ستكون هناك مقاومة سورية.
سورية ليست بحاجة لضوء أخضر في القضايا السيادية
وفيما اذا كانت سورية بحاجة لضوء أخضر حتى تنفذ ما تقوم به الآن على أراضيها قال الرئيس الأسد.. في مختلف المراحل كان يقال إن هناك ضوءاً أخضر فمثلاً عندما دخلت سورية إلى لبنان في 1976 قيل هذا الكلام وتكرر الأمر في مراحل أخرى.. والحقيقة أن سورية ليست بحاجة لضوء أخضر في القضايا السيادية وفي القضايا المحلية وفي القضايا الوطنية لا من أصدقاء ولا من أعداء ولا من خصوم.. إن لم نمتلك نحن الضوء الأخضر فلا داعي لوجودنا كوطن وكدولة.
وحول الحديث عن تحول الحراك في سورية إلى حراك مسلح في شهر رمضان فقط قال الرئيس الأسد.. هذا التفسير غير دقيق لسبب بسيط إذا كانت غير مسلحة فما الذي يفسر أنه في الأسبوع الأول من الاضطرابات والأحداث سقط عدد من الشهداء من قوى الأمن والشرطة.. إذاً كيف سقط هؤلاء… سقطوا بالصراخ.. بالأمواج الصوتية للمتظاهرين.. هذا الكلام غير منطقي والحقيقة أنهم سقطوا بسلاح ولكن نوع التسليح وهدف التسليح كان مختلفاً.. ففي ذلك الوقت كان الهدف الأساسي هو إثارة الشعب من خلال القيام بإطلاق النار على متظاهرين وعلى الأمن والشرطة لكي تقوم الشرطة والأمن بالرد وقتل المزيد من المدنيين وبالتالي انتشار حالة من العداء للدولة.. وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. وبعد فشل هذا المشروع انتقلوا من رمضان الماضي إلى العمل المسلح الذي وصلوا من خلاله إلى مناطق متمردة لا يمكن للدولة أن تدخل إليها كبابا عمرو وغيرها من المناطق وطبعاً تم الدخول إليها فتغير تكتيك المسلحين.. والآن بعد دخول بابا عمرو وسقوط مواقعهم في مختلف المحافظات الأخرى التي اعتبروها مواقع محصنة انتقلوا إلى أسلوب آخر شمل المزيد من الاغتيالات والمزيد من الإرهاب للمواطنين والمزيد من معاقبة المواطنين بقطع الطرق ومنع وصول الطحين للخبز والوقود كالمازوت والكاز والغاز وغيرها من المواد الأساسية اليومية.. في الحقيقة انه منذ الأيام الأولى ظهر المسلحون.. والصور التي بثت في التلفزيون السوري عما حصل في درعا من إطلاق نار من قبل المسلحين والتي قالوا في وقتها إنها مفبركة هي حقيقة.
وبشأن حديث الشارع عن تأخر الدولة في الحسم وتورط الكثيرين الذين اعتقدوا أن الدولة ضعيفة وبالتالي تسلحوا أكثر وغرر بهم أكثر أكد الرئيس الأسد أن الدولة لم تتأخر والدليل أن القوات المسلحة عندما شعرت أن هناك تصعيداً كبيراً في درعا في بدايات الأحداث في الأشهر الأولى دخل الجيش إلى درعا.. لم نتردد لحظة واحدة في الحسم.. ولكن مع كل خطوة كانت تقوم بها الدولة كان هناك تطوير لأسلوب أعمالهم وبالمقابل كانت الدولة بحاجة إلى مزيد من الخطوات المقابلة.. البعض يريد أن نتعامل مع تلك المرحلة كما نتعامل مع المرحلة اليوم وهذا الكلام غير منطقي لأن المرحلة مختلفة وأسلوب عملهم كان مختلفا والوضع السياسي كان مختلفا وحتى التفهم الشعبي لما يحصل كان مختلفا.. كثير من الناس غرر بهم في البدايات.. كانوا يعتقدون أن ما يحصل هو حالة انفعال وموجة ربيع عربي ستؤثر في سورية وأن هؤلاء الشباب منفعلون ولا يوجد مسلحون والدولة تفبرك كل هذه الأشياء التي كنا نسمعها.
من البداية أخذنا قراراً بالحسم لأن الصورة واضحة لكن أسلوب الحسم يختلف باختلاف مراحل الأزمة
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. بالنسبة لنا كدولة فإن عدم وجود تفهم شعبي كان مشكلة.. وما ساعد الدولة في الحسم في الأشهر الأخيرة هو وضوح الصورة بالنسبة للقسم الأكبر من المواطنين السوريين فهناك تغير في الظروف السياسية.. وفي الظروف الأمنية نفسها.. وهناك تغير في المزاج الشعبي تجاه ما يحصل وتجاه المسلحين باكتشافهم أن ما يحصل ليس بثورة ولا هو بربيع بل هو عبارة عن أعمال إرهابية بكل ما للكلمة من معنى.. وتوضح العامل الخارجي الذي لم يكن واضحاً في البداية.. فعندما ألقيت خطابي الأول في مجلس الشعب وتحدثت عن مؤامرة ومواجهة تساءل كثيرون أي مؤامرة وأي مواجهة.. واتهمونا بأننا نقول عن كل شيء بأنه مؤامرة واعتبروا أن ما يحصل حالة انفعالية فقط كما ذكرت سابقاً.. وأنه لو قال الرئيس بضع كلمات طيبة وعاطفية لكانت حلت المشكلة.. قلت لهم المشكلة لم تبدأ بعواطف ولن تنتهي بعواطف.. هناك مخطط وهناك أدوات داخلية.. فإذاً نحن من البداية أخذنا قراراً بالحسم لأن الصورة واضحة لكن أسلوب الحسم يختلف باختلاف مراحل الأزمة.
وجوابا على سؤال حول بعض الشخصيات التي مارست الفساد في هذه الفترة واستغلالهم للأزمة والمساهمة في زيادتها قال الرئيس الأسد أريد أن أفرق بين تجار الأزمة الذين يظهرون في كل أزمة من الأزمات في أي وطن سواء كانوا تجارا بالمعنى الاقتصادي أو المادي أو أشخاصاً آخرين يريدون استغلال الأزمة لمصالح أخرى خاصة وقد يكونون داخل الدولة أو خارجها.. ومن جانب آخر الأخطاء التي تحصل خلال الأزمة وليس لها علاقة بإطالة أمد الأزمة.. هناك أخطاء حصلت.. هناك اعتداءات حصلت.. هناك انتهاكات.. سرقات.. تم كشف البعض منها ولكن بعدد محدود وتم تحويل هؤلاء إلى القضاء منذ أشهر عديدة.. فلا بد من محاسبة كل شخص ارتكب خطأ أو كل شخص أراد أن يطيل الأزمة لأسباب مختلفة.. هذا الموضوع محسوم وليس محل نقاش أو جدل.. ولكن السؤال كيف تعرف هؤلاء.. أنت تحاسب معلوماً ولا تحاسب مجهولاً ومعظم الدعاوى التي ترفع والشكاوى التي تأتي هي ضد مجهول.. وفي الحالات التي تمت فيها معرفة الأشخاص ومحاسبتهم أتى صاحب المظلمة بالاسم وتم التدقيق والتحقيق وثبتت الجنحة أو الجناية وتم تحويله إلى القضاء.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. إن التحدي الأساسي هو كيف نعرف من هم الأشخاص وخاصة انه في ظروف الأعمال الأمنية وفي ظروف الفوضى تصبح عملية التحقيق أصعب من قبل.. أما كمبدأ فلا شك أنه لا بد من محاسبة هؤلاء الأشخاص حتى لو بعد تجاوز هذه الظروف وعودة الهدوء.
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. عندما لا يوجد لديك دليل بل مؤشرات غير دامغة يمكن أن تقيل هذا الشخص لعدم ثقتك بأدائه.. ولكن عندما يكون لديك دليل دامغ بأن هذا الشخص قام بعمل ما فلا بد من تحويله مباشرة إلى القضاء وبأي موقعٍ كان.
ورداً على من يقول بوجود خلل في آلية التعيين وتعيين بعض الأشخاص غير المؤهلين قال الرئيس الأسد.. هناك جانب موضوعي في هذا الطرح وهناك جانب غير موضوعي.. الجانب الموضوعي هو أنه لا يوجد لدينا في سورية حتى الآن إدارة موارد بشرية بالمعنى العلمي وهذا علم قائم بحد ذاته وهذا ما نقوم به الآن من خلال وضع اللمسات الأخيرة على مشروع له علاقة بالوظيفة العامة.. وهو الذي يقيم هذا الشخص منذ دخوله إلى الدولة وحتى خروجه منها بمسار كامل يحدد تطور عمله.. فقد يأتيك شخص جيد ويكون التقييم صحيحاً ولكن بعد فترة ينحرف.. فآلية الدخول بحد ذاتها ليست كافية.. أما أن نقول إن هذا الشخص أتى ولم يثبت أنه جيد في الآلية الحالية في غياب وجود إدارة موارد بشرية فليس أمامك سوى أن تجرب فأنت لا تعرف أن هذا الشخص سيفشل.. لا بد من التجربة كي تعرف أنه سيفشل.. وبما أنه فشل وأنت قادر على تبديله فأين المشكلة.. طبعاً هذا يستهلك وقتاً ولكن ليس لديك خيارات أخرى.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. هناك حالات يكون فيها الشخص ناجحاً في مكان ونحن نفترض بأن نجاحه في هذا المكان سيؤدي إلى نجاحه في مكان آخر لنكتشف بأن هذا غير صحيح بعد التجربة.. في الحقيقة بغياب الموارد البشرية بالشكل العلمي لا يوجد لديك خيار سوى أن تجرب والمهم في هذه الحالة ألا نسكت عن شخص يخطىء أو يفشل.. وألا نبقيه في مكانه.. بالمقابل هناك شخص يفشل في مكان ليس لأنه سيىء ولكن لأن هذا المكان لا يناسبه.. عندما تنقله إلى مكان آخر قد ينجح فيه.
وقال الرئيس الأسد جوابا على سؤال حول كيف يمكن أن يكون للإعلام الدور الأكبر في الرقابة على الأداء الحكومي.. لا بد من مراقبة المسؤولين مراقبة من الأعلى.. ومراقبة من الأسفل أي من القاعدة الشعبية.. إلا أن المطالبة حتى الآن هي بمراقبة المسؤولين من الأعلى فقط.. وهذه الحالة غير كافية.. قد تكون كافية بمستويات معينة من المسؤولية.. وزير.. مدير مركزي.. وما شابه ذلك.. ولكن هناك مستويات دنيا كالموظفين بحاجة إلى رقابة شعبية يلعب فيها الإعلام دوراً أساسياً.. وحاول الإعلام في مراحل مختلفة أن يلعب هذا الدور.. لكن هذا لا يكون فقط من خلال مقالات تشير إلى قضايا عامة.. فدور الإعلام هو أن يقوم بتحضير حالة كاملة كما يحصل في الدول المتطورة في هذا المجال.. يقدم الإعلامي حالة متكاملة فيها الأدلة.. في هذه الحالة لا يكون هناك من خيار أمام المسؤولين سوى تحويل هذه الحالة كما هي إلى التحقيق ولاحقاً إلى القضاء.. هذا ما ينقص الإعلام.. طبعاً لكي ينجح الإعلام في هذا الموضوع نحن بحاجة أيضاً إلى مزيد من الشفافية من قبل الدولة.. فالمتضرر سيحاول أن يغلق كل الأبواب بوجه الإعلام ولكن على الإعلام أن يبقى ملحاً ومصمماً في هذا الإطار.. طبعاً بالنسبة لدور رئيس الجمهورية فهو مسؤول عن كل الدولة.. لا يستطيع أن يتهرب أو أن يقول أنا لست مسؤولاً عن جانب معين من الدولة إلا أن هناك واقعاً معيناً لا يمكن فيه لأي شخص أن يرى كل زوايا الوطن.
وبشأن التأكيد على المؤسساتية وضرورة أن يأخذ كل مفصل دوره الحقيقي قال الرئيس الأسد.. تماما.. طالما أن المؤسسات لم تنضج سيبقى دور أي مسؤول بما فيه دور رئيس الجمهورية دوراً قاصراً.. رئيس الجمهورية يشرف بشكل عام على سياسات المؤسسات ويتدخل في بعض الحالات لكننا هنا نتعامل مع آلاف الحالات يومياً.. قضايا لها علاقة بالمواطنين لا يمكن متابعتها يومياً إلا إذا كانت هناك حالة مؤسساتية أو حالات مشاركة مع المواطنين في إدارة شؤون الدولة.
وحول وجود آلية تتيح دورا أكبر للإعلام والسماح له بالتدخل أكثر بشؤون قد تكون رقابية قال الرئيس الأسد.. هي أكثر من قضية سماح أو عدمه.. بالنسبة لي كمسؤول عندما تقوم أنت بواجبك فأنا أنجح.. ودوركم هو نجاح لي ومن مصلحتي الشخصية أن ينجح الإعلام في هذا الموضوع.. وفي ذلك مصلحة وطنية أيضاً حيث ينجح الوطن وتنجح المؤسسات وينجح المواطن ويرتاح.. في هذه الأمور كلنا نربح عندما تقوم بدورك.. إن قيام الإعلام بدوره ليس قضية سماح أم لا.. بل هي قضية أن تعرف تماماً كيف تلعب الدور بشكل موضوعي.. وألا يستغل الإعلام هذه الحالة أو هذا الدور لمصالح شخصية.. فالإعلام في النهاية هو سلطة من السلطات وأي صاحب سلطة قادر على استغلال السلطة لمصلحة خاصة.. وهذا يعتمد على أخلاقيات المهنة بالدرجة الأولى.
الإعلام السوري تمكن من فضحهم وضرب امبراطوريات إعلامية حقيقية
وحول ما اذا كان الإعلام حصل على ضوء أخضر إذا كان الموضوع في الاطار الرقابي وفي إطار خدمة الوطن قال الرئيس الأسد.. تماما.. لكن بتجاوز الدور التثقيفي والدخول بالدور التحقيقي وأن يكون دور الإعلام هو التحقيق في الحالة وإيجاد الأدلة إضافة إلى طرح الحلول وبالتالي مساعدة القضاء والجهات التي تقوم بالتحقيق.. وبنفس الوقت طرح حلول على المسؤولين نستطيع أن نستفيد منها في قراراتنا مستقبلاً.
وردا على سؤال حول استهداف الإعلام في سورية سياسيا ودمويا من الخارج وحجب بعض القنوات السورية عن الأقمار الاصطناعية وتفجير بعض مقراته وخطف الصحفيين وأين يمكن وضع الإعلام السوري في هذا السياق قال الرئيس الأسد.. الجواب متضمن في السؤال وينقلنا إلى نقطة مهمة بأنه علينا أن نتوقف عن جلد الذات.. فرغم وجود تقصير في كل المجالات بما فيها الإعلام.. وكنا نتمنى أن تكون الأمور أفضل.. لكن لو كانت هذه الأداة فاشلة كما يدعي البعض لما كانت استهدفت.. لو كانت سيئة وضارة وفاشلة لكانوا قدموا لكم كإعلام وطني سواء كان عاما أو خاصا أقنية فضائية مجاناً.. هذا ما يؤكد أن الإعلام السوري تمكن من فضحهم وضرب امبراطوريات إعلامية حقيقية يقف خلفها ليس المال فقط وإنما القرار السياسي في العواصم الكبرى في العالم.. فهذا في حد ذاته دليل نجاح للإعلام السوري.. طبعاً نستطيع أن نكون أقوى وأكثر نجاحاً.. وهذا شيء طبيعي.. لم نصل إلى طموحنا ولم تصلوا إلى طموحكم كإعلام وهذه مسيرة الحياة ولكن لمن يقول إن الإعلام فاشل نقول هذا هو الجواب.
من يفر إما أن يكون إنساناً قدم له المال وخرج فهو فاسد ومرتش.. أو شخصاً جباناً هدد من قبل إرهابيين أو جهات أخرى
وبشأن موضوع الانشقاقات وانشغال المجتمع السوري بها وقول البعض إنه لو لم ير هؤلاء المنشقون في مستقبل سورية ما هو مظلم لما انشقوا قال الرئيس الأسد.. بغض النظر عن الأسماء ولنفترض بأن المستقبل مظلم هل هذا مبرر لكي أترك الوطن… ما هذا الطرح القاصر.. إنه اتهام باللاوطنية.. لكن لندقق في المصطلح.. أولاً.. يتحدثون عن انشقاقات.. والانشقاق هو انشقاق مؤسسة عن مؤسسة أكبر منها ترأسها أو انشقاق جزء من مؤسسة عن المؤسسة الأم التي تتبع لها وعلى رأس هذه المؤسسة شخص أو أشخاص يقومون بالتمرد على المستوى الأعلى أو على الجزء الأم من هذه المؤسسات.. هذا الشيء لم يحصل.. وما حصل أن أشخاصاً كانوا موجودين في مواقع فروا خارج البلد وهي عملية فرار وهروب وليست عملية انشقاق.. الانشقاق يكون داخلياً وليس خارجيا.. يكون تمرداً على الدولة داخل البلد.. وهذا الشيء لم يحصل.. إذاً هي عمليات فرار خارج الدولة.. ومن يفر إما أن يكون إنساناً قدم له المال وخرج فهو فاسد ومرتش.. أو شخصاً جباناً هدد من قبل إرهابيين أو جهات أخرى أو كما تقول لم يكن لديه أمل بمستقبل مشرق فخاف من هذا المستقبل وهرب إلى الخارج.. أو شخصا لديه طموح ويعتقد بأنه كان يجب أن يحصل على مكاسب أو مزايا أو مراتب معينة فلم يحصل عليها فقرر الهروب.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. طبعاً هناك أسباب أخرى.. بالمحصلة من يهرب عملياً فهو إما شخص ضعيف أو سيىء.. لأن الشخص الوطني والجيد لا يهرب ولا يفر خارج الوطن.. عملياً هذه العملية هي عملية إيجابية وعملية تنظيف ذاتية للدولة أولاً وللوطن بشكل عام.. فعلينا ألا ننزعج من هذه العملية لأنها إيجابية.. كثير من الأشخاص لم نكن نعرف بأنهم بهذه المواصفات.. هم كشفوا عن حقيقتهم بأنفسهم.. وهذا الشيء إيجابي.
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. ان أكثر من شخص طرح سابقاً بأنه يريد أن يفر خارج سورية.. ماذا فعلنا.. قلنا لمن طرح ذلك لنسهل له ودعوه يذهب.. هي عملية إيجابية.. طبعاً لم نكن متأكدين من كل الحالات.. وبالمقابل في بعض الحالات كانت نسبة التأكد عالية ومع ذلك لم نمانع.. ورغم أن كثيراً من الأشخاص طرح سابقاً ومؤخراً بأنهم سيفرون خارج سورية تحت عنوان الانشقاق.. هل سمعت بأن الدولة قامت باعتقال أحد من هؤلاء… طبعاً لا لأننا ننظر إليها نظرة إيجابية.
الشعب السوري لا يحترم من يهرب
وأوضح الرئيس الأسد أنه في بعض الحالات لدينا معلومات وشكوك عالية.. لا نقول دراية كاملة.. ولكن كان السؤال من المؤسسات المعنية ماذا نفعل.. كيف نتصرف.. هل نمنع… وكان هناك توجه باتجاه المنع لكننا قلنا لهم لا.. المنع ليس صحيحاً.. خروج هؤلاء هو الشيء الصحيح.. أولاً يكشفون أمام المواطن السوري.. ثانياً كل شخص يخرج من الوطن انتهى.. إذا كان لديه طموح سياسي أو هدف سياسي فقد انتهى.. لسبب بسيط وهو أن الشعب السوري لا يحترم من يهرب.. والشعب السوري لا يقاد بالتحكم عن بعد بأجهزة اللاسلكي ولا يستطيعون أن يقودوه من الخارج.. هذا الموضوع محسوم تاريخياً لذلك أنا أستطيع أن أقول انه إذا كان هناك مواطن سوري يعرف أن هناك شخصاً متردداً من هؤلاء ولديه الرغبة بالهروب فليشجعه.
وبشأن توقع المزيد من الفرار في إطار الحملة الكبيرة التي تستهدف سورية ووجود مشكلة بهذا الموضوع قال الرئيس الأسد.. إذا كان الفرار لهذا النوع من الأشخاص فهو حالة إيجابية.. ومن الطبيعي أن يظهر هذا النوع من الأشخاص في الأزمات على الواجهة وهذا شيء إيجابي علينا أن نتوقعه وأن نتفاءل بظهوره لا أن نتشاءم.
ندفع ثمن مواقف مختلفة البعض منها متعلق بالسياسات المبدئية المرتبطة بالحقوق السورية وموقفنا من المقاومة
وأكد الرئيس الأسد ردا على سؤال لماذا تستهدف سورية بكل هذا الكم الهائل من الوسائل والسبل المتاحة سياسيا وغير سياسيا وأخلاقيا وغير أخلاقيا.. هذا تاريخ سورية.. فالصراع كان على سورية حتى عندما كنا جزءاً من الامبراطورية العثمانية.. لأن منطقة بلاد الشام منطقة استراتيجية.. وبعد الاستقلال والجلاء الفرنسي كل الانقلابات كانت انقلابات ممولة من الخارج تهدف للسيطرة على سورية وعلى السياسة السورية وجرها باتجاه المحاور التي كانت موجودة في ذلك الوقت حتى بدأت سورية بانتهاج سياسة مستقلة.. عملياً بعد ثورة الثامن من آذار وتكرست بعد الحركة التصحيحية.. فأصبح الهجوم على سورية أكثر شدة وتصميماً من قبل.. الآن نحن ندفع ثمن مواقف مختلفة البعض منها متعلق بالسياسات المبدئية المرتبطة بالحقوق السورية وموقفنا من المقاومة وعلاقتنا مع إيران أي مع هذا المحور الذي لا يعجب الغرب.. ومنها يرتبط بمواقفنا الأخيرة.. فكثير من الناس لا ينتبه الى أن موقفنا من القصف على ليبيا كان موقفاً وحيداً في الجامعة العربية ضد حظر الطيران ولم يكن الامتناع عن التصويت لأننا كنا نفهم تماماً أن حظر الطيران يعني بدء عدوان على ليبيا وهذا ما تم.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. نحن ندفع ثمن هذه المواقف وثمن انفتاح الغرب علينا في الأعوام 2008-2009-2010 والتي أخطأ البعض واعتقد أنها مرحلة انفتاح حقيقي بينما كانت مرحلة يهدفون من خلالها لتغيير أسلوب التعامل مع سورية بالرضا.. والوصول إلى الأهداف المطلوبة والتآمر على المقاومة وخاصة في لبنان وضرب العلاقة بين سورية وإيران التي تقف معنا ومع الحق العربي.. وعندما فشلوا في تلك المرحلة كان عنوان الربيع العربي هو المبرر الجديد لهم أمام شعوبهم للتآمر مرة أخرى على سورية.. لكل هذه الأسباب نحن ندفع الثمن.
الغرب يريد أن يحتكر المعرفة ويمنعها عن العالم الثالث
وحول امتناع سورية عن تنفيذ أشياء طلبت منها خلال فترة الانفتاح والترغيب التي مورست من 2008 وحتى 2010 وحصول تحول في الأسلوب والوسائل قال الرئيس الأسد.. نعم طلب بشكل واضح ومستمر أن نبتعد عن إيران.. وكان جوابنا واضحاً طالما أن إيران تقف معنا وتدعمنا وتقف مع حقوقنا من دون تردد وحتى من دون أن تناقشنا في قناعاتها لمجرد أنه حق سوري أو رأي سوري فكيف نبتعد عنها.. من الناحية المبدئية أن ترفض أو تنقلب على جهة أو بلد وفي لك.. هذا كلام غير مقبول.. ومن الناحية المصلحية بلد قلب السفارة الاسرائيلية إلى سفارة فلسطينية ووقف مع الحق الفلسطيني.. ونحن كدول عربية لا نتحدث سوى بالحق الفلسطيني.. نأتي وننقلب على هذا البلد.
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. إن المحاولات التي كانت تتم في ذلك الوقت مرتبطة أيضاً بالتآمر على الموضوع النووي الإيراني بالرغم من أننا لسنا جزءاً من هذا الملف.. وإيران لم تطلب المساعدة في هذا الموضوع.. فالموضوع مطروح على الساحة الدولية وليس على الساحة الإقليمية.. وكان المطلوب من سورية أن تقنع إيران بأشياء ضد مصلحتها.. نحن نظرنا إلى هذا الموضوع كموضوع يتعلق بمصلحتنا المستقبلية وأمننا الوطني في المستقبل لأن ما ينطبق على إيران كدولة تسعى للحصول على الطاقة النووية السلمية ينطبق علينا في المستقبل.. وخاصة أن هذه الطاقة أساسية في المستقبل.. والغرب يريد أن يحتكر المعرفة ويمنعها عن العالم الثالث أو العالم النامي.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. هناك جانب آخر يتعلق بالمقاومة.. كان المطلوب أن نتآمر على المقاومة في فلسطين.. وعلى المقاومة في لبنان من خلال بعض الإجراءات التي ربما تحصل في لبنان لتحجيم المقاومة فرفضنا كل هذه الأشياء.. هم كانوا يعتمدون على مبدأ الانفتاح والزيارات المتكررة والتطبيل بالإعلام الغربي لسورية التي كان رئيسها قبل سنوات مجرماً بحسب إعلامهم في عام 2005 بعد قضية الحريري.. وفجأة تحول إلى صانع سلام.. هذا يعطيك صورة عن النفاق الغربي.. وعندما فشلوا بهذه المرحلة كان الربيع العربي هو الفرصة للانتهاء من السياسة السورية.
علينا أن نعيد صياغة اقتصادنا بما يتناسب مع الظرف الجديد
