President Bashar al-Assad has given an interview to the Italian Rai News 24 TV channel, in which he stressed Syria’s commitment to the international agreement on the prohibition of chemical weapons and its determination to go ahead with the political solution and halting violence.
~
ENG
~
ITA
~
The following is the full text of the interview:
We comply with every treaty we sign
Rai News: Mr. President, thanks for having us here. It’s a very important moment, because the UN Security Council just approved with unanimity a resolution asking Syria to eliminate completely its chemical weapons. Are you going to comply with this?
President al-Assad: Actually, we joined the international agreement for preventing the use and acquirement of chemical weapons before that resolution came to light. The main part of the Russian initiative is based on our will to do so. So, it’s not the…
#CCTV Exclusive: #Assad on Syria chemical arms draft
“If the U.S. wants to find excuses for #war, it will find them as it has never stopped war”
“We also have confessions made by the terrorists who transported the materials from the neighboring countries”
“We know that these terrorists are obeying the orders of other countries and these countries do drive these terrorists to commit acts that could get the Syrian government blamed for hindering this agreement”
“We are a nation at war, we’ve got territories that have been occupied for more than 40 years, but in any case, the Syrian army is trained to fight using conventional weapons.”
“So there is nothing to worry about. The chemical weapons in Syria are in a safe place that is secure and under the control of the Syrian army.”
“I am not concerned. Since its independence, #Syria has been committed to all the treaties it has signed. We will honor everything that we have agreed to do. Secondly, China and Russia are playing a positive role in the UN Security Council to ensure any excuse for military action against Syria will not stand. And more importantly, I want to say, by submitting the draft to the #UN Security Council , or by urging the US and Russia to agree on a deal, the #US, #France, and #Britain are JUST trying to make themselves winners in a war against a Syria which is their imaginary enemy. Thus Syria should not be concerned by any such draft or deal.”
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad criticised the United States for threatening to attack Syria over its chemical weapons program, saying it was finding “excuses for war”, China’s state television said on Monday.
الرئيس الأسد لتلفزيون سي سي تي في الصيني: سورية ليست قلقة من مشروع القرار المقترح في مجلس الأمن بشأن الأسلحة الكيميائية
الإثنين 23 أيلول , 2013
أكد السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد أن سورية ليست قلقة من مشروع القرار الذي