وحول كيفية تدارك سورية العقوبات التي استهدفت الشعب السوري وإشاعة البعض بأنه عن طريق الضغط الاقتصادي تنهار سورية اقتصادياً وفيما اذا كانوا من خلال العقوبات قد يحققون غاياتهم السياسية قال الرئيس الأسد.. هذا النوع من العقوبات سيؤثر على سورية بلا شك.. ولكنه سيؤثر بنسب معينة وتعتمد هذه النسب على كيفية تأقلمنا مع هذه الظروف.. انظر إلى إيران فهي تتقدم إلى الأمام في ظل عقوبات قاسية عمرها عقود من الزمن.. فنحن شعب نمتلك الذكاء عبر التاريخ.. لدينا قدرة عالية على التأقلم.. عشنا الأزمات عبر تاريخنا.. الفترات التي كانت فترات هدوء هي فترات محدودة في التاريخ السوري.. لا شك بأنه لدينا القدرة على التأقلم معها وخاصة أننا بلد منتج.. نحن لسنا بلداً مستورداً بالدرجة الأولى.. نحن بلد منتج من الزراعة إلى الحرف إلى الصناعات الصغرى ولكن علينا أن نعيد صياغة اقتصادنا بما يتناسب مع هذا الظرف الجديد.. في هذه الحالة نستطيع أن نحقق مكاسب.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. الصناعة السورية تطورت في ظل حصار الثمانينيات.. ففي ذلك الوقت لم يكن لدينا حتى المواد الأساسية.. كان الظرف أصعب من هذه المرحلة ولم يكن لدينا حد أدنى من الاحتياطي في مصارفنا ومع ذلك تمكنا من تطوير الصناعة.. اليوم لدينا إمكانيات أكبر هي بحاجة للقليل من التفكير وبعض الخطط العملية على الأرض وليس التنظير.. أعتقد بأننا سنستفيد وستظهر هذه النتائج بعد الأزمة بالاعتماد أكثر على الذات والابتعاد عن بعض العادات الاستهلاكية غير الضرورية التي اعتدناها ربما بسبب سنوات من الرخاء.. فنحن لدينا القدرة على البقاء والتطوير والمهم أن نحدد ما هي الصيغة الأفضل بالنسبة لاقتصادنا.
وبخصوص كيفية تعامل الدولة مع موضوع الدعوة للحوار منذ المؤتمر الذي عقد العام الماضي قال الرئيس الأسد.. هذه قصة طويلة جداً بالرغم من أن المدة الزمنية هي عام ونصف العام ولكنها غنية جداً وكثير من الناس لا يعرفون ما هي الأشياء التي كانت تحصل وما هي حقيقة موضوع الحوار وما هو موقف الدولة وما هو موقف المعارضة.
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. في بداية الأزمة طلبنا أن نتحاور مع كل القوى والشخصيات حتى الهاوية منها للسياسة.. وتجاوزنا القوى السياسية وصولاً لشخصيات ثقافية واجتماعية وغيرها.. واعتبرنا أن القضية ليست قضية سياسية وإنما قضية وطنية فكل إنسان في سورية معني بحل هذه الأزمة.. وطرح في ذلك الوقت موضوع الحوار على كل المستويات من قبل الجهات المختلفة ومن الدول التي أتت لكي تنصحنا.. عن حسن نية أو عن سوء نية.. ونفس الشيء من قبل القوى الموجودة في سورية التي أرادت أن تستغل الأزمة.. أو البعض منها الذي أراد أن يأخذ موقعاً وطنياً حقيقياً.. فقلنا إن فكرة الحوار جيدة وبدأنا نعمل من أجلها.. وهنا بدأ الفرز وخاصة بالنسبة لقوى المعارضة.. هناك معارضة وطنية أرادت أن تضع كل مصالحها ورؤاها التي نختلف حولها جانباً وأن تضع مصلحة الوطن أولاً وسارت في موضوع الحوار ولاحقاً سارت في العملية السياسية.. البعض منها دخل الانتخابات.. البعض منها شارك في مجلس الشعب والبعض شارك في الحكومة.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. بالمقابل كان هناك المعارضة اللاوطنية التي لم نتحدث عنها سابقاً بشكل مباشر.. من دون أن أحدد من هي هذه المعارضة وسيكتشف الشعب من هي في يوم من الأيام ولكن يجب أن نحدد بدقة ما الذي حصل.. هذه المعارضة طرحت في البداية عملية الإصلاح.. إصلاح القوانين أو تغيير القوانين أو تعديلها وتعديل الدستور.. كانت تعتقد بأننا سنرفض هذا المنطق.. طبعاً هذا ما كانت تطرحه بشكل معلن.. وبنفس الوقت كانت تساومنا بالأقنية المخفية حول أنها لا تهتم بكل ذلك وأن هذا الكلام فقط للاستهلاك الإعلامي أو للاستهلاك الشعبي وإنما هي تريد أن تشارك في الحكومة.
نحن لا نقبل الابتزاز.. الأساس في التعامل مع أي جهة هو التعامل الأخلاقي والمبدئي
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. نحن قلنا من ناحية المبدأ لا يوجد لدينا مشكلة بموضوع المشاركة في الحكومة.. فالحكومة ليست محصورة بجهة.. الحكومة هي لكل الشعب ونحن أساساً دائماً نشرك مستقلين.. فلتأت قوى أخرى وتشارك.. لا يهم.. ولكن نحن لا نقبل الابتزاز.. الأساس في التعامل مع أي جهة هو التعامل الأخلاقي والمبدئي.. وصلنا إلى الحوار وكانت هذه القوى تدعو إلى الحوار.. فوجئنا خلال الحوار بأنها رفضت المجيء.. وأؤكد بأنني أتحدث عن جزء من المعارضة.. لماذا رفضت هذه القوى المجيء للمشاركة بالحوار… لأنها قبل الحوار طرحت أن يكون الحوار فقط حصرياً بين الدولة وبين هذه المجموعات.. أن نجلس على طاولة وألا تكون هناك جهات أخرى.. لسبب بسيط وهو أنهم أرادوا الظهور كمدافعين عن الشعب وممثلين عنه.. وأننا نحن ضد الشعب.. هم لا توجد لديهم قاعدة فحاولوا أن يحققوا موقعاً سياسياً لهم بشكل انتهازي لكي يفاوضوا الدولة.. فرفضنا هذا الكلام وقمنا بدعوة مختلف القوى وكان هناك في الحوار أكثر من مئة شخصية.. لا أذكر العدد بدقة.. تمثل كل الأطياف المختلفة في سورية.. هذا جانب من الجوانب.. هناك جانب آخر أن بعض هذه القوى كان على تواصل مستمر مع السفارات الغربية التي كانت تعمل بنشاط في سورية في ذلك الوقت.. فقيل لهم لا تذهبوا إلى الحوار لأن عمر هذه الدولة أو ما يسمى بين قوسين النظام وهذه كلمة مرفوضة عمر هذه الدولة بضعة أسابيع أو بضعة أشهر.. لا تحاوروا جهة ساقطة.. هناك جهات أخرى منهم ذهبت إلى مصر وقبضت أموالاً من الجهات الخليجية المعنية في الجامعة العربية أو عبر مسؤولين في الجامعة العربية لكي لا تذهب إلى الحوار.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. هناك سبب آخر فهم طرحوا موضوع الإصلاح.. وأنا التقيت بمجموعات من هؤلاء وتحدثوا معي عن الدستور والمادة الثامنة والقوانين.. وقبل الحوار بنحو شهر أو أقل ألقيت خطاباً في جامعة دمشق وأعلنت فيه عن الإصلاح.. بالنسبة لهم كان المطلوب من هذا الحوار أن يطرحوا هم الإصلاح من خلاله ويضعونا أمام خيارين.. إذا قبلنا فسيقولون للشعب إننا نحن من أتينا لكم بالإصلاح من خلال المفاوضات مع الدولة.. وإذا رفضنا فسيقولون إن هذه الدولة ضد الإصلاح.. فلنحاربها وبالتالي يقومون بالاستئثار بهذه القاعدة الشعبية كمدافعين عن حقوق الشعب.. الأمور كانت واضحة بالنسبة لنا.. فهي مجموعات انتهازية في جزء كبير منها وقد أهملناها جانباً.. وانتقلنا بعد الحوار إلى مرحلة ثانية.
وقال الرئيس الأسد.. هم استمروا في موقفهم من خلال الرهان على السفارات والقوى الخليجية الموجودة في الجامعة العربية والتواصل معها حتى فقدوا الأمل لاحقاً.. فسمعنا مؤخراً بأنهم بدؤوا يتحدثون عن الحوار.. لنضع كل هذه الانتهازية جانباً ولنفترض حسن النية ولنقل أن تأتي متأخراً أفضل من ألا تأتي أبداً.. لكن إذا أردت أن تأتي متأخراً فعليك أن تأتي صادقاً.. لا أن تأتي مرة أخرى بشكل انتهازي وتركب موجة ترى بأن هذه السفينة لم تغرق وبالتالي فلنؤمن لأنفسنا موقعاً فيها.. أنت تتحدث الآن عن رفض العنف ورفض التسلح من كل الأطراف.. وهذا الكلام الذي يجتره البعض من وقت إلى آخر.. إذا كنت قد اعترفت بالسلاح وبالتسليح لماذا كنت ترفضه منذ عام.. هل ستأتي وتقول بكل وضوح بأنك كنت على خطأ أو بالحد الأقصى أنك كنت تكذب على الشعب.. لا نتوقع منه الثانية.. على الأقل الأولى.. ليقل بأنه لم يكن يعرف.. ليقل أنه أخطأ في التقدير ليقل أي شيء.. أما أن يأتي وكأن شيئاً ما لم يحصل فإن هذا الكلام مرفوض.. هذه انتهازية لا نقبلها.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. عندما يعتقد هؤلاء بأنهم لم يجدوا لأنفسهم موقعاً في السفينة الأخرى وأن السفينة الأخرى هي التي غرقت من خلال المجالس في الخارج ومن خلال اكتشاف الخارج لها بأن هذه المعارضة الانتهازية ليس لها موقع حقيقي في سورية.. ليس لها دور.. من خلال رهانهم على العمل العسكري المسلح الإرهابي وفشل هذا العمل المسلح الإرهابي في سورية مؤخراً في تحقيق نتائج حقيقية.. وبالعكس هو تراجع وتقلص وتقهقر.. عندها بدؤوا يتحولون وهذا الكلام غير مقبول بالنسبة لنا.. هذا من جانب ومن جانب آخر هناك مبادرات أخرى تظهر.
سياستنا مبدئية وما قلناه في بداية الأزمة نقوله اليوم
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد إننا نرفض التعامل بانتهازية وسياستنا مبدئية وما قلناه في بداية الأزمة نقوله اليوم.. لم نغير موقفنا نهائياً تجاه الأحداث وكل الظروف التي أحاطت بها.. فنحن نقول ان تعاملنا مع المبادرات أيضاً ينطلق من.. من هي الجهة التي تطرح المبادرة.. ما هي الأدوات التي تمتلكها.. ما هو وزنها داخل سورية.. إذا كانت دولاً.. كما يحصل الآن حيث نسمع عن مبادرة ستقوم بها إيران وأيدنا هذه المبادرة.. أولاً لدور إيران في المنطقة ولأهمية إيران ومبدئيتها وغيرها من الأسباب.. وأنها ستكون مع مجموعة دول أخرى ليس بالضرورة أن تكون بنفس المبدئية وبنفس الوزن ولكن تستطيع أن تلعب دوراً بشكل أو بآخر.
وقال الرئيس الأسد.. نحن نسأل كل جهة تقوم بمبادرة ما هو وزن هذه الجهة.. أتتنا مبادرات كثيرة من جهات مختلفة.. البعض منها يأتي من جمعيات أجنبية كالتي رعت مبادرة روما الأخيرة.. وأنا أستغرب أن ترعى جمعيات أجنبية مبادرة سورية وبأشخاص سوريين.. هذا شيء معيب بالنسبة لنا على المستوى الوطني.. وقد أهملنا الكثير من هذه المبادرات التي لا قيمة ولا وزن لها.. فالأزمة ليست مكاناً لكي يبحث بعض الأشخاص عن مواقع عبرها.. فهذا جزء من تجارة الأزمة.
هناك ارتباط وثيق بين سياسات الدولة وعقيدة الشعب
وحول بقاء سورية قوية وصامدة أمام كل ما تعرضت له حتى الآن قال الرئيس الأسد.. أولاً البعض أخطأ باعتقاده أن السفينة هي سفينة دولة أو مرة أخرى بين قوسين نظام ولكن السفينة هي كل الوطن.. إما أن تغرق سورية أو تنجو سورية.. يجب أن نكون واضحين حول هذه النقطة.. لا يمكن أن تغرق هذه الدولة ويبقى الوطن لسبب بسيط.. وهو أنه على الرغم من الأخطاء الكثيرة الموجودة فهناك ارتباط وثيق بين سياسات هذه الدولة وعقيدة هذا الشعب.. ولكن لو قلنا من الذي جعل هذا البلد يصمد.. الحقيقة هو الشعب بشكل عام.. والشعب بقاعدته العريضة وليس بنخبه.. لكي أكون واضحاً للتاريخ.. القاعدة العريضة التي ربما لا تهتم عادة بالسياسة.
وفيما اذا كان يشمل ذلك عامة الشعب قال الرئيس الأسد.. نعم.. عامة الشعب.. الذي ربما لا يهتم بالسياسة.. ربما لا يحمل شهادات.. لا يعيش هذه الأجواء ولكن لديه إحساس فطري عميق بحقيقة الأزمة.. بمضمونها.. بجوهرها.. ليست المرة الأولى التي أكتشف فيها هذا الشيء أو التي أرى فيها هذا المشهد.. رأيناه في عام 2003 بعد حرب العراق ونتائجها عندما تنطح البعض لانتقاد الموقف السوري بسبب عناده لدول كبرى ووقوفه مع العراق في ذلك الوقت.. وظهر بشكل أوضح بعد العام 2005 عندما تآمر علينا الغرب على خلفية اغتيال الحريري في لبنان والآن نراها بشكل أوضح.. فهي الصورة نفسها.. هذه القاعدة العريضة من الشعب هي التي تحمي البلد وليس النخب.. لكي نكون واضحين سواء أرضى هذا الكلام البعض أو أغضبه.. ولا شك أن أهم فئة من هذا الشعب التي جعلت هذا البلد يصمد.. هي القوات المسلحة.. هذا الجيش والقوات المسلحة بأمنها وشرطتها يقومون بأعمال بطولية بكل ما تعني الكلمة من معنى.. لديهم استعداد للتضحية كنا نسمع عنها سابقاً وكنا نعتقد بأنها حالات فردية.. وهي موجودة في أي جيش في العالم.. حالات فردية من البطولة.. ولكن المفاجئ هو الحالة الجماعية والحالة العامة من الاستعداد للتضحية والتي رأينا حالات منها مباشرة وبالنقل الحي على تلفزيون الدنيا والتلفزيون السوري خلال المعارك التي أظهرت مدى الشجاعة والنجاحات التي حققوها.. فلولا النجاحات التي حققها الجيش العربي السوري في هذه الظروف المعقدة لكان وضع البلد من دون أدنى شك في خطر.. واحتضان الشعب لهذا الجيش هو أساسي.. ونقول جيش الشعب.. فهذا الجيش هو ابن هذا الشعب.
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. لو نظرنا إلى المجتمع كقطاعات من أطباء.. ومثقفين.. وجامعيين.. وحرفيين.. وفلاحين.. وعمال الخ.. ولو عدنا إلى بداية الأزمة.. فإن بداية الأزمة انطلقت أو استندت إلى الطرح الطائفي.. كانوا يريدون في البداية أن يخلقوا شرخاً طائفياً بين أبناء الشعب السوري لكي يفتح ثغرة كبيرة في سورية ويكون المرور بالنسبة لهذا المخطط سهلا جداً وسلسا وسريعا.. الطرح الطائفي هو خروج عن الدين.. وانحراف عن الدين.. لأن الأديان والدين الإسلامي بشكل خاص لا يمكن أن يكون ديناً طائفياً وديناً تفريقياً.. وهناك أدوات وأساليب كثيرة لمواجهة الحالة الطائفية ولكن أهم أداة لمواجهتها هي الدين الصحيح.. ولا يمكن لشريحة أن تقوم بهذا الدور مثل شريحة رجال الدين أو العلماء.. الحقيقة بأنه.. وللتاريخ.. في هذه الأزمة دور رجال الدين كان دوراً هاماً جداً وأساسياً.. والكثير من الناس لا يعرف أن عدداً من رجال الدين المحترمين عذب وسجن في الأقبية والبعض منهم تم اغتياله ودفع حياته ثمناً ليس لأنه وقف مع الدولة.. بل لأنه قال كلمة حق أو لأنه تحدث بالمبادئ الصحيحة للدين.
الشعب هو من حمى الوطن
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. ان جوهر الأزمة كان خلق فتنة طائفية بالدرجة الأولى وكان لرجال الدين دور أساسي في مواجهتها.. هنا أيضاً نتحدث عن دور الإعلام كما قلنا قبل قليل لو لم يكن دور الإعلام هاماً في سورية لما دفع الإعلاميون الثمن من حياتهم.. هناك عدد من الشرائح.. هناك أشخاص في مفاصل مختلفة.. أنا لا أستثني الشرائح.. كل الشرائح فيها أشخاص وطنيون وأشخاص دفعوا حياتهم ثمناً.. ولكن كان هناك تركيز من قبل الخصوم والأعداء على اتجاهات معينة.. وكان لا بد لهذه الشرائح أو القطاعات من الشعب أن تقوم بواجبها وقد قامت بواجبها.. بالمقابل طبعاً كان هناك رجال دين منحرفون ولعبوا دوراً سلبياً إما بسبب الجهل في العقيدة أو لأسباب كامنة سياسية استغلوا الدين من أجلها.. ولكن تم تطويقهم من قبل علماء الدين في سورية.. لذلك أعتقد أن هذه المرحلة هي مرحلة تسجل بالنسبة لكل هذه الفئات التي قامت بحماية الوطن.
وحول اغتيال الكثير من الفعاليات.. أطباء.. مهندسين.. أساتذة جامعيين علماء بكل الاتجاهات قال الرئيس الأسد.. هذا صحيح ولكن ربما المطلوب من كل شخص في هذه الشرائح كان محدوداً نسبة للعناوين الكبرى التي طرحت في بداية الأزمة.. مع ذلك أعود وأقول إن الكل ينتمي لهذا الشعب.. وعندما بدأت بكلمة أن الشعب هو من حمى هذا الوطن.. فهذا الشعب يشمل كل الشرائح.
وجوابا على سؤال حول إلى أين نحن ذاهبون وإلى أين سورية ذاهبة قال الرئيس الأسد.. نأخذ سورية إلى حيث نريد أن نأخذها كشعب سوري.. وليس إلى أي مكان آخر.. العامل الخارجي يؤثر.. يستطيع أن يسرع عملية ما أو يبطئها.. يستطيع أن ينحرف بها باتجاه معين.. ولكن نستطيع نحن أن نعيده.. كل ما يحصل في سورية لم يكن من الممكن أن يحصل لو لم يكن لدينا فئات معينة.. مجموعات محدودة ولكنها مؤثرة سارت مع المخطط الأجنبي سياسياً أو إجرامياً.. عندما لا يكون لدينا في سورية مثل هذه المجموعات والفئات فتأكد بأن مؤامرة يقودها كل العالم ضد سورية ويشارك فيها كل العالم ضد سورية غير قادرة على التأثير في المستقبل الذي نريد أن نرسمه لأنفسنا.. فالجواب بشكل مختصر للشعب السوري أن مصير سورية هو بيدك.. وليس بيد أي أحد اخر.. عندما نتخلص من الإرهاب لن يكون لدينا مشكلة.. حتى المتآمر سيعود ويتغير.. من ساهم بهذه المشكلة من السوريين هو الذي شجع المتآمرين على المزيد من التآمر.. هذه هي الحقيقة.. لذلك علينا أن نتعامل مع الوضع الداخلي.. وأؤكد بأن المؤامرة كبيرة ولكن كما قلت في كل خطاب وفي كل مقابلة.. الأساس هو في سورية.. عندما نتخلص من هؤلاء الإرهابيين ونعود لنبحث لاحقاً بسبب وجود هذا النوع من الإجرام الذي لم نكن نعتقد بأنه موجود في بلدنا.. هذه مسؤولية مجتمع.. مسؤولية وطن كامل.. نبحث في الأسباب الحقيقية ونعالجها.. عندها يجب أن نكون مطمئنين.. وعندها ستعود سورية التي كنا نعرفها قبل هذه الأزمة.. وأنا مطمئن لهذا الشيء بكل تأكيد.
وجوابا على سؤال حول الدور الذي تأخذه سورية الأم بالنسبة لأبنائها وإصدارها عفوا عن بعض الذين تورطوا وكذلك القول إن الدولة ليست في الوضع الذي يمكنها الآن من أن تكون هي القوية وبالتالي هي التي تعفو قال الرئيس الأسد.. حقيقة الجواب متضمن في السؤال.. ان العفو عند المقدرة وليس عند الضعف.. والعفو هو من دلائل القوة وليس من دلائل الضعف.. ومن دلائل الثقة.. الثقة بأنفسنا وبالشعب.. لأن الدولة تمثل الشعب وهي جزء من هذا الشعب.. فهي ثقة شاملة ليست ثقة المسؤول بنفسه.. هي ثقة بأن كثيراً من هؤلاء الناس غرر بهم.. طبعاً لنضع جانباً الأخطاء.. هناك أحياناً أشخاص ربما في ظروف العمل الأمني يتم اعتقالهم بشكل خاطئ ويفرج عنهم.. بشكل فردي أو بشكل جماعي.. ولكن هناك حالات من التورط.. التي يحددها القانون بشكل واضح كالجنح لا بد من أن تتبع معها منهج التسامح.. وفي كثير من حالات التسامح التي تمت خلال العام ونصف العام الماضي كان هناك نتائج إيجابية.
وأضاف الرئيس الأسد.. اذا كان هذا العفو يحقق نتائج إيجابية فلماذا لا نسير به.. فحل الأزمة ليس فقط من خلال القضاء على الإرهاب.. أو من خلال القوة.. هذا كلام أيضاً غير شامل ومحدود.. يجب أن تستخدم كل الأدوات الممكنة بما فيها التسامح.. لذلك قلت سابقاً سنستمر بهذه العملية ونحن فعلا مستمرون بها.
وردا على سؤال حول ما اذا كان ما زال هناك إيمان بالعروبة وبشيء اسمه العمل العربي بعد مواقف الجامعة العربية وتعليقها عضوية سورية أوضح الرئيس الأسد.. أكرر ما قلته في أحد الخطابات بأن سورية أولاً هذه من البديهيات.. كل وطن هو أولا وكل قرية ينتمي إليها الإنسان هي أولاً.. هذا شيء بديهي.. ولكن هذه الـ أولاً لا تتنافى مع الـ ثانيا.. وهو المدينة الأكبر والوطن الأكبر والوطن العربي أو القومية التي ننتمي إليها.. فهذا الكلام محدود.. وهذا الكلام هو كلام رد فعل.. عندما نقول سورية أولاً أو لا نريد أن ننتمي إلى العروبة.. فإذاً نحن نسلم العروبة لهؤلاء.. أنا أقول العكس.. أنا اليوم أكثر التزاماً بالعروبة.. وأكثر قناعة بها.. وأكثر اطمئناناً لها.. لانني عرفت بعد عقد ونيف من التعامل مع البعض.. لكي لا يقال الكل.. البعض من المسؤولين العرب في مستويات مختلفة والبعض منهم في قمة الدولة.. عرفت بأن هؤلاء لا ينتمون إلى العروبة.. فاطمأننت بأنهم لا ينتمون لنا ولا ننتمي إليهم.. فهذا يطمئن أكثر إلى أن العروبة هي صافية ولو حاول البعض أن يعكرها بوجوده.
الجامعة العربية ليست مقياس العروبة
وتابع الرئيس الأسد.. أما بالنسبة للجامعة العربية فهي ليست مقياس العروبة.. بمعنى أن العروبة ليست منظمة.. هي حالة حضارية.. هذه المنطقة ترتكز على عدد من الأشياء.. أكبرها شيئان.. العروبة والإسلام.. لا تستطيع أن تكون هذه المنطقة موجودة بشكلها الحالي من دون هاتين القاعدتين الكبيرتين.. إن لم نؤمن بوجود وبأساس وبأهمية هاتين القاعدتين فنحن لا نؤمن بشيء موجود على الواقع شئنا أم أبينا.. فليست القضية أن نؤمن أو لا نؤمن.. هذه حقيقة إذا لم تؤمن بها عليك أن تغيرها.. هل نستطيع أن نلغي العروبة هذا موضوع آخر… بالنسبة للجامعة العربية لنكن واقعيين.. أي على الأقل بالعشر سنوات الأخيرة أو منذ عام 2000 منذ اندلاع الانتفاضة أساساً بالتسعينيات لم تجتمع سوى مرة واحدة.. ولم يكن هناك سوى قمة عربية واحدة ولكن بشكل أساسي منذ الـ 2000 وحتى اليوم.. ما هو العمل الذي قامت به الجامعة العربية لصالح الأمة العربية.. الحقيقة من خلال وجودي في كل القمم العربية لم يكن لدينا.. كسورية.. طموح أن نحقق شيئاً.. كان لدينا طموح أقصى هو أن نخفف من الخسائر.. كنا نعرف بأنه في كل قمة عربية هناك قنابل توضع وأفخاخ وألغام علينا أن نفككها.. فلم يكن لدينا قناعة بأن هناك في الجامعة العربية عملا حقيقيا لصالح الامة العربية.. وكانت أصعب النشاطات السياسية التي أقوم بها هي الذهاب إلى القمة العربية لهذا السبب.. للمعارك التي تخوضها لكي تمنع هذه الالغام.. لم يكن هناك على الإطلاق إمكانية لتحقيق شيء لصالح الأمة العربية.. فالعروبة شيء والجامعة العربية شيء آخر.. أن ننتمي إلى الجامعة أو لا ننتمي فهذا موضوع آخر.
الإشاعة هي كفقاعة صابون سوف تنفجر بعد فترة
وحول رغبة وسائل الإعلام الخارجية بظهور رئيس الجمهورية كل يوم على شاشات التلفزيون حتى لا تخرج الشائعات عنه وأين يتواجد الرئيس الآن قال الرئيس الأسد.. أنا الآن معك في دمشق في القصر الجمهوري.. على كل الأحوال هذه الإشاعات ليست سلبية بشكل مطلق.. أنت تلاحظ بأننا لا نرد على هذه الإشاعات في معظم الحالات.. فهي من دون قيمة.. فالإشاعة هي كالفقاعة.. فقاعة صابون سوف تنفجر بعد فترة.. هذه الإشاعات ميزتها بأنها تظهر أكاذيبهم لأنها ستنكشف بعد فترة.. فهي شيء إيجابي يعزز موقفنا بأنهم يكذبون ويزورون.. لكن من جانب آخر.. هذه الاشاعات تشوش قليلاً بالنسبة للمواطن ولكنها تشوش أكثر بالنسبة لهم.. ولمقاتليهم الذين يحاولون رفع معنوياتهم بهذه الإشاعات.. رفع المعنويات من خلال الإشاعات يعني تقديم الوهم لأدواتك.. هذا يعني أن هذه الأدوات ستفشل قريباً.. وهذا شيء جيد.. لذلك علينا ألا ننزعج منها.. ولا نهتم بها.. أنا موجود على الواقع.. ولم يتمكنوا حتى الآن من إدخال الخوف ليس في قلبي وإنما في قلوب معظم السوريين.. الحقيقة الكل قلق على وطنه.. هذا قلق طبيعي ولكن أن يدخلوا الخوف بطريقة أو بأخرى.. فهذا الشيء لن يصلوا إليه على الإطلاق.
وختم الرئيس الأسد بالقول.. أتمنى أن تنقل تحياتي لكل العاملين في محطة الدنيا والذين يتعرضون لتهديدات بشكل مستمر ولكنهم ما زالوا مصرين على القيام بواجبهم الوطني في كشف الحقائق

The situation in Aleppo is not so different and cannot be separated from other situations around Syria. Aleppo and Damascus are the two biggest cities in Syria and most important cities in Syria. These battles are battles of need. The need to destroy. They moved from Homs to Damascus to Lattakia to Aleppo and so on. What he’s trying to say is that the situations in cities in Syria are not different from the situation in Syria itself. In Damascus, the battle ended within a week while in Aleppo the battle’s been raging on for more than a month. They change from city to city depending on their losses and what they could win from other cities if they attack. Also depending on the level of security in these cities and areas. Even though terrorism and violence is a lot, the Syrian Armed Forces is bringing heavy losses to the armed terrorist groups across all of Syria, with the help of civilian residents. Some countries are on Syria’s side, but are unable to stop the flows of weapons to the armed terrorist groups inside Syria. Some countries are the cause of these weapons flowing to the armed terrorist groups, such as, Turkey. We are using our armed forces wisely, to minimize the number of casualties from both the Syrian Arab Army and the civilian residents in area. For we could just use our full force and destroy all the terrorists in Syria but this isn’t reasonable as it will cause heavy casualties among civilians.

North Resistance

President Al Assad made a speech at 6pm GMT (9pm Local Syrian time).  Here’s an analysis on important points in his speech. He explained the situations in Syria like Aleppo, Damascus, and Homs. He explained the Syria’s major role in the Resistance in Palestine and Lebanon.

The situation in Aleppo is not so different and cannot be separated from other situations around Syria. Aleppo and Damascus are the two biggest cities in Syria and most important cities in Syria. These battles are battles of need. The need to destroy. They moved from Homs to Damascus to Lattakia to Aleppo and so on. What he’s trying to say is that the situations in cities in Syria are not different from the situation in Syria itself. In Damascus, the battle ended within a week while in Aleppo the battle’s been raging on for more than a month. They change from city to…

View original post 610 more words

Mr President’s Bashar al Assad interview-29/02/2012

Mr President's Bashar al Assad interview-29/02/2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0sUsmcb7r8&feature=youtu.be

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6CZ8Un3wuk&feature=youtu.be

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoX4xSz1oXU&feature=youtu.be

President al-Assad: the situation in Aleppo cannot be separated from the situation in Syria.
*Turkey is direct responsible for the bloodshed in Syria
*the task of the army and the armed forces in all countries of *the world is to protect the homeland. Protection not only of abroad enemies
*the talk about buffer zones does not exist and is not realistic.
*there is a continuing supplying for the militants, specifically in Homs.
*Syria does not need a green light for its sovereign issues
*We must distinguish between the trade crisis and errors that may occur during the crisis, and every person who wants to prolong the crisis for various reasonsmust be held accountable .
*Since the first week of the crisis, there were victims of police and security, how did they fall? Fallen victims of the acoustic wave of the demonstrators?
*We have to stop the self-flagellation,media must exceed from the educational role to the investigative role.
*Syrian media managed to hit the genuine media empires sustained not only with money but by the political decision in the major capitals of the world and this is the proof of the success of the Syrian media
*There are minimum levels of staff needed – the popular mass plays an essential role in the media
*the defection operation must be committed inside the country and not outside, therefore who runs away is an escapee / the Syrian people does not respect who flees and Syrians cannot be led from the outside.
*A lot of people did not notice that our position on the bombing of Libya and we were the only ones in the Arab *League who voted against it not just abstaining from voting
we were obviously asked to leave Iran behind and that is unacceptable.
*we must move away from unnecessary consumption habits which we were used with in the years of prosperity
*there is a national opponent that put the interests of the country as primordial and who participated in dialogue and and elections
*there is also a non-national opponent that wants to extort us to reclaim positions.
*Syrian Arab army is the protector of the people and the homeland Army and Armed Forces conducts heroic battles out there on the field
*President al-Assad to the opponents: if you want be late, then you must be honest at least.
*We have to use all possible tools, including tolerance and amnesty is not weakness

Defections occurred inside the country, those who left their country called absconders and fugitives.

– Some opposition parties were paid in Cairo by some Gulf countries not to participate in the national dialogue.

– The Syrian media exposed huge media empires, and the Syrian media institutions can perform better.- Rumors about Syria work for us in the long term, when people realize that these bubbles are just lies.

– I am in the presidential house in Damascus.

the real Syrian Free Press

*

*

Western media distorts truth in Syria

Syrian journalists say some Western and Arabic satellite news channels are fabricating events to accuse the Syrian army of attacking and terrorizing civilians.

They refer to the recent case of Mohammad Salim Kabbani who used to go on live on Al-Jazira , Al-Arabia and Orient TV channels as the spokesman for the foreign-backed militant group calling itself the Free Syria Army.

He appeared on Arab media outlets as if he was in the city of Homs while he was in Northern Lebanon city of Tripoli. Mohammad salim Kabbani confessed 3 weeks ago in an interview on the Syrian Television that he was fabricating events to get money from those media outlets in return.

*

*

I Media Occidentali distorcono la verità sulla Siria.

Alcuni giornalisti siriani accusano i canali di notizie via satellite, occidentali e arabi, di fabbricare falsi eventi per accusare…

View original post 144 more words

Der Kosmopolit: Ethnische Säuberung für einen syrischen Gottesstaa…

Der Kosmopolit: Ethnische Säuberung für einen syrischen Gottesstaa…: Wahabiten, Salafisten, Moslembrüder, Al-Kaida, Faruk-Brigarden – die Terroristen dieser Welt vereinigen sich zur Zeit in Syrien. Diesen G…

Wahhabis, Salafis, Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, Faruk-Brigarden – the terrorists of the world unite at present in Syria.These groups there is certainly not about the fight for freedom and the establishment of a democratic rule of law, but simply to the annihilation of Christians, Alawites and other non-Sunni Syrian peoples. The aim of the Sunni terrorists is simply the establishment of an Islamic theocracy in Syria.
After that, look this murderer a new goal, which would be found quickly – to neighboring Israel and the Western world.

North Resistance

As you all may know, Israel has been threatening Iran and Syria for an intervention. Israel threatening to invade Syria for the reason of humanitarian rights, and threatening to invade Iran for the nuclear power reactor Iran’s building for peaceful reasons, where Israel has over 200 Nuclear warheads in storage. Iran only became a threat to Israel on the Islamic Revolution, in 1979. Whereas Syria was a threat to Israel ever since the occupation in Palestine in 1948. Syria’s alliance with after the Islamic revolution is what made Iran strong to this present day. Ever since the Iran-Iraq war, in which Syria took Iran’s side in, Iran’s been building the country both economically and in military. With Arab states falling one by one under the control of the Zionist state of Israel, the state of Syria is the last remaining threat to Israel sovereignty. Iran’s view of destroying Israel cannot…

View original post 771 more words

News from Christians in Syria

News from Christians in Syria
News from Christians in Syria
From the Pontifical Mission Society new service, Fides: Aleppo (Agenzia Fides) –http://romans8v29.blogspot.ro/2012/08/news-from-christians-in-syria.html

The Metropolitan Archbishop of Aleppo, His Exc. Mgr. Jea

n-Clement Jeanbart’s residence was broken into and looted during clashes between militiamen and loyalist troops. The Archbishop, his Vicar and some priests fled a few hours before the episode, which occurred last Thursday, and took refuge in the house of the Franciscans in Aleppo. According to Fides sources in the local Catholic community, those responsible “are unidentified groups, who want to foster a sectarian war and involve the Syrian people in a sectarian strife.”

As confirmed to Fides by the Franciscan Fr. George Abu Khazen, OFM, Apostolic Pro-Vicar of the Latin Catholic community, who welcomed the greek-Catholic confreres, “Archbishop Jeanbart expressed great concern and dismay over the incident, and he repeated, shaken, in a single word : Why? “. Then he left for Lebanon, where he still stands. In the following days, when the military regained control of the situation, the Mgr. Je Vicar was able to return to his see, noting that the doors had been forced and there were different objects missing (such as a computer and projector). Fr. George explains that in past days there was a battle in the old city of Aleppo, and the fighting reached Fahrat Square, where all the archbishoprics are. In addition to the greek Catholic (Melkite), also the Maronite Catholic was damaged.

Some militants also broke into the Byzantine Christian museum “Maarrat Nahman”, damaging some artifacts and icons. According to Fr. George, a solution to the conflict “cannot still be seen, because none of the protagonists in the field, national and international, put pressure to start real dialogue.”

Speaking to Fides, another member of the local hierarchy, who requested anonymity for security reasons, warns: “With the intervention, well established, of jihadist groups, there is an attempt to foment hatred and sectarian conflict. There is an increasing number of Wahhabi and Salafi Islamist militias, from Chechnya, Pakistan, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Arabia, Libya: these groups have the sole purpose of bringing chaos, destruction, atrocities, and to paralyze social life. The Syrian civilian population is victim. But will not fall into this trap. ” (PA) (Agenzia Fides 27/08/2012)

Daraya Massacre


GRAPHIC:
Another massacre by Turkey’s sponsored FSA terrorists, wherever they infest they leave their fingerprints in order to terrify the people and make them revolt by force against their own government, just like what they do in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya… just everywhere USA’s Al Qaeda Federal Agency can get in to ‘democratize’ a country…
The camera of Addounia TV channel shows after it entered into the town images of bodies strewn here and there of women, men and children.
أفادت وكالة الأنباء السورية (سانا) في خبر يشمل تحركات الجيش السوري للقضاء على المسلحين في انحاء سورية، بأن قوات الجيش تواصل تطهير “منطقة داريا من فلول المجموعات الارهابية المرتزقة التي ارتكبت الجرائم بحق أبناء المدينة وروعتهم وخربت ودمرت الممتلكات العامة والخاصة”. واكدت ان العملية اسفرت “عن قتل عدد كبير من الإرهابيين المرتزقة وإلقاء القبض على عدد آخر ومصادرة كميات كبيرة من الأسلحة والذخائر وفككت ثلاث عبوات ناسفة زرعتها المجموعات الإرهابية المسلحة في شوارع داريا”.

ولم تتحدث الوكالة عن أية مجزرة وقعت في البلدة، في حين دخلت كاميرا قناة “الدنيا” الى البلدة واظهرت صور الجثث المنثورة هنا وهناك من نساء ورجال وأطفال. وذكرت مراسلة القناة ان الارهابيين مارسوا في البلدة “ما يتقنونه من اجرام”، وان جثث المدنيين مرمية في كل مكان. كما استعرضت الكاميرا صورا لجنود يسعفون المتضررين وشهود عيان يطالبون الجيش بحمايتهم وحماية اطفالهم وتخليصهم من المسلحين. وأكد احد الجنود الذي كان يحمل جثة طفل ان المسلحين يقتلون النساء والاطفال بدم بارد. بدوره اشار رجل أمن الى انه تم اكتشاف محرقة تضم مسلحين من غير السوريين وعددهم التقديري 40 شخصا، موضحا ان الحرق يأتي بغية تغطية هويات المسلحين. كما دخلت الكاميرا الى منزل حيث قام المسلحون بتصفية عائلة كاملة عن طريق الاعدام الميداني لاعتبارها من اتباع النظام.

ROBERT FISK WROTE FOR INDEPENDENT:

 

 

The massacre town of Daraya is a place of ghosts and questions. It echoed with the roar of mortar explosions and the crackle of gunfire yesterday, its few returning citizens talking of death, assault, foreign “terrorists”, and its cemetery of slaughter haunted by snipers.

The men and women to whom we could talk, two of whom had lost loved ones on Daraya’s day of infamy four days ago, told a story different from the version that has been repeated around the world: theirs was a tale of hostage-taking by the Free Syria Army and desperate prisoner-exchange negotiations between the armed opponents of the regime and the Syrian army, before President Bashar al-Assad’s government forces stormed into the town to seize it back from rebel control.

Officially, no word of such talks between the enemies has been mentioned. But senior Syrian officers told The Independent how they had “exhausted all possibilities of reconciliation” with those holding the town, while residents of Daraya said there had been an attempt by both sides to arrange a swap of civilians and off-duty soldiers – apparently kidnapped by rebels because of their family ties to the government army – with prisoners in the army’s custody. When these talks broke down, the army advanced into Daraya, six miles from the centre of Damascus.

Being the first Western eyewitness into the town yesterday was as frustrating as it was dangerous. The bodies of men, women and children had been moved from the cemetery where many of them were found; and when we arrived in the company of Syrian troops at the Sunni Muslim graveyard – divided by the main road through Daraya – snipers opened fire at the soldiers, hitting the back of the ancient armoured vehicle in which we made our escape. Yet we could talk to civilians out of earshot of Syrian officials – in two cases in the security of their own homes – and their narrative of last Saturday’s mass killing of at least 245 men, women and children suggested that the atrocities were far more widespread than supposed.

One woman, who gave her name as Leena, said she was travelling through the town in a car and saw at least 10 male bodies lying on the road near her home. “We carried on driving past, we did not dare to stop, we just saw these bodies in the street,” she said, adding that Syrian troops had not yet entered Daraya.

Another man said that, although he had not seen the dead in the graveyard, he believed that most were related to the government army and included several off-duty conscripts. “One of the dead was a postman – they included him because he was a government worker,” the man said. If these stories are true, then the armed men – wearing hoods, according to another woman who described how they broke into her home and how she kissed them in a fearful attempt to prevent them shooting her own family – were armed insurgents rather than Syrian troops.

The home of Amer Sheikh Rajab, a forklift truck driver, had been taken over, he said, by gunmen as a base for “Free Army” forces, the phrase the civilians used for the rebels. They had smashed the family crockery and burned carpets and beds – the family showed this destruction to us – but had also torn out the internal computer chip parts of laptops and television sets in the house. To use as working parts for bombs, perhaps?

On a road on the edge of Daraya, Khaled Yahya Zukari, a lorry driver, had been leaving the town on Saturday in a mini-bus with his 34-year-old wife Musreen and their seven-month-old daughter.

“We were on our way to [the neighbouring suburb of] Senaya when suddenly there was a lot of shooting at us,” he said. “I told my wife to lie on the floor but a bullet came into the bus and passed right through our baby and hit my wife. It was the same bullet. They were both dead. The shooting came from trees, from a green area. Maybe it was the militants hiding behind the soil and trees who thought we were a military bus bringing soldiers.”

Any widespread investigation of a tragedy on this scale and in these circumstances was virtually impossible yesterday. At times, in the company of armed Syrian forces, we had to run along empty streets with anti-government snipers at the intersections; many families had barricaded themselves in their homes.

Why Syria will not Fall: Crushing Defeat of “Free Syrian Army”

Why Syria will not Fall: Crushing Defeat of “Free Syrian Army”.


(translated from Arabic by vijayvaani.com)

The recent developments in Syria revealed a series of important signs which will have decisive repercussions over the course of the global war led by the United States to destroy this country. Unlike the information and impressions of American strategists and their European and Arab accomplices – as conveyed by hundreds of media outlets engaged in the battle – the death squads, mercenaries and Takfiri groups introduced from all parts of the world suffered a crushing defeat at the level of the battles. Nonetheless, the Turkish officials and their Qatari and Saudi allies had promised – as they have already done last year and during the same period – that the month of Ramadan will witness the fall of the resisting regime in Syria. These illusions have once again collapsed on the battlefield where the armed gangs suffered the fall of thousands of dead, wounded and detainees.

Indeed, the comprehensive attack launched by the extremists against Damascus ended – even with the recognition of Western media outlets – with massive losses. Hence, the force which included local mercenaries and jihadists from around the world was completely annihilated by the Syrian army that is pursuing the remnants on the outskirts of the capital. As a result, tons of weapons were confiscated and the heavy infrastructure of the armed groups was dismantled and destroyed, which will require months to reconstruct if the armed groups are ever able to do so.

The outcome of the Aleppo battle on the other hand is known in advance, as the extremists are falling by the thousands in the face of the methodic progress of the army which was able to fully sever the supply lines of the mercenaries who came from the training camps led by the CIA in Turkey. Consequently, the armed gangs can no longer deliver reinforcements without having to pay a hefty price. As to their 4×4 convoys which are equipped with heavy artillery and were offered by their regional sponsors, they are moving under the fire of the army’s helicopters and aircrafts and are falling in the ambushes set up by the elite forces that have infiltrated enemy lines.

According to experts, one third of the extremist groups are composed of jihadists who have come from the Arab Maghreb, Libya, the Gulf, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Chechnya. At this level, European Union Intelligence Chief French national Patrice Bergamini recognized in an interview with the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar on Friday 17 August the important role played by the jihadists at the level of the Syrian conflict, stressing that the Western public was now aware of the threat they represented. It is clear that the Syrian army’s cleansing of the city of Aleppo and its countryside is now a mere question of time.

The crushing defeat suffered by the armed gangs throughout Syria reveals that the Syrian Arab army which was built on solid ideological bases quickly drew the lessons of the war and developed strategies of urban and rural counter-guerilla, which allowed it to strike the extremists despite the massive military, material, financial and media means that were generously offered to them by the coalition of dozens of countries, not to forget the sanctions adopted against the Syrian people and state outside the context of the United Nations.

In order to understand the developments of the situation, it is also important to analyze the Syrian people’s state of mind. Without real popular backup –which is naturally disregarded by Western media outlets – President Bashar al-Assad and his army would not have been able to resist and deter this attack. This popular support is due to three factors. Firstly, the majority of the Syrians are aware of the fact that their country is targeted by a plot aiming at subjugating Syria to include it in the Western imperialistic camp and consequently remove it from all the regional equations, knowing that during these last four decades, Syria has been at the heart of the balances of power and that nothing could be done in the Middle East without its knowledge and participation. These wide popular factions are attached to their country’s political autonomy and are willing to fight to defend it, which would explain why thousands of young people are volunteering to join the army’s ranks.

On the other hand, the experts believe that twenty percent of the public – which at some point sympathized with the opposition – discovered the real face of the extremists who are multiplying their savageries in the regions under their control (rape, executions, massacres, pillaging…). In light of this transformation affecting the popular mood, especially in the rural areas where the people have become sick and tired, the Syrian state has put in place discreet communication means allowing the population to inform the army about the presence of terrorists, which would explain how and why during these last few weeks, the special units and the air force were able to successfully carry out well designed strikes against the bases of the armed gangs.

In parallel to all the developments on the ground, Damascus’ regional and international allies are showing stringency and developing political and diplomatic initiatives to avoid leaving the arena open before the Westerners. At this level, the success of the meeting in Tehran between thirty countries, including China, India, Russia, nine Arab countries and Latin American and South African states, conveys this new balance of power. The formation of this group constituted a strong message to the Westerners and seriously jeopardized their project to establish – outside the context of the United Nations – a no-fly zone in the northern part of Syria. The last few months of 2012 will be decisive at the level of the emergence of new regional and international balances and the drawing up of a new image starting from Damascus, thanks to the victory of the Syrian national state in the global war led against it.

Fast-moving developments

Until the American presidential elections which will be held at the beginning of November, the Syrian internal, regional and international developments will grow faster than ever before. Obviously, foreign military intervention whether from inside or outside the Security Council is off the table, while the sanctions have reached their highest levels as long as Chapter VII is being deterred by the veto right. Following the American presidential elections, we will see the materialization of American political headlines and especially NATO, Turkish and Gulf ones, in parallel to the repercussions that will affect the military machine used across the border and from inside the Syrian territories.

Hence, there should either be a recognition of the impossibility to introduce change at the level of Syria’s geography and role which should prompt preparations for serious negotiations and for political solutions – that are rejected by the Americans who are refusing to respond to the invitation addressed by Russia to meet – or sustain the war alliance and the mobilization of the state of hostility from all directions, i.e. from the Mecca conference to the visit of the French foreign minister to Syria’s neighboring states to assemble as many pressure cards as possible.

There will be no buffer zones and no air embargoes, rather efforts to completely isolate certain border regions from the state’s control in order to test the chances of establishing mini-states, similar to the ones established by Saad Haddad and Antoine Lahd under Israeli tutelage in South Lebanon. At this level, the wager is on Aleppo’s countryside to which all those who sold their honor among the dissidents will be introduced following preparations in Doha, Riyadh and Amman to grant legitimacy in form to the division project.

On the other hand, Lakhdar Brahimi was appointed as envoy and mediator for the political solution and the observers mission was ended to prepare the arena for all possibilities. Brahimi will thus spend time touring before a decision is adopted, while Syria is standing fast with its army and people and drawing up – starting from Aleppo and its countryside – the course of the upcoming change.

The NAM Summit, Iran, and Syria: A Coup against the West?

The NAM Summit, Iran, and Syria: A Coup against the West?.


The upcoming summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) will be held in Tehran from August 26 to 31, 2012. The NAM and its summit are mostly ignored in the Atlanticist world of the United States and NATO, but this year’s gathering has gotten the attention of the Atlanticists and their press. The reason is that the NAM summit’s venue has upset the political establishment in Washington, DC.

The US government has got its feathers ruffled and even gone out of its way to berate NAM leaders for gathering in Iran. US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland – the spouse of neo-con Project for the New American Century (PNAC) co-founder and arch-imperialist Robert Kagan – has asked Egypt’s new president, Mohamed Morsi, and even UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Washington’s own steward at the UN, not to travel to Tehran. Nuland and the US State Department have bitterly declared that Iran is not deserving of such “high-level presences.” The US, however, is forced to grin and bear the gathering of world leaders in Tehran.

What will take place is an international extravaganza, minus NATO and its key de facto members – Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea – in the Asia-Pacific and Israel. African, Asian, Caribbean, and Latin America officials will be there in full strength. The Chinese, which have the status of observers in the NAM, will be there. The Russians, which are not part of the NAM, have been invited as Iran’s special guests and will be represented by Konstantin Shuvalov, Russian ambassador-at-large and Vladimir Putin’s envoy. Even non-NAM member Turkey has been given an invitation from Tehran. To help the Palestinians, Hamas will also be given a special seat at the table under an invitation sent from Iran to Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh to participate at the summit alongside the US-Israeli puppet Mahmoud Abbas. Alongside the Russian Federation, most the members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) will be attending as either full members or observers. Aside from the Chinese and Russians, the other three members of the BRICS grouping – Brazil, India, and South Africa – that is becoming the new engine shaping the world will also be in attendance.

 

The NAM Summit, Iran, and Syria: A Coup against the West?

The gathering of NAM leaders will doubtlessly be an important event for Iran’s international prestige and status. For almost a week Tehran will be a key center of the world alongside the offices of the UN in New York City and Geneva. Not only will Iran be the venue for one of the largest international get-togethers of world leaders, but it will also be handed over the organization’s chairmanship from Arab powerhouse Egypt. Iran will retain this position as the leader of the NAM for the next few years and will be able to speak on behalf of the international organization. Up to a certain degree this position will allow Tehran to have more influence in world affairs. At least this is the view in Tehran where none of the significance of the NAM summit has been lost on Iranian politicians and officials who one after another are pointing out the importance of the NAM summit for their country.

The NAM is the second largest international organization and body in the world after the United Nations. With 120 full members and 17 observer members it includes most the countries and governments of the world. About two-thirds of the UN’s member states are full NAM members. The African Union (AU), Afro-Asian People’s Solidarity Organization, Commonwealth of Nations, Hostosian National Independence Movement, Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front, Arab League, Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), South Center, United Nations, and World Peace Council are all observers too.

The US and NATO which very generously and misleadingly throw around the term “international community” when they are referring to themselves are really a global minority that pale in comparison to the international grouping formed by the NAM. Any agreements or consensuses drilled out by the NAM represent not only the bulk of the international community, but also the non-imperialist international majority or those countries that have traditionally been viewed as the “have-nots.” Unlike at the UN, the “silent majority” will have its voice heard with little adulteration and perversion from the confederates of NATOistan.

The NAM gathering in Tehran signifies an important event. It demonstrates that Iran is genuinely not internationally isolated like the images that the United States and major European Union powers, such as the UK and France, like to continuously project. Atlanticist media are scrambling to explain this situation and the Israelis are clearly upset.

Undoubtedly, Iran will use the international gathering to its advantage and make use of the NAM to garnish support for its international positions and to help try to end the crisis in Syria. The US-supported siege of Syria will be denounced at the NAM conference and diplomatic blows will be dealt against the US and its clients and satellites. Already the hurried ministerial conference about the fighting in Syria organized by the Iranian Foreign Ministry in Tehran before the emergency summit held by the OIC in Mecca was a prelude to the diplomatic support that Iran will give the Syrian Arab Republic at the 2012 NAM summit.

Despite Algerian and Iranian opposition, Syria was expelled from the OIC at the behest of Saudi Arabia and the petro-monarchies. While the OIC emergency summit in Mecca may have been a political and diplomatic blow to Damascus, the situation is expected to be much different at the NAM summit in Tehran. The Syrians will also be present in Tehran and able to face their Arab antagonists from the petro-monarchies of the Persian Gulf.

The Genesis of the Non-Aligned Movement and Third World

The Non-Aligned Movement and concept of a “Third World” have their roots in the period of de-colonization after the Second World War when the empires of Western Europe began to crumble and formally end. This superficially represented an end to the domination of the weak by the strong. In reality, colonialism was merely substituted with foreign aid and loans by the declining empires. In this context, the British would offer aid to their former colonies while the French and Dutch would do the same with their former colonies to maintain control over them. Thus, the exploitation never truly ended and the world was maintained in a state of disequilibrium. The United Nations was also hostage to the big powers and ignored many important issues concerning places like Africa and Latin America.

What brought the formation of the NAM about was firstly the rejection of domination and interference by the countries of the “Global North” – a term that will be defined shortly – and the concept of co-existence that India and China carved out in 1954 when New Delhi recognized Tibet as a part of China.

The NAM started as an Asian initiative, which sought to address the tense relations between China and the US on one hand and China’s relations with other Asian powers on the other hand. The newly independent Asian states wanted to avoid any ratcheting up of the Cold War in their continent, especially after the disastrous US-led military intervention in Korea, or the manipulation of India and Indonesia as buffer states against the People’s Republic of China. This Asian initiative quickly broadened and gained the support of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Egypt, and the various leaders of the nationalist independence movements in Africa that were fighting for their liberation against NATO countries like Britain, France, and Portugal.

Yugoslavian President Josip Broz Tito, Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser were the three main forces behind the organization’s creation. Kwame Nkrumah, the Marxist pan-African leader of Ghana, and Ahmed Sukarno, the leader of Indonesia, would also put their weight behind the NAM and join Tito, Nehru, and Nasser. These leaders and their countries did not view the Cold War as an ideological struggle. This was a smokescreen. The Cold War was a power struggle from their perspectives and ideology was merely used as a justification.

 

The Different Worlds of the Cold War

The word “non-alignment” was first used on the world stage by Vengalil Krishnan Krishna Menon, India’s ambassador to the United Nations, while the term “Third World” was first used by the French scholar Alfred Sauvy. Third World is a debated political term and some find it both deregulatory and ethnocentric. To the point of confusion the phrase Third World is inextricably intertwined with the concept of non-alignment and the NAM.

Both the NAM and, especially, Third World are wrongly and carelessly used as synonyms for the Developing and Under-developing Worlds or as economic indicators. Most Third World countries were underprivileged former colonies or less affluent states in places like Africa and Latin America that were the victims of imperialism and exploitation. This has led to the general identification or misidentification of the NAM countries and the Third World with concepts of poverty. This is wrong and not what either of the terms means.

Third World was a concept that developed during the Cold War period to distinguish those countries that were not formally a part of the First World that was formed by the Western Bloc and either the Eastern/Soviet Bloc and Communist World that formed the Second World. In theory most these Third Worlders were neutral and joining the NAM was a formal expression of this position of non-alignment.

Aside from being considered Second Worlders, communist states like the People’s Republic of China and Cuba have widely been classified as parts of the Third World and have considered themselves as parts of the third global force. Chairman Mao’s views defined through his concept of Three Worlds also supported the classification of communist states like Angola, China, Cuba, and Mozambique as Third Worlders, because they did not belong to the Soviet Bloc like Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland.

In the most orthodox of interpretations of the political meaning of Third World, the communist state of Yugoslavia was a part of the Third World. In the same context, Iran due to its ties to NATO and its membership in the US-controlled Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) was politically a part of the First World until the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Thus, reference to Yugoslavia as a Second World country and Iran as a Third World country prior to 1979 are incorrect.

The term Third World has also given rise to the phrase “Global South.” This name is based on the geographically southward situation of the Third World on the map as opposed to the geographically northward situation of the First and Second Worlds, which both began to collectively be called the “Global North.” The names Global North and Global South came to slowly replace the terms First, Second, and Third World, especially since the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed.

Bandung, Belgrade, and Non-Aligned Institution Building

The NAM formed when the Third Worlders who were caught between the Atlanticists and the Soviets during the Cold War tried to formalize their third way or force. The NAM would be born after the Bandung Conference in 1955, which infuriated the US and Western Bloc who saw it as a sin against their global interests.

Contrarily to Western Bloc views, the Soviet Union was much more predisposed to accepting the NAM. Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev even proposed in 1960 that the UN be managed by a “troika” composed of the First, Second, and Third Worlds instead of its Western-influenced secretariat in New York City that was colluding with the US to remove Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba from power in the Democratic Republic of Congo, as well as other independent world leaders.

Fidel Castro and Cuba, which hosted the NAM’s summit in 1979 when Iran joined as its eighty-eighth member, would actually argue that the Second World and communist movements were the “natural allies” of the Third World and the NAM. The favorable attitudes of Nasser and Nehru towards the Soviet Union and the Soviet Bloc’s support for various national liberation movements also lends credence towards the Cuban argument about the Second and Third World alliance against the capitalist exploitation and imperialist policies of the First World.

The first NAM summit would be held in the Yugoslavian capital of Belgrade in 1961 under the chairmanship of Marshall Tito. The summit in Belgrade would call for an end to all empires and colonization. Tito, Nehru, Nasser, Nkrumah, Sukarno and other NAM leaders would demand that Western Europeans end their colonial roles in Africa and let African peoples decide their own fates.

A preparatory conference was also held a few months earlier in Cairo by Gamal Abdel Nasser. At the preparatory meetings non-alignment was defined by five points:

(1) Non-aligned countries must follow an independent policy of co-existence of nations with varied political and social systems;

(2) Non-aligned countries must be consistent in their support for national independence;

(3) Non-aligned countries must not belong to a multilateral alliance concluded in the context of superpower or big power politics;

(4) If non-aligned countries have bilateral agreement with big powers or belonged to a regional defense pact, these agreements should not have been concluded in context of the Cold War;

(5) If non-aligned states cede military bases to a big power, these bases should not be granted in the context of the Cold War.

All the NAM conferences to follow would cover vital issues in the years to come that ranged from the inclusion of the People’s Republic of China in the UN, the fighting in the Democratic Republic of Congo, African wars of independence against Western European countries, opposition to apartheid and racism, and nuclear disarmament. Furthermore, the NAM has traditionally been hostile to Zionism and condemned the occupation of Palestinian, Lebanese, Syrian, and Egyptian territories by Israel, which has earned it the seamlessly never-ending aversion of Tel Aviv.

Making NAM Relevant Again

Many people ask what relevance the Non-Aligned Movement has today. Since the end of the Cold War the NAM’s strength has been eroded as the US, neoliberal economic reforms, the IMF, and the World Bank have gained more and more control over NAM members. In many cases NAM members have reverted back to de facto colonies in all but name. Many members of NAM, such as Belarus, Colombia, Ethiopia, and Saudi Arabia, are actually fully aligned states.

There is no question about it that Iran wants to make NAM relevant again to use it to fight off the expansionist Atlanticist World. So do the Russians and the Chinese. The NAM after all has provided Iran important diplomatic support in its politicized nuclear dispute with the Atlanticists. The NAM is also the closest alternative to the Atlanticist-infiltrated and perverted United Nations.

The NAM summit will be capitalized on by Iran and its allies to try and develop some sort of strategy to fight and circumvent the unilateral US and European Union sanctions against the Iranian economy and to show the Atlanticists in the US and the EU that their powers in the world are limited and declining. One small step in this direction is that Iran will begin negotiations with 60 NAM countries to drop bilateral visa requirements with Iran. A universal statement may also be released asking for the anti-Iranian sanctions to be dropped or modified. Other steps would include proposals for a new and alternative financial global structure, which would evade the Atlanticist chokehold on international financial transactions.

An important event at the NAM summit will be the arrival of Morsi in Tehran as a sign of warming relations. Ties between Cairo and Tehran will not be restored overnight either, because there are restrictions on Morsi. Whatever happens between Egypt and Iran at the NAM summit in Tehran will be just steps in an unrushed process. The Egyptians are taking pains not to antagonize their Western and Arab paymasters and the Iranians have opted to be patient. Morsi’s presence in Iran, however, is still symbolically very important. Tehran indeed has reason to be very optimistic as all its stars are aligning at its NAM gala.

Diplomatic circles are looking at Egypt on the eve of the NAM summit. Before it was announced that Morsi would go to Iran, it was expected that Egyptian Vice-President Mahmoud Mekki would represent Egypt at the NAM summit as a demonstration of Egypt’s estrangement from Iran.

Cairo’s relationship with Tehran and what develops from Morsi’s trip to Iran is what all Arabdom, Israel, and the US will be watching carefully.

Some analysts are asserting that Egypt’s stance could “make or break” the project to isolate Iran, especially in sectarian terms involving a Shiite-Sunni divide. This is actually wrong, because there is nothing specifically significant that Egypt can do to break or isolate Iran. After all, Cairo and Tehran have essentially had no ties since 1980 and Mubarak was a staunch ally of the US who put Egypt to work with Saudi Arabia and Israel to curve Iranian influence.

In the worst case scenario the relationship between the two countries will stay as it was during the Mubarak era. This is not a losing situation for Iran, albeit the situation in Syria has catalyzed the Iranian desire for faster rapprochement. Egyptian-Iranian relations have nowhere to go except upward.

The Tahrir (Liberation) Square protests that dethroned Mubarak and helped bring about the elections that brought the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood into power are part of what Iranian officials call an “Islamic Awakening” in contrast to an “Arab Spring.” Iran did not hide its belief either that Egypt and it could eventually form a new regional axis after dictator-for-life Mubarak was booted out from power. If there is any man that can make the leap from the conception of an Arab Spring to an Islamic Awakening, at least publicly, it is President Morsi through an alliance with Iran.

On August 8, Iran sent Hamid Baqaei to deliver Morsi’s invitation to attend the NAM summit in Tehran. Along the way the international press and pundits gave higher attribution to Baqaei’s governmental rank, because they failed to realize or mention that he was the most senior of eleven junior or assistant vice-presidents and essentially the cabinet minister responsible for the Iranian presidency’s executive affairs.

First Vice-President Mohammed-Reza Rahimi, the former governor of the Iranian province of Kurdistan and himself a former junior vice-president, is Iran’s senior vice-president. Regardless, Baqaei’s visit to Cairo as both a presidential envoy and a close presidential aide was important. Iran could have delivered the invitation letter through its interest section in the Swiss Embassy to Egypt or other diplomatic channels, but made a significant gesture by sending Baqaei directly to Egypt. The move made all the countries conspiring against Iran and Syria very anxious. For these anxious countries the NAM get-together in Tehran will be all about Egypt, Iran, and Syria.

 

Are Saudi, Qatari, and IMF moves in Egypt tied to the NAM Summit in Tehran?

Both Saudi Arabia and Qatar have offered Egypt their financial aid before Morsi’s visits to Beijing, where he is expected to ask for Chinese help. Aside from the use of Saudi and Qatari aid to shape the way that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood interacts with Iran, the offers of aid from the petro-despots of Doha and Riyadh are part of the Arab competition over influence in Cairo.

Morsi is widely seen as Qatar’s man and relations between Riyadh and Cairo have been uneasy for some time. The Saudi Embassy in Cairo was even temporarily closed after Egyptian protests against Saudi Arabia flared up. More importantly, the House of Saud opposed Morsi in support of longstanding Mubarak henchman Ahmed Shafik during the Egyptian presidential elections. In addition, the House of Saud has propped up its own political clients inside Egypt against the Muslim Brotherhood. The House of Saud’s Egyptian clients, the Nour Party and the their parliamentary coalition called the Alliance for Egypt (Islamic Bloc), trailed in second place behind the Muslim Brotherhood’s parliamentary coalition, the Democratic Alliance.

Despite the fact that Doha and Riyadh are both serving US interests, the two sheikhdoms have a rivalry with one another. This Qatari-Saudi rivalry picked up again after a brief pause that saw both sides invade the island-kingdom of Bahrain to support the Khalifa regime and to work together against the governments of Libya and Syria.

The Saud and Al-Thani rivalry has seen both sides supporting different armed groups in Libya and competing anti-government forces during the so-called Arab Spring (or Islamic Awakening in Tehran). The elections in Egypt, where Doha and Riyadh supported different sides, just added fuel to the Qatari-Saudi fire.

Qatar’s Emir Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani has made it a point to support the Muslim Brotherhood almost wherever they are as a means of expanding Qatari influence. Just days after the ousting of Mubarak, Qatar’s Al Jazeera showed great foresight when it launched Al Jazeera Mubasher Misr, a news channel dedicated exclusively to Egypt. While Qatar and its media have put their weight behind the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia and its media have not.

This has also been the reason that the Saudi-controlled media, like Al Arabiya, has continued to level criticisms against President Morsi even after the elections in Egypt. To alleviate the House of Saud’s tensions with Egypt, Morsi made his first foreign trip as president to Saudi Arabia.

Aside from favorable news coverage, it is also widely believed that Qatar helped finance the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt during elections. In addition, Qatari investments in Egypt grew by 74% according to figures released by the Egyptian Central Bank in July 2012. On August 11, Emir Al-Thani and a Qatari delegation also travelled to Egypt for a one-day visit with Morsi. The next day, on August 12, Morsi politely dismissed or “retired” Field Marshal Tantawi, the head of the Egyptian Armed Forces, and Sami Anan, the Egyptian Armed Forces chief of staff and Tantawi’s number two. After Al-Thani’s visit, rumors also began to circulate in Egypt that the Muslim Brotherhood was planning to lease the Suez Canal to Emir Al-Thani, which was denied by Morsi and his presidential staff.

An outcome of Emir Al-Thani’s Egyptian visit was that it was announced that Qatar gave Cairo two billion dollars (US). In reality, the Qataris only gave Egypt 500 million dollars (US) and said that the remainder will be given in installments, which will start after the NAM summit in Tehran. Does the payment schedule say anything?

The timing of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) visit to Cairo to negotiate a loan on the eve of the NAM summit in Tehran is also suspicious. After a year of uncertainty and begging, Qatar and the IMF have opened their pockets to the Egyptians (although Qatar sent some money earlier). The Libyan Transitional Council government has even offered to pitch in financially, even when its own coffers are in disarray as a result of the NATO war on Libya and the looting of Libya’s treasury and assets by the Atlanticists with the help of US neoliberal economist turned Libyan “minister of oil and finance” Ali Tarhouni. As for the House of Saud everyone understands that their terms for financial aid to Egypt include the continuation of anti-Iranian policies in Cairo.

 

Everyone will be Watching Morsi in Tehran

Readings on Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, which govern under the banner of the Freedom and Justice Party, vary. On the one hand the Egyptian government has maintained the closure of the borders with the Palestinians in Gaza. It has also pledged to honor its international treaties, a sly reference to its peace treaty with Israel that seeks to avoid mentioning Israel and prevent a media fuss. On the other hand, Morsi made positive gestures to Tehran at Mecca’s emergency Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) summit about forming an Ankara-Cairo-Riyadh-Tehran contact group to discuss the Syrian crisis and has said he wants amendments to be made to the Egyptian peace treaty with Israel.

Like most politicians, Morsi has watered-down his election promises. He has had to walk a fine line surrounded by enemies and competitors alike while he has worked to slowly accumulate power. When he was elected there was a delay in announcing the outcome of the Egyptian election. Field Marshal Tantawi and the Egyptian military junta were taking their time to think over on deciding whether to keep Morsi as a president or to impose a new round of martial law while forcibly installing their fellow general Ahmed Shafik as the country’s civilian president.

Morsi is at odds with Egypt’s military commanders who are the longstanding allies of Israel and the US, as well as allies of the House of Saud. Aside from retiring the two most important members of the Egyptian military junta, Morsi has also reversed the Egyptian military’s decisions to subordinate his presidency and amend the post-Mubarak constitution of Egypt. This power play has been widely described as a pre-emptive counter-coup against the Egyptian military junta. Doha may have supported the move to make sure that its Muslim Brotherhood racehorse stays in power, as opposed to the Saudi’s Egyptian military and Nour Party racehorses. Whether the counter-coup was a move made in the context of Qatari-Saudi rivalries or strictly a move to attain political freedom for Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood is a ten million Qatari riyal question.

Looking East Policy Shift in Cairo?

Where Morsi’s foreign policy is going after the NAM conference in Tehran is the other important question. Where he stands will begin to crystallize from the NAM meeting onwards. The fear of rapprochement between Iran and Egypt certainly keeps a lot of people up at night in Riyadh, Tel Aviv, London, and Washington, DC. Everyone is waiting to see what Cairo and Tehran will do and for many the expectations of rapprochement are running high, but the leverage and restrictions that exist over Morsi should not be forgotten either.

Although there is far less fanfare and attention being paid to Morsi’s trip to China, what he does there will also be very important. Some say he plans on slowly shifting Cairo’s foreign policy away from the Atlanticist camp, with Washington as its capital, towards the Eurasianist camp that includes China and Iran. Certainly Chinese foreign aid will reduce Egyptian dependency on the Atlanticists and their Arab petro-monarch partners. What we are dealing with here is an intricate web of multiple relations between different groups who are interacting with one another in different ways and through changing relationships.

Addendum – August 25, 2012

The unelected Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas threatened to boycott the NAM summit after the Iranian media and Hamas both announced that Prime Minister Haniyeh, the democratically-elected representative of the Palestinians, was going to attend the NAM summit. Subsequently the Iranian Foreign Ministry released a statement saying that Haniyeh was never invited to Tehran.


An award-winning author and geopolitical analyst, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is the author of The Globalization of NATO (Clarity Press) and a forthcoming bookThe War on Libya and the Re-Colonization of Africa. He has also contributed to several other books ranging from cultural critique to international relations. He is a Sociologist and Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), a contributor at the Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF), Moscow, and a member of the Scientific Committee of Geopolitica, Italy. He has also addressed the Middle East and international relations issues on various news networks including Al Jazeera, teleSUR, and Russia Today. His writings have been translated into more than twenty languages. In 2011 he was awarded the First National Prize of the Mexican Press Club for his work in international journalism. The above article is from his Press TV column.


The Globalization of NATO (Clarity Press) by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya.
Foreword by Denis J. Halliday.

 

The NAM Summit, Iran, and Syria: A Coup against the West?

The NAM Summit, Iran, and Syria: A Coup against the West?


The upcoming summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) will be held in Tehran from August 26 to 31, 2012. The NAM and its summit are mostly ignored in the Atlanticist world of the United States and NATO, but this year’s gathering has gotten the attention of the Atlanticists and their press. The reason is that the NAM summit’s venue has upset the political establishment in Washington, DC.
The US government has got its feathers ruffled and even gone out of its way to berate NAM leaders for gathering in Iran. US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland – the spouse of neo-con Project for the New American Century (PNAC) co-founder and arch-imperialist Robert Kagan – has asked Egypt’s new president, Mohamed Morsi, and even UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Washington’s own steward at the UN, not to travel to Tehran. Nuland and the US State Department have bitterly declared that Iran is not deserving of such “high-level presences.” The US, however, is forced to grin and bear the gathering of world leaders in Tehran.
What will take place is an international extravaganza, minus NATO and its key de facto members – Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea – in the Asia-Pacific and Israel. African, Asian, Caribbean, and Latin America officials will be there in full strength. The Chinese, which have the status of observers in the NAM, will be there. The Russians, which are not part of the NAM, have been invited as Iran’s special guests and will be represented by Konstantin Shuvalov, Russian ambassador-at-large and Vladimir Putin’s envoy. Even non-NAM member Turkey has been given an invitation from Tehran. To help the Palestinians, Hamas will also be given a special seat at the table under an invitation sent from Iran to Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh to participate at the summit alongside the US-Israeli puppet Mahmoud Abbas. Alongside the Russian Federation, most the members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) will be attending as either full members or observers. Aside from the Chinese and Russians, the other three members of the BRICS grouping – Brazil, India, and South Africa – that is becoming the new engine shaping the world will also be in attendance.

 

The NAM Summit, Iran, and Syria: A Coup against the West?

The gathering of NAM leaders will doubtlessly be an important event for Iran’s international prestige and status. For almost a week Tehran will be a key center of the world alongside the offices of the UN in New York City and Geneva. Not only will Iran be the venue for one of the largest international get-togethers of world leaders, but it will also be handed over the organization’s chairmanship from Arab powerhouse Egypt. Iran will retain this position as the leader of the NAM for the next few years and will be able to speak on behalf of the international organization. Up to a certain degree this position will allow Tehran to have more influence in world affairs. At least this is the view in Tehran where none of the significance of the NAM summit has been lost on Iranian politicians and officials who one after another are pointing out the importance of the NAM summit for their country.

The NAM is the second largest international organization and body in the world after the United Nations. With 120 full members and 17 observer members it includes most the countries and governments of the world. About two-thirds of the UN’s member states are full NAM members. The African Union (AU), Afro-Asian People’s Solidarity Organization, Commonwealth of Nations, Hostosian National Independence Movement, Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front, Arab League, Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), South Center, United Nations, and World Peace Council are all observers too.

The US and NATO which very generously and misleadingly throw around the term “international community” when they are referring to themselves are really a global minority that pale in comparison to the international grouping formed by the NAM. Any agreements or consensuses drilled out by the NAM represent not only the bulk of the international community, but also the non-imperialist international majority or those countries that have traditionally been viewed as the “have-nots.” Unlike at the UN, the “silent majority” will have its voice heard with little adulteration and perversion from the confederates of NATOistan.

The NAM gathering in Tehran signifies an important event. It demonstrates that Iran is genuinely not internationally isolated like the images that the United States and major European Union powers, such as the UK and France, like to continuously project. Atlanticist media are scrambling to explain this situation and the Israelis are clearly upset.

Undoubtedly, Iran will use the international gathering to its advantage and make use of the NAM to garnish support for its international positions and to help try to end the crisis in Syria. The US-supported siege of Syria will be denounced at the NAM conference and diplomatic blows will be dealt against the US and its clients and satellites. Already the hurried ministerial conference about the fighting in Syria organized by the Iranian Foreign Ministry in Tehran before the emergency summit held by the OIC in Mecca was a prelude to the diplomatic support that Iran will give the Syrian Arab Republic at the 2012 NAM summit.

Despite Algerian and Iranian opposition, Syria was expelled from the OIC at the behest of Saudi Arabia and the petro-monarchies. While the OIC emergency summit in Mecca may have been a political and diplomatic blow to Damascus, the situation is expected to be much different at the NAM summit in Tehran. The Syrians will also be present in Tehran and able to face their Arab antagonists from the petro-monarchies of the Persian Gulf.

The Genesis of the Non-Aligned Movement and Third World

The Non-Aligned Movement and concept of a “Third World” have their roots in the period of de-colonization after the Second World War when the empires of Western Europe began to crumble and formally end. This superficially represented an end to the domination of the weak by the strong. In reality, colonialism was merely substituted with foreign aid and loans by the declining empires. In this context, the British would offer aid to their former colonies while the French and Dutch would do the same with their former colonies to maintain control over them. Thus, the exploitation never truly ended and the world was maintained in a state of disequilibrium. The United Nations was also hostage to the big powers and ignored many important issues concerning places like Africa and Latin America.

What brought the formation of the NAM about was firstly the rejection of domination and interference by the countries of the “Global North” – a term that will be defined shortly – and the concept of co-existence that India and China carved out in 1954 when New Delhi recognized Tibet as a part of China.

The NAM started as an Asian initiative, which sought to address the tense relations between China and the US on one hand and China’s relations with other Asian powers on the other hand. The newly independent Asian states wanted to avoid any ratcheting up of the Cold War in their continent, especially after the disastrous US-led military intervention in Korea, or the manipulation of India and Indonesia as buffer states against the People’s Republic of China. This Asian initiative quickly broadened and gained the support of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Egypt, and the various leaders of the nationalist independence movements in Africa that were fighting for their liberation against NATO countries like Britain, France, and Portugal.

Yugoslavian President Josip Broz Tito, Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser were the three main forces behind the organization’s creation. Kwame Nkrumah, the Marxist pan-African leader of Ghana, and Ahmed Sukarno, the leader of Indonesia, would also put their weight behind the NAM and join Tito, Nehru, and Nasser. These leaders and their countries did not view the Cold War as an ideological struggle. This was a smokescreen. The Cold War was a power struggle from their perspectives and ideology was merely used as a justification.

 

The Different Worlds of the Cold War

The word “non-alignment” was first used on the world stage by Vengalil Krishnan Krishna Menon, India’s ambassador to the United Nations, while the term “Third World” was first used by the French scholar Alfred Sauvy. Third World is a debated political term and some find it both deregulatory and ethnocentric. To the point of confusion the phrase Third World is inextricably intertwined with the concept of non-alignment and the NAM.

Both the NAM and, especially, Third World are wrongly and carelessly used as synonyms for the Developing and Under-developing Worlds or as economic indicators. Most Third World countries were underprivileged former colonies or less affluent states in places like Africa and Latin America that were the victims of imperialism and exploitation. This has led to the general identification or misidentification of the NAM countries and the Third World with concepts of poverty. This is wrong and not what either of the terms means.

Third World was a concept that developed during the Cold War period to distinguish those countries that were not formally a part of the First World that was formed by the Western Bloc and either the Eastern/Soviet Bloc and Communist World that formed the Second World. In theory most these Third Worlders were neutral and joining the NAM was a formal expression of this position of non-alignment.

Aside from being considered Second Worlders, communist states like the People’s Republic of China and Cuba have widely been classified as parts of the Third World and have considered themselves as parts of the third global force. Chairman Mao’s views defined through his concept of Three Worlds also supported the classification of communist states like Angola, China, Cuba, and Mozambique as Third Worlders, because they did not belong to the Soviet Bloc like Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland.

In the most orthodox of interpretations of the political meaning of Third World, the communist state of Yugoslavia was a part of the Third World. In the same context, Iran due to its ties to NATO and its membership in the US-controlled Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) was politically a part of the First World until the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Thus, reference to Yugoslavia as a Second World country and Iran as a Third World country prior to 1979 are incorrect.

The term Third World has also given rise to the phrase “Global South.” This name is based on the geographically southward situation of the Third World on the map as opposed to the geographically northward situation of the First and Second Worlds, which both began to collectively be called the “Global North.” The names Global North and Global South came to slowly replace the terms First, Second, and Third World, especially since the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed.

Bandung, Belgrade, and Non-Aligned Institution Building

The NAM formed when the Third Worlders who were caught between the Atlanticists and the Soviets during the Cold War tried to formalize their third way or force. The NAM would be born after the Bandung Conference in 1955, which infuriated the US and Western Bloc who saw it as a sin against their global interests.

Contrarily to Western Bloc views, the Soviet Union was much more predisposed to accepting the NAM. Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev even proposed in 1960 that the UN be managed by a “troika” composed of the First, Second, and Third Worlds instead of its Western-influenced secretariat in New York City that was colluding with the US to remove Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba from power in the Democratic Republic of Congo, as well as other independent world leaders.

Fidel Castro and Cuba, which hosted the NAM’s summit in 1979 when Iran joined as its eighty-eighth member, would actually argue that the Second World and communist movements were the “natural allies” of the Third World and the NAM. The favorable attitudes of Nasser and Nehru towards the Soviet Union and the Soviet Bloc’s support for various national liberation movements also lends credence towards the Cuban argument about the Second and Third World alliance against the capitalist exploitation and imperialist policies of the First World.

The first NAM summit would be held in the Yugoslavian capital of Belgrade in 1961 under the chairmanship of Marshall Tito. The summit in Belgrade would call for an end to all empires and colonization. Tito, Nehru, Nasser, Nkrumah, Sukarno and other NAM leaders would demand that Western Europeans end their colonial roles in Africa and let African peoples decide their own fates.

A preparatory conference was also held a few months earlier in Cairo by Gamal Abdel Nasser. At the preparatory meetings non-alignment was defined by five points:

(1) Non-aligned countries must follow an independent policy of co-existence of nations with varied political and social systems;

(2) Non-aligned countries must be consistent in their support for national independence;

(3) Non-aligned countries must not belong to a multilateral alliance concluded in the context of superpower or big power politics;

(4) If non-aligned countries have bilateral agreement with big powers or belonged to a regional defense pact, these agreements should not have been concluded in context of the Cold War;

(5) If non-aligned states cede military bases to a big power, these bases should not be granted in the context of the Cold War.

All the NAM conferences to follow would cover vital issues in the years to come that ranged from the inclusion of the People’s Republic of China in the UN, the fighting in the Democratic Republic of Congo, African wars of independence against Western European countries, opposition to apartheid and racism, and nuclear disarmament. Furthermore, the NAM has traditionally been hostile to Zionism and condemned the occupation of Palestinian, Lebanese, Syrian, and Egyptian territories by Israel, which has earned it the seamlessly never-ending aversion of Tel Aviv.

Making NAM Relevant Again

Many people ask what relevance the Non-Aligned Movement has today. Since the end of the Cold War the NAM’s strength has been eroded as the US, neoliberal economic reforms, the IMF, and the World Bank have gained more and more control over NAM members. In many cases NAM members have reverted back to de facto colonies in all but name. Many members of NAM, such as Belarus, Colombia, Ethiopia, and Saudi Arabia, are actually fully aligned states.

There is no question about it that Iran wants to make NAM relevant again to use it to fight off the expansionist Atlanticist World. So do the Russians and the Chinese. The NAM after all has provided Iran important diplomatic support in its politicized nuclear dispute with the Atlanticists. The NAM is also the closest alternative to the Atlanticist-infiltrated and perverted United Nations.
The NAM summit will be capitalized on by Iran and its allies to try and develop some sort of strategy to fight and circumvent the unilateral US and European Union sanctions against the Iranian economy and to show the Atlanticists in the US and the EU that their powers in the world are limited and declining. One small step in this direction is that Iran will begin negotiations with 60 NAM countries to drop bilateral visa requirements with Iran. A universal statement may also be released asking for the anti-Iranian sanctions to be dropped or modified. Other steps would include proposals for a new and alternative financial global structure, which would evade the Atlanticist chokehold on international financial transactions.

An important event at the NAM summit will be the arrival of Morsi in Tehran as a sign of warming relations. Ties between Cairo and Tehran will not be restored overnight either, because there are restrictions on Morsi. Whatever happens between Egypt and Iran at the NAM summit in Tehran will be just steps in an unrushed process. The Egyptians are taking pains not to antagonize their Western and Arab paymasters and the Iranians have opted to be patient. Morsi’s presence in Iran, however, is still symbolically very important. Tehran indeed has reason to be very optimistic as all its stars are aligning at its NAM gala.

Diplomatic circles are looking at Egypt on the eve of the NAM summit. Before it was announced that Morsi would go to Iran, it was expected that Egyptian Vice-President Mahmoud Mekki would represent Egypt at the NAM summit as a demonstration of Egypt’s estrangement from Iran.

Cairo’s relationship with Tehran and what develops from Morsi’s trip to Iran is what all Arabdom, Israel, and the US will be watching carefully.

Some analysts are asserting that Egypt’s stance could “make or break” the project to isolate Iran, especially in sectarian terms involving a Shiite-Sunni divide. This is actually wrong, because there is nothing specifically significant that Egypt can do to break or isolate Iran. After all, Cairo and Tehran have essentially had no ties since 1980 and Mubarak was a staunch ally of the US who put Egypt to work with Saudi Arabia and Israel to curve Iranian influence.

In the worst case scenario the relationship between the two countries will stay as it was during the Mubarak era. This is not a losing situation for Iran, albeit the situation in Syria has catalyzed the Iranian desire for faster rapprochement. Egyptian-Iranian relations have nowhere to go except upward.

The Tahrir (Liberation) Square protests that dethroned Mubarak and helped bring about the elections that brought the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood into power are part of what Iranian officials call an “Islamic Awakening” in contrast to an “Arab Spring.” Iran did not hide its belief either that Egypt and it could eventually form a new regional axis after dictator-for-life Mubarak was booted out from power. If there is any man that can make the leap from the conception of an Arab Spring to an Islamic Awakening, at least publicly, it is President Morsi through an alliance with Iran.

On August 8, Iran sent Hamid Baqaei to deliver Morsi’s invitation to attend the NAM summit in Tehran. Along the way the international press and pundits gave higher attribution to Baqaei’s governmental rank, because they failed to realize or mention that he was the most senior of eleven junior or assistant vice-presidents and essentially the cabinet minister responsible for the Iranian presidency’s executive affairs.

First Vice-President Mohammed-Reza Rahimi, the former governor of the Iranian province of Kurdistan and himself a former junior vice-president, is Iran’s senior vice-president. Regardless, Baqaei’s visit to Cairo as both a presidential envoy and a close presidential aide was important. Iran could have delivered the invitation letter through its interest section in the Swiss Embassy to Egypt or other diplomatic channels, but made a significant gesture by sending Baqaei directly to Egypt. The move made all the countries conspiring against Iran and Syria very anxious. For these anxious countries the NAM get-together in Tehran will be all about Egypt, Iran, and Syria.

 

Are Saudi, Qatari, and IMF moves in Egypt tied to the NAM Summit in Tehran?
Both Saudi Arabia and Qatar have offered Egypt their financial aid before Morsi’s visits to Beijing, where he is expected to ask for Chinese help. Aside from the use of Saudi and Qatari aid to shape the way that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood interacts with Iran, the offers of aid from the petro-despots of Doha and Riyadh are part of the Arab competition over influence in Cairo.

Morsi is widely seen as Qatar’s man and relations between Riyadh and Cairo have been uneasy for some time. The Saudi Embassy in Cairo was even temporarily closed after Egyptian protests against Saudi Arabia flared up. More importantly, the House of Saud opposed Morsi in support of longstanding Mubarak henchman Ahmed Shafik during the Egyptian presidential elections. In addition, the House of Saud has propped up its own political clients inside Egypt against the Muslim Brotherhood. The House of Saud’s Egyptian clients, the Nour Party and the their parliamentary coalition called the Alliance for Egypt (Islamic Bloc), trailed in second place behind the Muslim Brotherhood’s parliamentary coalition, the Democratic Alliance.

Despite the fact that Doha and Riyadh are both serving US interests, the two sheikhdoms have a rivalry with one another. This Qatari-Saudi rivalry picked up again after a brief pause that saw both sides invade the island-kingdom of Bahrain to support the Khalifa regime and to work together against the governments of Libya and Syria.

The Saud and Al-Thani rivalry has seen both sides supporting different armed groups in Libya and competing anti-government forces during the so-called Arab Spring (or Islamic Awakening in Tehran). The elections in Egypt, where Doha and Riyadh supported different sides, just added fuel to the Qatari-Saudi fire.
Qatar’s Emir Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani has made it a point to support the Muslim Brotherhood almost wherever they are as a means of expanding Qatari influence. Just days after the ousting of Mubarak, Qatar’s Al Jazeera showed great foresight when it launched Al Jazeera Mubasher Misr, a news channel dedicated exclusively to Egypt. While Qatar and its media have put their weight behind the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia and its media have not.

This has also been the reason that the Saudi-controlled media, like Al Arabiya, has continued to level criticisms against President Morsi even after the elections in Egypt. To alleviate the House of Saud’s tensions with Egypt, Morsi made his first foreign trip as president to Saudi Arabia.

Aside from favorable news coverage, it is also widely believed that Qatar helped finance the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt during elections. In addition, Qatari investments in Egypt grew by 74% according to figures released by the Egyptian Central Bank in July 2012. On August 11, Emir Al-Thani and a Qatari delegation also travelled to Egypt for a one-day visit with Morsi. The next day, on August 12, Morsi politely dismissed or “retired” Field Marshal Tantawi, the head of the Egyptian Armed Forces, and Sami Anan, the Egyptian Armed Forces chief of staff and Tantawi’s number two. After Al-Thani’s visit, rumors also began to circulate in Egypt that the Muslim Brotherhood was planning to lease the Suez Canal to Emir Al-Thani, which was denied by Morsi and his presidential staff.

An outcome of Emir Al-Thani’s Egyptian visit was that it was announced that Qatar gave Cairo two billion dollars (US). In reality, the Qataris only gave Egypt 500 million dollars (US) and said that the remainder will be given in installments, which will start after the NAM summit in Tehran. Does the payment schedule say anything?

The timing of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) visit to Cairo to negotiate a loan on the eve of the NAM summit in Tehran is also suspicious. After a year of uncertainty and begging, Qatar and the IMF have opened their pockets to the Egyptians (although Qatar sent some money earlier). The Libyan Transitional Council government has even offered to pitch in financially, even when its own coffers are in disarray as a result of the NATO war on Libya and the looting of Libya’s treasury and assets by the Atlanticists with the help of US neoliberal economist turned Libyan “minister of oil and finance” Ali Tarhouni. As for the House of Saud everyone understands that their terms for financial aid to Egypt include the continuation of anti-Iranian policies in Cairo.

 

Everyone will be Watching Morsi in Tehran

Readings on Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, which govern under the banner of the Freedom and Justice Party, vary. On the one hand the Egyptian government has maintained the closure of the borders with the Palestinians in Gaza. It has also pledged to honor its international treaties, a sly reference to its peace treaty with Israel that seeks to avoid mentioning Israel and prevent a media fuss. On the other hand, Morsi made positive gestures to Tehran at Mecca’s emergency Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) summit about forming an Ankara-Cairo-Riyadh-Tehran contact group to discuss the Syrian crisis and has said he wants amendments to be made to the Egyptian peace treaty with Israel.

Like most politicians, Morsi has watered-down his election promises. He has had to walk a fine line surrounded by enemies and competitors alike while he has worked to slowly accumulate power. When he was elected there was a delay in announcing the outcome of the Egyptian election. Field Marshal Tantawi and the Egyptian military junta were taking their time to think over on deciding whether to keep Morsi as a president or to impose a new round of martial law while forcibly installing their fellow general Ahmed Shafik as the country’s civilian president.

Morsi is at odds with Egypt’s military commanders who are the longstanding allies of Israel and the US, as well as allies of the House of Saud. Aside from retiring the two most important members of the Egyptian military junta, Morsi has also reversed the Egyptian military’s decisions to subordinate his presidency and amend the post-Mubarak constitution of Egypt. This power play has been widely described as a pre-emptive counter-coup against the Egyptian military junta. Doha may have supported the move to make sure that its Muslim Brotherhood racehorse stays in power, as opposed to the Saudi’s Egyptian military and Nour Party racehorses. Whether the counter-coup was a move made in the context of Qatari-Saudi rivalries or strictly a move to attain political freedom for Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood is a ten million Qatari riyal question.

Looking East Policy Shift in Cairo?

Where Morsi’s foreign policy is going after the NAM conference in Tehran is the other important question. Where he stands will begin to crystallize from the NAM meeting onwards. The fear of rapprochement between Iran and Egypt certainly keeps a lot of people up at night in Riyadh, Tel Aviv, London, and Washington, DC. Everyone is waiting to see what Cairo and Tehran will do and for many the expectations of rapprochement are running high, but the leverage and restrictions that exist over Morsi should not be forgotten either.

Although there is far less fanfare and attention being paid to Morsi’s trip to China, what he does there will also be very important. Some say he plans on slowly shifting Cairo’s foreign policy away from the Atlanticist camp, with Washington as its capital, towards the Eurasianist camp that includes China and Iran. Certainly Chinese foreign aid will reduce Egyptian dependency on the Atlanticists and their Arab petro-monarch partners. What we are dealing with here is an intricate web of multiple relations between different groups who are interacting with one another in different ways and through changing relationships.

Addendum – August 25, 2012
The unelected Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas threatened to boycott the NAM summit after the Iranian media and Hamas both announced that Prime Minister Haniyeh, the democratically-elected representative of the Palestinians, was going to attend the NAM summit. Subsequently the Iranian Foreign Ministry released a statement saying that Haniyeh was never invited to Tehran.


An award-winning author and geopolitical analyst, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is the author of The Globalization of NATO (Clarity Press) and a forthcoming bookThe War on Libya and the Re-Colonization of Africa. He has also contributed to several other books ranging from cultural critique to international relations. He is a Sociologist and Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), a contributor at the Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF), Moscow, and a member of the Scientific Committee of Geopolitica, Italy. He has also addressed the Middle East and international relations issues on various news networks including Al Jazeera, teleSUR, and Russia Today. His writings have been translated into more than twenty languages. In 2011 he was awarded the First National Prize of the Mexican Press Club for his work in international journalism. The above article is from his Press TV column.


The Globalization of NATO (Clarity Press) by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya.
Foreword by Denis J. Halliday.

 

They used #missile, the rules have changed-smash the trash and send it back to sewers!

صواريخ ستينغر تصل من واشنطن إلى جوبر ، ولهذا لا خيار أمام جيشنا إلا سحق العدو بلا رحمة … وهذا ماكانت ستفعله أي دولة ذات سيادة .
A helicopter has been shot down by terrorists in Alghofran mosque in Al Qaboon, Damascus.

Condition of pilots unknown.
Damascus: Syrian Army attacks dens for the militants in Jobar in response to down the helicopter
American missile used to shot down the chopper in Qaboon. the same trick used it in Afghanistan are using it in Syria this means they want to make Syria like Afghanistan.

بعد وصول اسلحة نوعية اميركية وغربية الى ايدي مقاتلي المعارضة السورية التابعين قياديا لحلف الاطلسي اسقط هؤلاء قبل دقائق مروحية سورية في منطقة القابون بريف دمشق
‎#Jobar :the vehicle that launched the Stinger missiles has been destroyed by the #Syria-n army.
أيها الحثالة الارهابيين …ستدفعون ثمناً باهظاً كرامة لروح هذا الطيار وكل شهداء الوطن … ولن تروا غياب شمس اليوم الا وانتم في السجون أو القبور بسواعد جيشنا الباسل الجيش العربي السوري
باذن الله

Land Destroyer: Globalist Rag Gives "Two Cheers" for Terrorism

Land Destroyer: Globalist Rag Gives “Two Cheers” for Terrorism: Foreign Policy plums new depths of own legendary depravity.  by Tony Cartalucci August 24, 2012 – Foreign Policy published a recent art…

Globalist Rag Gives “Two Cheers” for Terrorism

Foreign Policy plums new depths of own legendary depravity. 
by Tony Cartalucci

August 24, 2012 – Foreign Policy published a recent article literally titled, “Two Cheers for Syrian Islamists.” In it, general editor of the Neo-Con Middle East Forum Gary Gambill concedes that the Syrian government “would not be in the trouble it’s in today were it not for the Islamists,” revealing what the West and its media houses have attempted but failed at obfuscating – that the violence in Syria is the work of sectarian extremists, not “pro-democracy activists.” The latter’s existence was amplified by the Western media specifically to provide cover and legitimacy for the violence and subversion of the former.

 Image: Must be seen to believe – screenshot of FP’s article literally titled, “Two Cheers for Syrian Islamists.” The writer, Gary Gambill, comes from the Middle East Forum which regular features the warmongering rants of Neo-Cons like Daniel Pipes and Islamophobia-propagandist Robert Spencer. 

….

Gambill continues his “two cheers” for terrorism in perhaps the most perverse statement found to-date in the Western press on the subject: 

“Islamists — many of them hardened by years of fighting U.S. forces in Iraq — are simply more effective fighters than their secular counterparts. Assad has had extraordinary difficulty countering tactics perfected by his former jihadist allies, particularly suicide bombings and roadside bombs.”

Gambill is gushingly praising men who have killed Western troops, admiring their prowess on the battlefield through their use of indiscriminate terrorist tactics which have killed and maimed tens of thousands of civilians across the Arab World.

The Big Lie 

Gambill continues by stating, “The Sunni Islamist surge may also be essential to inflicting a full-blown strategic defeat on Iran,” before concluding at length as to why the US should support terrorism in Syria:

“For the foreseeable future, however, Iran constitutes a far greater and more immediate threat to U.S. national interests. Whatever misfortunes Sunni Islamists may visit upon the Syrian people, any government they form will be strategically preferable to the Assad regime, for three reasons: A new government in Damascus will find continuing the alliance with Tehran unthinkable, it won’t have to distract Syrians from its minority status with foreign policy adventurism like the ancien régime, and it will be flush with petrodollars from Arab Gulf states (relatively) friendly to Washington.

So long as Syrian jihadis are committed to fighting Iran and its Arab proxies, we should quietly root for them — while keeping our distance from a conflict that is going to get very ugly before the smoke clears. There will be plenty of time to tame the beast after Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions have gone down in flames. ” –Gary Gambill, “Two Cheers for Syrian Islamists,” (2012)

In this, Gambill divulges the true agenda behind destabilizing Syria – the isolation and undermining of Iran to the east, and Hezbollah in Lebanon to the West. Gambill also mentions the destruction of Syria as a means of realigning Iraq to US interests.

Gambill disingenuously claims that the US can do “little about” what he calls the “political ascendancy” of these sectarian extremists, portraying the rise of violence across the Levant and the miraculous resurrection of the Muslim Brotherhood across the Arab World as coincidentally aligned to American interests, and something that should be allowed, even encouraged, to run its course.

Gambill fails to mention, however, that this “political ascendancy” was planned, funded, armed, and organized by the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia as far back as 2007, according to a detailed, 9-page report published by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker titled “The Redirection.”

In the report, it explicitly states:

“To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.” –Seymour Hersh, The Redirection (2007)

 Hersh’s report would also include:

“the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria. The Israelis believe that putting such pressure on the Assad government will make it more conciliatory and open to negotiations.” –Seymour Hersh, The Redirection (2007)

In essence, Gambill’s gushing support for terrorism – and in particular, terrorists who have fought and killed Americans – is but the latest in an attempt to spin and repackage Al Qaeda and the fraudulent “War on Terror” as public awareness outgrows the fallacious “humanitarian pretenses” the operation has been couched within hitherto.

Gambill’s material support for terrorism echos a recent article titled, “Al-Qaeda’s Specter in Syria,” published by the Council on Foreign Relations, a premier Fortune 500-funded US think-tank, which stated:

“The Syrian rebels would be immeasurably weaker today without al-Qaeda in their ranks. By and large, Free Syrian Army (FSA) battalions are tired, divided, chaotic, and ineffective. Feeling abandoned by the West, rebel forces are increasingly demoralized as they square off with the Assad regime’s superior weaponry and professional army. Al-Qaeda fighters, however, may help improve morale. The influx of jihadis brings discipline, religious fervor, battle experience from Iraq, funding from Sunni sympathizers in the Gulf, and most importantly, deadly results. In short, the FSA needs al-Qaeda now.”

Why is Gambill Writing This?

Consider the audience of Foreign Policy. It is not propaganda fit for the masses. Rather it is for aspiring, as well as low to mid-level members of the global corporate-financier establishment. Western involvement in both Libya and Syria have undermined the governments, institutions, and organizations many of these people work for, and as public awareness (and anger) grows, it will be these low to mid-level members who bear the brunt of the system’s collapsing legitimacy. Many are already expressing doubts over the viability and nature of the West’s global agenda as it unfolds.

It must be remembered that the terrorists Gambill is “cheering” for had ensnared millions of Western troops for over a decade in the so-called “War on Terror.” It has killed thousands of troops, tens of thousands were maimed both physically and psychologically, and hundreds of thousands have forever lost time they could have spent at home with their loved ones. As public awareness grows of Western support for these very terrorists, it would be almost inconceivable that there would not be a profound, perhaps even violent backlash against people like Gambill and the establishment he represents.

Gambill’s cheerleading is designed to rally the lower ranks of the establishment around this new narrative as he and fellow warmongers attempt to flee forward through Syria and then into Iran. Eventually, the reckless promotion of terrorism Gambill and others are committed to will once again call US soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen into harms way – either to fight nations defending themselves against US-sponsored terrorism, or to liquidate US-supported terrorists when their services are longer needed.

Gambill by causally saying, “there will be plenty of time to tame the beast after Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions have gone down in flames,” means specifically more US troops will be deployed, and will most certainly die, all in the pursuit of corporate-financier interests in the Middle East. Gambill specifically refers to “hegemonic ambitions,” not any conceivable threat to US defense, as the impetus for cheering on terrorism, a theme that is omnipresent throughout US policy papers on Iran.

Legendary US Marine Corps General Smedley Butler once said “war is a racket.” For an increasing number of people worldwide, they are beginning to understand why.

the real Syrian Free Press

*

*

Published on Aug 23, 2012 by syrianpress

“Violence in Syria is fuelled from abroad, Iran next”.

A Russia Today TV-channel interview with the journalist Kris Janssen,
founder of Syrian Friendship Association

*

Recorded from Russia Today television on 22/08/2012

SyrianFreePress.net Network

http://www.syrianfreepress.net/

http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/

http://www.facebook.com/syrianetwork

https://www.facebook.com/Tg24Siria

http://www.youtube.com/user/syriafreepress

http://www.youtube.com/user/syrianpress

http://www.youtube.com/user/sirianews

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheNewsSyria

*

*

*

*

*

View original post

Cyprus displeased at reports that British bases provide help to Syrian rebels

NICOSIA: Cyprus said on Thursday it had asked Britain to give an official explanation for a Sunday Times report alleging that the British Sovereign Bases in Cyprus provide intelligence to Syrian rebels which helped them deal effective strikes against the Syrian army.

Foreign Minister Erato Kozakou-Markoulli told the state radio that she had instructed the Cypriot High Commissioner (Ambassador) in London to make a demarche to the British Foreign Ministry asking for official information on the report.

“It is a very serious issue if the bases are being used for purposes other than those explicitly set out in the Treaty of Establishment,” Markouli said.

She said she expected a British reply by the end of the day.

Markoulli added that the 1960 Treaty of Establishment under which Cyprus was granted independence states that two bases retained by Britain can only be used for defensive purposes.

British paper the Sunday Times claimed on Sunday that British agents operating in the British bases were collecting intelligence on Syrian army movements which is then channeled through Turkey to forces fighting the the Syrian army.

A spokesman for the British High Commission in Cyprus on Monday refused to confirm or deny the report, citing the official government position not to comment on intelligence or operational matters.

Antiwar literary and philosophical selections

Xinhua News Agency
August 23, 2012

Cyprus displeased at reports that British bases provide help to Syrian rebels

NICOSIA: Cyprus said on Thursday it had asked Britain to give an official explanation for a Sunday Times report alleging that the British Sovereign Bases in Cyprus provide intelligence to Syrian rebels which helped them deal effective strikes against the Syrian army.

Foreign Minister Erato Kozakou-Markoulli told the state radio that she had instructed the Cypriot High Commissioner (Ambassador) in London to make a demarche to the British Foreign Ministry asking for official information on the report.

“It is a very serious issue if the bases are being used for purposes other than those explicitly set out in the Treaty of Establishment,” Markouli said.

She said she expected a British reply by the end of the day.

Markoulli added that the 1960 Treaty of Establishment under which Cyprus was granted independence states…

View original post 615 more words

UN "Peace Envoy" Lakhdar Brahimi: America’s New Point Man in Syria

UN “Peace Envoy” Lakhdar Brahimi: America’s New Point Man in Syria

Brahimi is distorting the reality of Western mass murder and subversion in Syria. He is serving to lend contemptible cover to those external forces that are tearing Syria apart by giving the mayhem a veneer of “civil war”.

In that way, he is following in the disgraceful footsteps of Kofi Annan and is proving to be less a point man for the UN and more a point man for the US.” The UN-Arab League’s new peace envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, says he is not confident about the prospect of restoring peace in Syria. After giving his first major public comment on the conflict, it is not surprising to hear the veteran Algerian diplomat voicing his lack of confidence.

This is because he is either completely misinformed on the violence in Syria; or, more likely, because Brahimi is deliberately misinforming the rest of the world about the problem at hand.
It should be a matter of deep misgiving that, only days after the former Algerian foreign minister took up the post, his first port of call was to have a private meeting with French President Francois Hollande in the Elysee Palace, Paris. The former colonial power is hardly a neutral party to the raging conflict in Syria. France, and the other Western powers, are up to their neck in the bloodshed that is spilling across the Levant.
For months now, it has been reported that France, along with that other colonial has-been Britain, dispatched Special Forces to operate covertly in Syria, helping the insurgency wage a campaign of sabotage to bring down the government of President Bashar al-Assad. Only last weekend, the French government made its policy towards Syria abundantly clear when Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, visiting refugee camps in Turkey, announced that the Syrian authorities should be “smashed”.
Fabius even went as far as calling for Assad’s personal liquidation by adding that “he should not be allowed on this earth”. Let’s just dwell on that for a minute. The French government is in effect calling for the overthrow of a sovereign government and the assassination of a head of state. Such language is the policy of a lawless rogue power that has abdicated any pretence of abiding by the charter of the UN.
How can Brahimi expect to be taken seriously as an honest broker when he openly defers to a criminal party in the conflict – a party that is acting wholly illegally in its interference in the affairs of a sovereign state?
Brahimi, who previously served as the UN representative to Iraq and Afghanistan, is replacing Kofi Annan as the so-called United Nations-Arab League “point man” in Syria. Annan quit the task earlier this month after his six-point peace plan initiated in April was systematically scuppered by Western, Arab and Turk-backed foreign militants trying to overthrow Assad over the past 17 months.
At the time of his resignation, Annan told the Financial Times on 2 August that his proposed ceasefire was doomed because “sustained international support did not follow… The ceasefire quickly unraveled.” This startling admission – albeit couched in typically vague diplomatic language – should have made front-page news. What Annan was saying then was that the international backers of the Syrian insurgents – that is the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Turkey, Israel and the Persian Gulf Arab monarchies – did not support the initiative. In plain language, these powers killed the UN-brokered ceasefire. That Annan did not explicitly lay the blame is to his discredit.
This crucial factor reveals the real nature of the conflict in Syria. It is not, as the Western governments and their media have been asserting, a popular uprising from within the country that has led to a battle between state forces and rebels. This scenario suggests that Syria is wracked in a civil war between national factions. But this assessment of the situation is a travesty of the truth. It so happens that Syrian government’s claims are closer to the truth. That is, that the country is being assailed and destabilized by a foreign-backed insurgency.
Russia and China are in agreement with the official position in Damascus, and that is why these powers have rejected Western attempts through the UN Security Council to oust the Assad government. Both Moscow and Beijing correctly view the Western agenda towards Syria as a politically driven plan for regime change. The Western narrative of painting the Assad government as “a brutal oppressor” plays to a moral pseudo-concern for the protection of human rights and thereby gives the Western powers cover for illegal intervention – in the same way that they did in Libya last year, using a fake “responsibility to protect” pretext to unleash a seven-month bombing campaign to overthrow the government in Tripoli that led to the murder of the country’s leader Muammar Gaddafi.
Since the covert intervention by Western powers in Syria, along with their regional allies, has greatly escalated the violence in that country in recent months, the above narrative of “brutal oppressor” is no longer plausible. That is why Western governments and media are now talking in terms of “civil war” and portraying the conflict as one between a reprehensible regime and freedom-loving rebels.
But the Western narrative of “civil war” in Syria is also beneath contempt. Just in the past week, it has been revealed that British and German military intelligence are acting as the eyes and ears of the armed militia in Syria, directing them to sharpen assaults against the Syrian state forces in the commercial capital of Aleppo.
Most of these armed groups have infiltrated Syria from foreign countries such as Libya, Iraq, Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Yemen and even as far away as Pakistan and Chechnya. It is now widely reported that these mercenaries are affiliated to al-Qaeda and other extremist Salafist groups that have a long history of collaboration with the US, Britain and Saudi Arabia going back to the guerrilla war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
This global proxy mercenary army – that was previously the West’s supposed enemy in the “war on terror” – is now doing the bidding in Syria of the US, Britain, France, Germany, as well as Turkey, Israel and the Persian Gulf monarchies. This US-led axis wants to overthrow the Syrian government, which it views as being resistant to Western hegemonic objectives in the Middle East. These objectives include thwarting the pro-democracy movement of the Arab Spring and undermining Syria’s ally, Hezbollah, in Lebanon, with a view to shoring up the unsustainable pro-Western Zionist regime. The Western objectives also include undercutting and eventually overthrowing the Islamic Republic of Iran, and thereby circumscribing the influence of Russia and China in the vital energy-rich Middle East and Central Asian regions.
What is happening in Syria is an imperialist proxy war. The people of that country are being subjected to an all-out campaign of terrorism and sabotage to bring down the West’s perceived enemy in Damascus, to replace it with a regime that is pliable to Western geopolitical objectives.
Reliable sources in Syria report that there is negligible popular support for the Western-backed mercenaries running amok in that country. Indeed, the general populace seems to be living under a foreign-backed reign of terror, with no-warning car bombs in the capital, Damascus, and the second, northern city of Aleppo, and whole villages being massacred by Salafist gangs trying to fuel a sectarian bloodbath. Families tell of being turned out of their homes under pain of death, to make way for sniper posts and bomb factories, their loved ones being kidnapped and held to ransom.
The heinous game plan is to turn a once pluralist society of Shia, Sunni, Christian, Druze, Jew and non-believer into a charnel house of sectarian bloodletting in much the same way as Libya and other countries that have succumbed to Western “protection”.
Given the appalling reality of violence in Syria, and in particular the criminal Western involvement in fomenting, fuelling and directing foreign-backed subversion, it is surely a sickening farce to portray the situation as a “civil war”.
Yet this is what the new UN envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, is seeking to do. After his private audience with Francois Hollande at weekend, Brahimi lamented the violence in Syria thus:
“A civil war, it is the cruelest kind of conflict, when a neighbour kills his neighbour and sometimes his brother, it is the worst of conflicts. There are a lot of people who say that we must avoid civil war in Syria. Me, I believe that we are already there for some time now. What’s necessary is to stop the civil war and that is not going to be easy.”
Brahimi is distorting the reality of Western mass murder and subversion in Syria. He is serving to lend contemptible cover to those external forces that are tearing Syria apart by giving the mayhem a veneer of “civil war”. In that way, he is following in the disgraceful footsteps of Kofi Annan and is proving to be less a point man for the UN and more a point man for the US.

UN “Peace Envoy” Lakhdar Brahimi: America’s New Point Man in Syria

UN “Peace Envoy” Lakhdar Brahimi: America’s New Point Man in Syria.

Brahimi is distorting the reality of Western mass murder and subversion in Syria. He is serving to lend contemptible cover to those external forces that are tearing Syria apart by giving the mayhem a veneer of “civil war”.

In that way, he is following in the disgraceful footsteps of Kofi Annan and is proving to be less a point man for the UN and more a point man for the US.” The UN-Arab League’s new peace envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, says he is not confident about the prospect of restoring peace in Syria. After giving his first major public comment on the conflict, it is not surprising to hear the veteran Algerian diplomat voicing his lack of confidence.

This is because he is either completely misinformed on the violence in Syria; or, more likely, because Brahimi is deliberately misinforming the rest of the world about the problem at hand.

It should be a matter of deep misgiving that, only days after the former Algerian foreign minister took up the post, his first port of call was to have a private meeting with French President Francois Hollande in the Elysee Palace, Paris. The former colonial power is hardly a neutral party to the raging conflict in Syria. France, and the other Western powers, are up to their neck in the bloodshed that is spilling across the Levant.

For months now, it has been reported that France, along with that other colonial has-been Britain, dispatched Special Forces to operate covertly in Syria, helping the insurgency wage a campaign of sabotage to bring down the government of President Bashar al-Assad. Only last weekend, the French government made its policy towards Syria abundantly clear when Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, visiting refugee camps in Turkey, announced that the Syrian authorities should be “smashed”.

Fabius even went as far as calling for Assad’s personal liquidation by adding that “he should not be allowed on this earth”. Let’s just dwell on that for a minute. The French government is in effect calling for the overthrow of a sovereign government and the assassination of a head of state. Such language is the policy of a lawless rogue power that has abdicated any pretence of abiding by the charter of the UN.

How can Brahimi expect to be taken seriously as an honest broker when he openly defers to a criminal party in the conflict – a party that is acting wholly illegally in its interference in the affairs of a sovereign state?

Brahimi, who previously served as the UN representative to Iraq and Afghanistan, is replacing Kofi Annan as the so-called United Nations-Arab League “point man” in Syria. Annan quit the task earlier this month after his six-point peace plan initiated in April was systematically scuppered by Western, Arab and Turk-backed foreign militants trying to overthrow Assad over the past 17 months.

At the time of his resignation, Annan told the Financial Times on 2 August that his proposed ceasefire was doomed because “sustained international support did not follow… The ceasefire quickly unraveled.” This startling admission – albeit couched in typically vague diplomatic language – should have made front-page news. What Annan was saying then was that the international backers of the Syrian insurgents – that is the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Turkey, Israel and the Persian Gulf Arab monarchies – did not support the initiative. In plain language, these powers killed the UN-brokered ceasefire. That Annan did not explicitly lay the blame is to his discredit.

This crucial factor reveals the real nature of the conflict in Syria. It is not, as the Western governments and their media have been asserting, a popular uprising from within the country that has led to a battle between state forces and rebels. This scenario suggests that Syria is wracked in a civil war between national factions. But this assessment of the situation is a travesty of the truth. It so happens that Syrian government’s claims are closer to the truth. That is, that the country is being assailed and destabilized by a foreign-backed insurgency.

Russia and China are in agreement with the official position in Damascus, and that is why these powers have rejected Western attempts through the UN Security Council to oust the Assad government. Both Moscow and Beijing correctly view the Western agenda towards Syria as a politically driven plan for regime change. The Western narrative of painting the Assad government as “a brutal oppressor” plays to a moral pseudo-concern for the protection of human rights and thereby gives the Western powers cover for illegal intervention – in the same way that they did in Libya last year, using a fake “responsibility to protect” pretext to unleash a seven-month bombing campaign to overthrow the government in Tripoli that led to the murder of the country’s leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Since the covert intervention by Western powers in Syria, along with their regional allies, has greatly escalated the violence in that country in recent months, the above narrative of “brutal oppressor” is no longer plausible. That is why Western governments and media are now talking in terms of “civil war” and portraying the conflict as one between a reprehensible regime and freedom-loving rebels.

But the Western narrative of “civil war” in Syria is also beneath contempt. Just in the past week, it has been revealed that British and German military intelligence are acting as the eyes and ears of the armed militia in Syria, directing them to sharpen assaults against the Syrian state forces in the commercial capital of Aleppo.

Most of these armed groups have infiltrated Syria from foreign countries such as Libya, Iraq, Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Yemen and even as far away as Pakistan and Chechnya. It is now widely reported that these mercenaries are affiliated to al-Qaeda and other extremist Salafist groups that have a long history of collaboration with the US, Britain and Saudi Arabia going back to the guerrilla war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

This global proxy mercenary army – that was previously the West’s supposed enemy in the “war on terror” – is now doing the bidding in Syria of the US, Britain, France, Germany, as well as Turkey, Israel and the Persian Gulf monarchies. This US-led axis wants to overthrow the Syrian government, which it views as being resistant to Western hegemonic objectives in the Middle East. These objectives include thwarting the pro-democracy movement of the Arab Spring and undermining Syria’s ally, Hezbollah, in Lebanon, with a view to shoring up the unsustainable pro-Western Zionist regime. The Western objectives also include undercutting and eventually overthrowing the Islamic Republic of Iran, and thereby circumscribing the influence of Russia and China in the vital energy-rich Middle East and Central Asian regions.

What is happening in Syria is an imperialist proxy war. The people of that country are being subjected to an all-out campaign of terrorism and sabotage to bring down the West’s perceived enemy in Damascus, to replace it with a regime that is pliable to Western geopolitical objectives.

Reliable sources in Syria report that there is negligible popular support for the Western-backed mercenaries running amok in that country. Indeed, the general populace seems to be living under a foreign-backed reign of terror, with no-warning car bombs in the capital, Damascus, and the second, northern city of Aleppo, and whole villages being massacred by Salafist gangs trying to fuel a sectarian bloodbath. Families tell of being turned out of their homes under pain of death, to make way for sniper posts and bomb factories, their loved ones being kidnapped and held to ransom.

The heinous game plan is to turn a once pluralist society of Shia, Sunni, Christian, Druze, Jew and non-believer into a charnel house of sectarian bloodletting in much the same way as Libya and other countries that have succumbed to Western “protection”.

Given the appalling reality of violence in Syria, and in particular the criminal Western involvement in fomenting, fuelling and directing foreign-backed subversion, it is surely a sickening farce to portray the situation as a “civil war”.

Yet this is what the new UN envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, is seeking to do. After his private audience with Francois Hollande at weekend, Brahimi lamented the violence in Syria thus:

“A civil war, it is the cruelest kind of conflict, when a neighbour kills his neighbour and sometimes his brother, it is the worst of conflicts. There are a lot of people who say that we must avoid civil war in Syria. Me, I believe that we are already there for some time now. What’s necessary is to stop the civil war and that is not going to be easy.”

Brahimi is distorting the reality of Western mass murder and subversion in Syria. He is serving to lend contemptible cover to those external forces that are tearing Syria apart by giving the mayhem a veneer of “civil war”. In that way, he is following in the disgraceful footsteps of Kofi Annan and is proving to be less a point man for the UN and more a point man for the US.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32425

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32425.


US-led NATO forces armed, funded, trained, and even provided air support to Syria for Libyan terrorists emanating out of Libya’s eastern Cyrenaica region – most notably Benghazi which had served as the premier international terrorist recruiting ground in the world,
 according to the US Army’s Combating Terrorism Center, producing a percentage per capita of militants outstripping even that of Saudi Arabia.

Operating under the banner of the “Libyan Islamic Fighting Group” (LIFG), a US State DepartmentBritish Home Office, and United Nations-listed international terrorist organization, and officially merged with Al Qaeda in 2007, its commanders including Abdul Hakim Belhaj and Mahdi al-Harati led NATO’s military proxy forces on the ground as US, French, and British planes destroyed the nation from the air.

These very same commanders of this very same listed-terrorist organization would then turn its cash, weapons, and fighters on Syria, as early as November 2011, arriving on the Turkish-Syrian border to enjoy yet another NATO safe haven and logistical networks overseen by Western intelligence along with US funding and arms laundered through Gulf Cooperative Council (GCC) members such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Image: Libyan Mahdi al-Harati of the US State DepartmentUnited Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf)-listed terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), addressing fellow terrorists in Syria. Harati is now commanding a Libyan brigade operating inside of Syria attempting to destroy the Syrian government and subjugate the Syrian population. Traditionally, this is known as “foreign invasion.” 

….


In essence, just as Al Qaeda had served as an “Arab Foreign Legion” for the US in Afghanistan in the 1980’s during its inception, it once again is serving as a foreign legion inside Syria, fighting Washington’s proxy war against the Syrian government.

It appears however that unlike in Afghanistan where Al Qaeda fought alongside a sizable indigenous force against foreign Soviet troops, the tactical environment is revered – where Washington’s proxy terrorist forces are foreigners facing a highly motivated, well organized, and better armed indigenous Syrian Army.

US Machinations Unraveling  – Shareholders Face Liquidation 

Coordinated attempts by NATO and its proxy forces to invade and overrun the cities of Damascus and Aleppo in July and early August have failed, with proxy forces being expelled after suffering sizable loses. An attempt to decapitate Syria’s leadership in a bombing in central Damascus also fell flat, with high ranking officials quickly replaced, followed quickly by a cohesive military counter offensive.

The bombing was also followed by the mysterious disappearance of Saudi Arabia’s Bandar “Bush” Bin Sultan, who if confirmed assassinated, may indicate that NATO’s plans are suffering at even the highest levels of organization.

Compounding the West’s attempts to overthrow the government of Syria, is the increasing support Syria has been receiving due to Iranian efforts to assemble international forums representing half of the world’s population, condemning the support of foreign interference and promoting alternatives to the violent destabilization being carried out by the West. A 30 member conference was held ahead of the annual Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) meeting in Tehran, Iran – and another meeting will be held again on the sidelines of NAM toward the end of August. 


Image: An impressive counter to the so-called “Friends of Syria” confabs held by Wall Street and London corporate-financier interests in an attempt to sway global opinion toward a repeat of Libya’s destruction at NATO’s hands, the International Consultative Conference hosed by Iran seeks to end the flow of foreign arms into militant hands and resolve political differences through more civilized means. 

….



With the tactical situation inside Syria deteriorating for Western proxies and international consensus shifting in unprecedented directions against Washington and London, shareholders in the West’s latest adventure appear to be making tacit moves to divest their support and protect their own interests, lest they be left with the ignominious results of an increasingly compounding failure.

Obama’s Recent Threats 

With this in mind, the US has been making increasingly unhinged “Bush-esque” remarks regarding “weapons of mass destruction” in Syria and attempting to expand the pretexts under which it could “militarily intervene.” Even the very “movement” of Syria’s “unconventional weapons” in a “threatening manner,” US President Barack Obama claimed in a recent statement, would constitute a “red line.”

Obama claims that the US “fears” Syria’s unconventional weapons “falling into the hands of the wrong people.” If the US is willfully arming, funding, and threatening to back militarily, listed Al Qaeda terrorist organizations, then whose hands is the US referring to? And while the US struggles to foment victory in Syria, it seems to have stretched its support for terrorism all the way to Russia’s Caucasus Mountains, reigniting violence there, linked to Al Qaeda as well.

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0224-friends-of-syria-conference/11843662-1-eng-US/0224-friends-of-syria-conference_full_600.jpg


Image: The Washington Consensus’ shrinking legitimacy is proportionally matched to its increasingly untenable perpetuation. Its unjustified, disastrous military adventure in Libya seems to have resulted in a Pyrrhic victory, hobbling the institutions and legitimacy it needed to likewise undermine and overthrow the Syrian government in a timely fashion. Overstretched, it appears the West is even trying to strike at Russia with terrorist proxies that now span from North Africa all the way to the Caucasus Mountains.   

….



To say that the US is overstretched is an understatement. It is overstretched politically, economically, and tactically. It risks a historically unprecedented collapse that would destroy all shareholders invested in its increasingly unhinged and transparently illegitimate ambitions. Nations, in particular GCC members, are beginning to realize with acute alarm that their support of Washington’s agenda is now threatening their very self-preservation. A victory even at this point would still likely be Pyrrhic.

No matter how well Syria goes for the West from this point on, the mechanisms it has used to get here, including its “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine, the legitimacy of the UN, the West’s so-called commitment to “human rights,” and the narrative of the so-called “War on Terror” have been undermined beyond salvage.

One can only imagine the mountains Washington is promising to move in order to keep its allies lined up behind them, particularly the ruling governments of Turkey and the GCC. For an elitist clique that has prided itself in “realist” political discourse, it has become increasingly surrealist. Whether or not Washington’s allies mirror this surrealism all the way to their own demise, remains to be seen.

Chilling Crimes By Terrorist Jaber Mustapha Shihabi in Aleppo


“daba7to!(beheaded him) ! with double cut on his neck!twice ! for 50000 Syrian pounds!each of those I was asked to!” no remorse !this monster smiles! ya Allah ,after hearing him I was in shock for an hour! And me and my family ask Syria not to show such testimonies of monsters unless we see their public execution in the same night! no chance for them to get free! to slaughter again!

the real Syrian Free Press

*

Woman Confesses to Working with Terrorist Groups and Interrogating Abducted Women

Terrorist Sabah Othman confessed to working with armed terrorist groups in Douma, Damascus Countryside, and being an accomplice to the abduction, torture and murder of women, with her acting as an interrogator.

In confessions broadcast by the Syrian TV, 22 year-old Othman said that she is originally from Douma and that she was married at the age of 14 and separated from her husband three years later.

She met a man named Ala’a Mahfoud from Harasta on the pretext that he wanted to marry her, and he introduced her to two militants from a group referring to itself as Loua’a al-Islam who in turn introduced her to the group’s leader Zahran Alloush who employed her as an interrogator of the women they abducted.

Othman said that she was told to beat up any abducted woman that doesn’t answer…

View original post 648 more words

the real Syrian Free Press

*

The Sunday Times: UK and US Intelligence Covertly Aiding Terrorist Groups in Syria

Nothing new under the sun…, but the fact that the statement has been published by an English newspaper, and not by a Syrian patriot or a supporter of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, confirms the reality, in a non-suspected of “conspiracy” part .. .

The British intelligence is covertly aiding the armed terrorist groups to launch terrorist attacks in Syria, the British newspaper Sunday Times reported on Sunday.

In an article published on Sunday, the newspaper cited a Syrian opposition official as saying that the British authorities “know about and approve 100%” of intelligence from their Cyprus military bases being passed through Turkey to the militia of the so-called Free Army.

“British intelligence is observing things closely from Cyprus,” said the official, adding that “The British are giving the information to the Turks and the Americans and…

View original post 479 more words

Syria at the Mercy of the West’s "Ministers of Terrorism"

Syria at the Mercy of the West’s “Ministers of Terrorism”


Murder, sabotage, bribery, contract killings — and that’s just the behavior of Western political leaders and their Arab allies. Forget the fancy titles, manners and clothes — ongoing violence in Syria shows that the foreign policy of these powers is being conducted by terrorists and thugs in high offices. Which let’s one glimpse what level of barbarity is being perpetrated by the Western terror army, running amok in the streets and villages of Syria.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague (L) and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (file photo)
British Foreign Secretary William Hague (L) and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (file photo)

The latest display of criminality in high office is the call by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius for the “smashing” of Syria and the killing of its president, Bashar al-Assad. The words may have been spoken with an eloquent French accent, but their practical meaning has all the savagery of cold-blooded bludgeoning.

What we are seeing is a descent into barbarism and an open embrace of international lawlessness — by the same governments that appoint themselves to lecture the rest of the world on the principles of democracy and human rights.
Reports and videos, showing that the Western-backed mercenaries of the so-called Free Syrian Army are bolstered by al-Qaeda brigades and other terrorists, have been greeted with barely veiled glee in Washington and European capitals.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice have pointedly refused to condemn the surge in bombing atrocities across Syria that have accompanied the influx of terrorists into the country over recent months. Indeed, Washington officials have effectively condoned such barbarities by their studied silence. Rice has even made statements, suggesting that more such atrocities will follow until the Syrian president does what her government demands and surrenders office. In mafia terminology, it’s called “making an offer he can’t refuse.”
The “terror” that Washington and other Western governments have promoted as the defining existential threat to democratic civilization over the past 10 years, has suddenly and seamlessly morphed into “war with terror” when it comes to Syria. And Western media that are intoxicated with hubris over supposed “free, independent thinking” do not even raise a timid question about this glaring contradiction. Indeed, these organs compound their intellectual bankruptcy with moral bankruptcy by concealing their government’s outrageous duplicity.
However, for those with eyes, when it comes to Syria, the mask of Western pretence at defending international law and human rights has now been ripped off. The face revealed is a grotesque, salivating monster, whose motives are evidently selfish elite power and domination in the strategic Middle East region. And this objective is to be achieved by any means necessary — foremost by the collusion with bloodthirsty killers.
In asserting their geopolitical objective over Syria, the Western governments are openly deploying terrorists and killers who supposedly were the reason, why Western governments spent trillions of dollars fighting foreign wars, invading and occupying sovereign countries, destroying millions of innocent lives, incarcerating and torturing thousands, and turning over democratic societies into draconian police states.
US President Barack Obama has time and again lauded American military veterans for their sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than 4,500 US forces were killed in Iraq, thousands more maimed and psychologically destroyed, with record numbers committing suicide once back home in Civvy Street. In Afghanistan, the death toll continues to rise — with a spate of ‘green on blue’ attacks, in which Afghan security personnel turn their guns on American troops.
How must the families in the Iraqi city of Haditha feel where, in 2005, US marines shot dead 25 inhabitants, including women and children? — Just one of countless other such massacres and war crimes. Why were they killed in the putative “war on terror” that has now become a US “war with terror”? Or how about the family of the 14-year-old Iraqi girl, who was gang-raped by an American platoon, which then butchered her broken body to cover up their crime? Or the families in Iraq’s Fallujah city, whose loved ones where incinerated with the Pentagon white phosphorus bombs during 2004-2005? What was that holocaust all about in the pursuit of a supposed war against terrorists, the same terrorists, who are now armed, trained, and directed by Washington, London, and Paris to overthrow the legal government of Syria?
Or how about the thousands of unnamed villagers, killed in remote areas of Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia in continuing American drone attacks?
Fabius recently told reporters in Turkey, “The Syrian regime must be smashed fast.” He also called for Assad’s death.
Elsewhere, it is reported that Qatar, the West’s Arab ally in the sabotage of Syria, has resorted to bribery to destabilize the government in Damascus. Apparently, the Al Thani royal rulers of the Persian Gulf emirate offered USD 1 million to the Syrian ambassador in Mauritania to defect, thereby attempting to tarnish Assad’s government. The Syrian Ambassador, targeted by the honey-trap, Hamad Albni, denounced the bribe as “blatant interference” in his country’s affairs.
It was just the latest in a barrage of dirty tricks that Qatar and the royal rulers of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have engaged in against Syria, including bribing the nation’s Army ranks to dessert, fabricating news stories on Arab media channels, Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, and jamming the satellite signals for the Syrian national broadcaster. The latter is a war crime, but don’t expect the Western crime bosses in office to bat an eyelid over that.
This is on top of these billionaire rulers funneling USD 100 million from their own impoverished, downtrodden countries to pay for American and Israeli weapons and explosives that are being used by the Western terrorist army to kill and maim women and children across Syria.
Meanwhile, Oxbridge-educated British Foreign Secretary William Hague announces with his ever-so-polite plumy accent that “Her Majesty’s” government is to supply an extra USD eight million to Syria. Not to help refugees or victims of Western-orchestrated violence, but to help the terrorists escalate their campaign of tearing that country apart and no doubt creating more refugees.
Clinton, Fabius, Hague and their royal Arab friends may dress in fine clothes, speak with polished accents, and have manicured, scented hands. But make no mistake. They may not pull the triggers, slit throats, or switch the detonators. That’s for the goons on the ground to do and to keep the blood from appearing on those scented, lily-white hands of their bosses.
In the Orwellian world of Western governments, these politicians are called “Foreign Ministers.” In the world of normative reasoning and language, they are known simply as “Ministers of Terrorism.”

“Freedom Fighters”: The Foot Soldiers of the American Empire

“Freedom Fighters”: The Foot Soldiers of the American Empire.

Since the end of World War II, the Anglo-American Empire has covertly supported the deployment of foreign and domestic “foot soldiers”, including terrorists and paramilitary brigades to bring about regime change and further its agenda of World domination.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32371
One of the earlier examples of such a modus operandi, still widely ignored, is Glad

io, “NATO’s European stay-behind army”, active during the Cold War. Controlled by the CIA and Britain’s MI6, Gladio members orchestrated terrorist attacks in Western Europe, which were blamed on Communist entities.

Gladio was falsely presented to key European state officials as a stand-by secret army ready to counter a possible communist take over. The ultimate goal of Gladio was to demonize the Communist and Socialist parties and encourage European citizens to endorse their governments’ commitment to “National security”.

American citizens were not exempt from such scheming. As Prof. James F. Tracy explains:

“The string of still unresolved US political assassinations throughout the 1960s suggest how such practices were not restricted to foreign countries. Nor were they solely the terrain of intelligence agencies. Along lines similar to Gladio, in the early 1960s the US Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed Operation Northwoods, where terrorist attacks would be initiated against US civilians in American cities and the violence blamed on Cuban combatants to justify war against the island nation.[2] The Kennedy administration rejected the proposal. While Northwoods exhibited the capacity for government to conceive and propose such plans, Gladio was demonstrably carried out against Western civilian populations in multiple locations over many years.” (Prof. James F. Tracy False Flag Terror and Conspiracies of Silence.)

The recruitment of paramilitary armies and death squads played a key role in the conduct of US foreign policy. These “secret soldiers” were turned into highly visible “freedom fighters”, waging the Empire’s war at the forefront and in plain sight: Afghan Mujahideen, Nicaraguan Contras, Kosovar and Haitian rebels, etc.

As recent history has proven, the Western powers are still using this virtuous terminology to describe their foot soldiers, their terrorists in the Middle-East: the “pro-democracy Libyan rebels” and the “Free Syrian Army”. But who’s “freedom” and “liberty” are they fighting for? If an armed gang such as the “Free Syrian Army” invaded any Western street, they would be labelled as terrorists and promptly crushed by the national Defense.

The mainstream media not only ignores history, it distorts reality, it omits to report essential information. It never “connects the dots”. As Tony Cartalucci notes:
As West berates Syria for “killing civilians” Western weapons flow into terrorist hands from NATO. The New York Times in their article, “C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition,” confirms what many have already long known – that the West, led by the US and its Gulf State proxies, have been arming terrorists, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, while berating the Syrian government for “violating” a UN mandated ceasefire and for “failing to protect” its population. (Tony Cartalucci CONFIRMED: US CIA Arming Terrorists in Syria)
These omissions and distortions result in a Kafkaesque interpretation of reality which eventually becomes, with the exception of the independent alternative media, a mainstream media consensus serving dominant financial and political interests.

Here is a short list of recent articles on Western freedom fighters, together with selected articles from our archives. You can also browse our archives for many more articles on the subject.
SYRIA

CIA Provides Stinger Missiles to Syrian “Freedom Fighters”
Syria’s Parallels with Afghanistan
– by Deepak Tripathi – 2012-08-13
UN Designates “Free Syrian Army” Affiliates as Al Qaeda
– by Tony Cartalucci – 2012-08-12
US-Saudi Sponsored Al Qaeda Killers in Syria
– by Tony Cartalucci – 2012-08-11
Terrorism as an Instrument of US Foreign Policy: UN-Backed Rogue States Plan Syria’s Slaughter
– by Felicity Arbuthnot – 2012-08-11
Al Qaeda, The CIA and Media Propaganda directed Against Syria

– by Devon DB – 2012-08-03

Humanitarian Military Intervention in Syria? Who is Behind the Atrocities?
– by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky – 2012-07-30

LIBYA

The Al Qaeda Connection: Who are we Helping in Libya? Here are Some Answers. – 2011-03-27

The CIA’s Libya Rebels: The Same Terrorists who Killed US, NATO Troops in Iraq – by Dr. Webster G. Tarpley – 2011-03-28

LATIN AMERICA

Watching Syria, remembering Nicaragua – by Richard Becker – 2012-07-22

How United States Intervention Against Venezuela Works – by Philip Agee – 2005-09-15

Damning the Flood: Haiti, Aristide, and the Politics of Containment – by Joe Emersberger – 2008-02-19

AFRICA

THE “SPECTER” OF AL QAEDA IN AFRICA: A Cover for Western Reconquest of the Continent – by Finian Cunningham – 2012-04-05
British Intelligence Worked with Al Qaeda to Kill Qaddafi – by Gerald A. Perreira – 2011-03-25

THE BALKANS

Kosovo and Albania: Dirty Work in the Balkans: NATO’s KLA Frankenstein – by Tom Burghardt – 2011-01-30

KOSOVO’S “MAFIA STATE”: From Madeleine to Hillary: The US Secretary of State’s “Love Affair” with the KLA- by Michel Chossudovsky – 2012-04-06

MORE ON GLADIO

Gladio – Death Plan For Democracy – by Peter Chamberlin – 2008-02-05

Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job – by Paul Joseph Watson – 2007-12-05

NATO’s secret armies linked to terrorism? – by Daniele Ganser

"Freedom Fighters": The Foot Soldiers of the American Empire

“Freedom Fighters”: The Foot Soldiers of the American Empire
Since the end of World War II, the Anglo-American Empire has covertly supported the deployment of foreign and domestic “foot soldiers”, including terrorists and paramilitary brigades to bring about regime change and further its agenda of World domination.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32371
One of the earlier examples of such a modus operandi, still widely ignored, is Glad

io, “NATO’s European stay-behind army”, active during the Cold War. Controlled by the CIA and Britain’s MI6, Gladio members orchestrated terrorist attacks in Western Europe, which were blamed on Communist entities.

Gladio was falsely presented to key European state officials as a stand-by secret army ready to counter a possible communist take over. The ultimate goal of Gladio was to demonize the Communist and Socialist parties and encourage European citizens to endorse their governments’ commitment to “National security”.

American citizens were not exempt from such scheming. As Prof. James F. Tracy explains:

“The string of still unresolved US political assassinations throughout the 1960s suggest how such practices were not restricted to foreign countries. Nor were they solely the terrain of intelligence agencies. Along lines similar to Gladio, in the early 1960s the US Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed Operation Northwoods, where terrorist attacks would be initiated against US civilians in American cities and the violence blamed on Cuban combatants to justify war against the island nation.[2] The Kennedy administration rejected the proposal. While Northwoods exhibited the capacity for government to conceive and propose such plans, Gladio was demonstrably carried out against Western civilian populations in multiple locations over many years.” (Prof. James F. Tracy False Flag Terror and Conspiracies of Silence.)

The recruitment of paramilitary armies and death squads played a key role in the conduct of US foreign policy. These “secret soldiers” were turned into highly visible “freedom fighters”, waging the Empire’s war at the forefront and in plain sight: Afghan Mujahideen, Nicaraguan Contras, Kosovar and Haitian rebels, etc.

As recent history has proven, the Western powers are still using this virtuous terminology to describe their foot soldiers, their terrorists in the Middle-East: the “pro-democracy Libyan rebels” and the “Free Syrian Army”. But who’s “freedom” and “liberty” are they fighting for? If an armed gang such as the “Free Syrian Army” invaded any Western street, they would be labelled as terrorists and promptly crushed by the national Defense.

The mainstream media not only ignores history, it distorts reality, it omits to report essential information. It never “connects the dots”. As Tony Cartalucci notes:
As West berates Syria for “killing civilians” Western weapons flow into terrorist hands from NATO. The New York Times in their article, “C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition,” confirms what many have already long known – that the West, led by the US and its Gulf State proxies, have been arming terrorists, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, while berating the Syrian government for “violating” a UN mandated ceasefire and for “failing to protect” its population. (Tony Cartalucci CONFIRMED: US CIA Arming Terrorists in Syria)
These omissions and distortions result in a Kafkaesque interpretation of reality which eventually becomes, with the exception of the independent alternative media, a mainstream media consensus serving dominant financial and political interests.

Here is a short list of recent articles on Western freedom fighters, together with selected articles from our archives. You can also browse our archives for many more articles on the subject.
SYRIA

CIA Provides Stinger Missiles to Syrian “Freedom Fighters”
Syria’s Parallels with Afghanistan
– by Deepak Tripathi – 2012-08-13
UN Designates “Free Syrian Army” Affiliates as Al Qaeda
– by Tony Cartalucci – 2012-08-12
US-Saudi Sponsored Al Qaeda Killers in Syria
– by Tony Cartalucci – 2012-08-11
Terrorism as an Instrument of US Foreign Policy: UN-Backed Rogue States Plan Syria’s Slaughter
– by Felicity Arbuthnot – 2012-08-11
Al Qaeda, The CIA and Media Propaganda directed Against Syria

– by Devon DB – 2012-08-03

Humanitarian Military Intervention in Syria? Who is Behind the Atrocities?
– by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky – 2012-07-30

LIBYA

The Al Qaeda Connection: Who are we Helping in Libya? Here are Some Answers. – 2011-03-27

The CIA’s Libya Rebels: The Same Terrorists who Killed US, NATO Troops in Iraq – by Dr. Webster G. Tarpley – 2011-03-28

LATIN AMERICA

Watching Syria, remembering Nicaragua – by Richard Becker – 2012-07-22

How United States Intervention Against Venezuela Works – by Philip Agee – 2005-09-15

Damning the Flood: Haiti, Aristide, and the Politics of Containment – by Joe Emersberger – 2008-02-19

AFRICA

THE “SPECTER” OF AL QAEDA IN AFRICA: A Cover for Western Reconquest of the Continent – by Finian Cunningham – 2012-04-05
British Intelligence Worked with Al Qaeda to Kill Qaddafi – by Gerald A. Perreira – 2011-03-25

THE BALKANS

Kosovo and Albania: Dirty Work in the Balkans: NATO’s KLA Frankenstein – by Tom Burghardt – 2011-01-30

KOSOVO’S “MAFIA STATE”: From Madeleine to Hillary: The US Secretary of State’s “Love Affair” with the KLA- by Michel Chossudovsky – 2012-04-06

MORE ON GLADIO

Gladio – Death Plan For Democracy – by Peter Chamberlin – 2008-02-05

Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job – by Paul Joseph Watson – 2007-12-05

NATO’s secret armies linked to terrorism? – by Daniele Ganser 

the real Syrian Free Press

 

VIDEO NEWS – ENGLISH

Recorded from Syrian Official Tv Channel and brought to you by
https://www.syrianfreepress.net
https://www.facebook.com/Tg24Siria

*

VIDEO NOUVELLES – FRANÇAIS

Enregistré de officielle syrienne Tv Channel, par
https://www.syrianfreepress.net
https://www.facebook.com/Tg24Siria

*

ВИДЕО НОВОСТИ НА РУССКОМ ЯЗЫКЕ

Записано от сирийского Официальный телеканал и привлечены к вам
https://www.syrianfreepress.net
https://www.facebook.com/Tg24Siria

*

فيديو الجديدة – العربية

مسجل من قناة سورية الرسمية، ويوجه اليكم من
https://www.syrianfreepress.net
https://www.facebook.com/Tg24Siria

*

Supported by SyrianFreePress.net Network  &  TG24Siria

http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2012/08/16/syrian-video-news-august-16-2012-from-local-arab-journalists-television-engfrarusarab/

*

*

*

*

*

View original post

The Turkish terrorist who was killed Aleppo :Idriss Ekinci,the brother al-Qaeda member accused of bombing of the British consulate and HSBC bank in Istanbul in 2003:Azad Ekinci

The Turkish terrorist who was killed Aleppo :Idriss Ekinci,the brother al-Qaeda member accused of bombing of the British consulate and HSBC bank in Istanbul in 2003:Azad Ekinci

PLEASE READ HOW BACK THAN ZIONIST MEDIA PRAISED THE FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN ISRAHELL AND BROTHER ERDOGAN!

Well NATZO and erDOGan and Hague and Hitlary should explain that to their citizens, who pay taxes : those money go for monsters who kill the citizens after!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwfcNQIiFyk&feature=youtu.be

Al Qaeda Turkish citizen killed yesterday in Aleppo
The Turkish terrorist who was killed Aleppo :Idriss Ekinci,the brother al-Qaeda member accused of bombing of the British consulate and HSBC bank in Istanbul in 2003:Azad Ekinci

هذه هوية المسلح التركي الذي تم قتله في حي سبف الدولة بحلب والجدير ذكره ان ادريس ايكينيكي: اخوه عضو تنظيم القاعدة أزاد ايكينيكي المتهم بتفجير بنك HSBC بإسطنبول عام ٢٠٠٣

The Guardian wrote back then:
“It took five hours before rescuers finally discovered Roger Short’s body. Minutes before the suicide bomber ploughed his van into Britain’s consulate building in Istanbul, Short had stepped into his temporary office. The elegant gatehouse was next to the consulate’s main entrance. In the chaotic minutes after the explosion, as survivors ran in panic through clouds of choking dust, there was no trace of the genial consul general. Nobody knew if he was alive or dead. Britain’s most senior official in Istanbul had simply disappeared.
Witnesses described a scene of ‘surreal’ devastation. ‘The shops in front of the consulate were completely destroyed,’ said Onur Galhanoglu. ‘There was blood everywhere. The two gatehouses next to the entrance had been demolished. Trees inside the garden were broken. Cars were on fire. There was a huge hole in the ground where the bomb went off. The blast flung an air-conditioning unit and a microwave into the consulate garden from a nearby electrical shop. Roger Short couldn’t be found anywhere.’

Sifting through the remnants of a shop selling dentists’ chairs, the rescue teams finally found Short’s mangled body. The explosion had hurled him out of the building and across the road. Ten minutes earlier he had popped out of the consulate to get his shoes polished.

It was one of the worst attacks in British diplomatic history – a consul general dead; nine other consulate staff, three of them Britons, killed, together with two police officers protecting the building; the building gutted; and 450 people injured. Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, announced yesterday that the death toll had gone up to 30, including at least 17 victims of the blast four minutes earlier at Istanbul’s HSBC building, a short drive away.

The bombing has raised a host of awkward questions for the Government. What were the security failings? Should the British – like the Americans – have abandoned their neo-Palladian consulate building in the heart of Istanbul’s old quarter and moved somewhere safer?

As details emerged last night of the heroic role played by two security guards who tried to stop the bomber, it was clear that Britain’s network of rambling colonial-era embassies around the world now offers little protection from terrorists. ‘Security at the consulate was good. There were two or three security cameras,’ said Galhanoglu, a 20-year-old student who works in the Nizam pizzeria next door to the devastated building. ‘Turkish and British staff checked you with a metal detector, and you had to put your belongings through an X-ray.’

But such measures offer no deterrent to a single fanatical suicide attacker. The two Turkish policemen stationed at the consulate’s entrance, Huseyin Apaydin and Salih Gapikin, opened fire on the van seconds before it smashed into the front gate. They also sounded the alarm. It made no difference. Both men were killed instantly in the explosion.

The blast also tore into the main consulate building 50 metres away, killing 34-year-old Cafer Gunduz and his 32-year-old wife Kiraz, who worked in the consulate as cleaners. Gunduz was sitting in the building’s first-floor cafe. As news of the earlier blast flashed on Turkish TV, he called his wife over to watch. Last night friends of the couple, who lived in Istanbul’s Alibaker suburb, said they were about to pay off the mortgage on their flat and wanted to try for a baby. On Friday relatives formed a procession with their coffins, draped in Turkish flags, back to 8 Acelya Apartments, the brown-painted block of flats surrounded by satellite dishes and children playing football that was their home.

‘These were innocent people. The bombers who did this were idiots,’ the couple’s neighbour, 47-year-old Muhiftin Atekin, told The Observer yesterday. ‘Hundreds of people came to the funeral. They were crying and shaking and cursing terrorism.’

Despite Britain’s involvement in Iraq – a war that most Turks opposed – there is scant evidence of anti-British feeling in the aftermath of Thursday’s blasts. Most Turks are struggling to come to terms with the fact that the bombers, who also struck at two synagogues a week ago, were almost certainly Turkish. Over the past 48 hours police in Istanbul have raided homes in three parts of the city and have so far arrested 18 suspects. The Turkish media has identified Thursday’s bombers as 27-year-old Azad Ekinci and Feridun Ugurlu, calling them ‘Turkish nationals with links to the Middle East’. (‘Azad is not a Turkish name. It’s an Arab name,’ one official pointed out indignantly.)

Photos of the pair show two young, well-groomed men, one wearing a tie. They appear to fit the profile of other attackers that have struck in ‘al-Qaeda’ attacks in recent years, but there is little certain information about them. According to police sources, Ugurlu hired the Isuzu cars used in last weekend’s synagogue attacks, which killed 23 people. Two cars were hired – or bought, according to some sources – from the same showroom on the same day. Each was used in a different wave of attacks. The pair also flew on 28 October from Istanbul’s Ataturk airport to Dubai, detectives believe. Who they met there – and why – remains unclear.

One clue may lie in Ekinci’s recent past. According to sources close to Turkish intelligence, he was an active militant of the Turkish Hizbollah group, based in his home town of Binyol in eastern Turkey from 1997 to 2000. He left the organisation due to an internal dispute and joined a separate radical group, the Islamic Movement. Since his introduction to Islamic militancy, security sources say, Ekinci travelled to Afghanistan eight times and Pakistan three times. The trips would have been an opportunity to fight with the Taliban, build contacts with hardened activists close to Osama bin Laden and learn terrorist techniques. Small groups of Turks are known to have been present in Afghanistan and the region, fighting or training as militants, since the late Eighties. Ekinci is also thought to have twice visited Chechnya and Bosnia, two key ‘theatres of jihad’ for modern militants, where he would have been able to put his new skills to use.

Another clue is that four of the suspected bombers were, like Ekinci, born in Binyol, a poverty-stricken provincial city where life is very different from the bustling metropolis of Istanbul. It is likely the men had known each other for some time, and their ties were reinforced by shared adherence to the new radical Islamic doctrines sweeping the Middle East. This picture is familiar to those who have studied modern Islamic militancy. In many bombings associated with al-Qaeda or bin Laden we see a local group, formed of friends or men with family ties, drawn together by a more experienced, motivated, charismatic man who acts as the link with the major players in international Islamic terrorism. The cell leader has the manpower but is looking for resources such as money, expertise and explosives. People like bin Laden have access to the resources but need manpower. The result is a pragmatic, and often temporary, alliance.

It now seems clear that radical Islamic militant cells are capable of plotting sophisticated operations inside once-peaceful Turkey, a friend of Israel and a secular Muslim democracy. After inspecting the shattered consulate last week, Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, warned of the possibility of further attacks and advised British nationals to stay away from the country.

Yesterday bulldozers and fire vehicles continued to cart away rubble, and forensic experts in boiler suits scoured the compound. British diplomats left in Turkey were pondering what to do next. Consulate staff are now likely to use the old US consulate building, a three-minute walk away, as a temporary HQ. American diplomats vacated the grandiose building earlier in the summer after concluding that its Grecian portico and balustrades, set among streets which are old, narrow, and hard to block, offered little protection from a suicide attack.

The Americans have moved to a heavily fortified compound some distance away. ‘Why did the British not move too?’ asked Osman Tufecki, whose hotel is opposite the old US consulate. ‘The fact that the Americans have left is bad for my business. But they were clever.’

For Turkey there are hard lessons to learn. First is the realisation that the country much-touted by the West as a model of Muslim democracy is as vulnerable to terror, and as likely to produce ‘homegrown’ Islamic terrorists, as anywhere else. Second, it is clear that Turkish militants, some of them active for many years, have embraced the new internationalism epitomised by al-Qaeda and joined other radicals in a pan-Islamic struggle.

Turkey may now be facing the gravest security problem of all the states so far affected by the new Islamic militancy. Its size and diversity and its ‘frontier’ location between East and West make it an obvious target. Its long borders, and the unstable states that encircle it, pose massive challenges even for Ankara’s efficient and well-funded security organisations. The ongoing conflict in Iraq is a huge security concern. Few in Turkey believe there will not be another attack. But of all the awkward truths, the most uncomfortable one is that extremism may have flourished because of the failure of Prime Minister Erdogan to rout it from the ranks of his own moderate Islamist Justice and Development (AKP) party .

Erdogan, a devout Muslim himself, vowed on Friday to stand ‘shoulder to shoulder’ with President Bush in the fight against terrorism. Insiders say he will now have to prove that in Turkey radical Islamic views and values will not be tolerated. And that, critics say, may be harder for him than for others.

‘Erdogan was a radical Islamist in the past and while he has taken a firm stance in the war on terror his rejection of militant groups has only been rhetorical,’ said Dr Hussein Bagdi, a security expert at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. ‘He needs to take concrete steps now. It would help bring Turkey that much closer to the West.’

The AKP party was crafted out of the ruins of two Islamist groups previously banned by the army-dominated establishment. During their one year in power, the ‘neo-Islamists’ have proved as never before that Islam can be compatible with democracy. Against expectations, the party has passed more human rights, economic and political reforms than any other government in the 80 years since Mustafa Kemal Ataturk founded Turkey as an avowedly secular state.

Increasingly, Erdogan and his sharp-suited associates are being seen as role models not only for the Middle East but the Turkic republics of the former Soviet Union. Visiting Istanbul on Friday, Straw went out of his way to emphasise the point. Turkey, he said, may have been targeted because it is a rare example of ‘a successful democracy’. But both Erdogan and his Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul have had contact with radical Islamic leaders in the past. ‘They knew all the international radical groups,’ said Bagdi. ‘Before they became radical democrats they were radical Islamists who had close ties with these people.’

Many in Turkey believe last week’s assaults are proof that the country has failed to resolve what one columnist in Hurriyet, the best-selling daily, called its ‘Islamic fundamentalist problem’. The fact that at least two of last week’s bombers appear to have been able to travel to Afghanistan repeatedly and still return to Turkey, some analysts allege, is further evidence that authorities turned a blind eye to the flow of Turks to combat zones in Afghanistan, Chechnya and Bosnia. One factor may be that Turkey’s otherwise formidable intelligence services were distracted by Kurdish separatists and other ‘enemies of the state’. And, critics say, when intellectuals and liberal opponents were killed by Islamic extremists, the attacks were often ignored because many saw Turkey’s extremists as relatively harmless romantics. The Hezbollah was thought to have been crushed.

‘The system basically turned its back on the fact that in the 1980s there was a whole movement of Turks enrolling at the most fundamentalist Taliban schools in Pakistan,’ said Ahmet Evin, professor of international relations at Istanbul’s Sabachi University. ‘Unfortunately, Turks preferred to take an ostrich-like approach and deny it was happening. This violence has been in the making for a long time, but even after the attacks people can’t bring themselves to believe that Turks are behind it.’

Al-Qaeda and other radicals consider Turkey – the provider of Nato’s second biggest standing army – the antithesis of everything they stand for. In its statement claiming responsibility for the blasts, a spokesman for the Abu Hafs-al-Masri brigade (Abu Hafs, a key aide of bin Laden, was killed in November 2001) said the country had been targeted because it was an ally of the West and had military ties with Israel. It apologised for injuring so many civilians but then issued a chilling warning that Britain, Italy, Australia and Japan – who it called ‘the tails of America’ – would be struck in the coming weeks.

British Islamic radicals told The Observer that internet chatrooms frequented by militants had been full of rumours of strikes against Britain, Japan and Egypt in recent weeks.

In hoping to foment trouble, the militants may be aiming to spark a widespread crackdown in Turkey – possibly involving the human rights abuses that have previously held back Turkey’s aims to join the European Union – in the hope that it will help radicalise Turkish politics.

For the moment though, an air of normality appeared to be returning to Istanbul. At the Golden Horn river, which feeds into the Bosporus, large numbers of fishermen gathered in the morning sunshine yesterday, dangling their rods off the bridge. And over at the Haji Sophia – Istanbul’s famous mosque – crowds were gathering to celebrate the end of Ramadan. ‘The last few days have been terrible,’ one said. ‘What we are afraid of is that it will happen again.'”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/nov/23/turkey.terrorism
why do you support them now Mr.Hague? why Erdogan?why is some’s life more important than others?why kill Syrians???

CIA Provides Stinger Missiles to Syrian “Freedom Fighters”

CIA Provides Stinger Missiles to Syrian “Freedom Fighters”.

The revelation about President Barack Obama’s decision to provide secret American aid to Syria’s rebel forces is a game changer. The presidential order, known as an “intelligence finding” in the world of espionage, authorizes the CIA to support armed groups fighting to overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s government. But it threatens far more than the regime in Damascus.

The disclosure took its first casualty immediately. Kofi Annan, the special envoy to Syria, promptly announced his resignation, bitterly protesting that the UN Security Council had become a forum for “finger-pointing and name-calling.” Annan blamed all sides directly involved in the Syrian conflict, including local combatants and their foreign backers. But the timing of his resignation was striking. For he knew that with the CIA helping Syria’s armed groups, America’s Arab allies joining in and the Security Council deadlocked, he was redundant.

President Obama’s order to supply CIA aid to anti-government forces in Syria has echoes of an earlier secret order signed by President Jimmy Carter, also a Democrat, in July 1979. Carter’s fateful decision was the start of a CIA-led operation to back Mujahideen groups then fighting the Communist government in Afghanistan. As I discuss the episode in my book Breeding Ground: Afghanistan and the Origins of Islamist Terrorism (chapters 7 & 8), the operation, launched with a modest aid package, became a multi-billion dollar war project against the Communist regime in Kabul and the Soviet Union, whose forces invaded Afghanistan in December 1979. In the following year, Carter was defeated by Ronald Reagan, who went for broke, pouring money and weapons into Afghanistan against the Soviet occupation forces to the bitter end.

Carter’s national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski later claimed that it was done on his recommendation, and that the motive was to lure Soviet forces into Afghanistan to give the Kremlin “its Vietnam.” The Soviets’ humiliating retreat from Afghanistan in 1989, the collapse of Soviet and Afghan communism and the rise of the Taliban triggered a chain reaction with worldwide consequences. President Obama’s decision to intervene in support of Syria’s rebels, who include fundamentalist Islamic fighters, points to history repeating itself. Brzezinski, now in his 85th year, still visits Washington’s corridors of power. And General David Petraeus, a formidable warrior, is director of the CIA.

Three decades on, it seems likely that President Carter’s motive behind signing the secret order to provide aid to the Mujahideen was to entice the Soviets into Afghanistan’s inhospitable terrain, thus keeping their military away from Iran in the midst of the Islamic Revolution which overthrew America’s proxy, Shah Reza Pahlavi, in February 1979. If that was indeed the plan, then the Soviet leadership fell right into the Afghan trap.

China was then part of the U.S.-led alliance against the Soviets. Now Beijing and Moscow stand together against Washington as the conflict in Syria escalates. Otherwise, the U.S.-led alliance has many of the old players––the much enlarged European Union, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and others in the Sunni bloc in the Arab world. And Turkey, which is now the base for the anti-Assad forces, channeling help to them. Turkey’s Islamist government plays a crucial role in Syria, like Pakistan in the 1980s during America’s proxy war in Afghanistan.

In Washington, an American official told Reuters that “the United States was collaborating with a secret command center operated by Turkey and its allies.” And a few days before, the news agency reported that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey had established a “nerve center” in Adana in southern Turkey, near the Syrian border, to coordinate their activities. The place is home to America’s Incirlik air base and military and intelligence services.

According to NBC News a few days ago, the rebel Free Syrian Army has acquired American Stinger missiles via Turkey, clearly to target Syrian government aircraft. It reminds of President Reagan’s decision in the mid-1980s to supply Stingers to Mujahideen groups for use against Soviet aircraft. Their use was first reported in 1987 and it soon emerged that the heat-seeking weapons were so accurate that they were hitting three out of four aircraft in Afghanistan. As I have discussed in my book Breeding Ground, some of the hundreds of Stingers were likely to have been passed on to the Taliban and their allies after the Soviet forces left Afghanistan and the last Communist government in Kabul collapsed in 1992.

In recent months, American and European officials have been busy feeding information to media outlets that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the main sources of weapons to rebels in Syria through Turkey. The pattern is consistent with the long-standing Saudi policy to keep Islamists out of Saudi Arabia itself, lest they challenge the ruling family. Long-term lessons of proxy wars remain unheeded for immediate perilous “gains.”

Reports of the Obama administration sending Stinger missiles to Syrian rebels carry the first indication that non-stateplayers now have advanced U.S. weaponry in the Middle East. That Washington is in such a cozy alliance with forces including Islamists soon after the killing of Osama bin Laden (on Obama’s personal order) is as incredible as it is consistent with follies of the past. The present will define the future again.

The situation in Egypt is becoming explosive. The killing of 16 Egyptian border guards in the Sinai Peninsula by “suspected Islamists,” and violence thereafter, represent challenges on several fronts for the new president Mohamed Morsi. Israel has been quick to blame Islamic militants in Gaza, ruled by Hamas, which has close ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, the party of the Egyptian president. For its part, the Brotherhood has pointed the finger at Israel’s secret service Mossad, claiming it is a plot to thwart Morsi’s presidency. These developments cast a shadow over Morsi’s relations with Hamas and, at the same time, increase his dependence on the Egyptian armed forces to quell the unrest, thereby undermining his authority. Murderous optimism of powerful and suicidal pessimism of victims in an oppressive environment blight the lives of many.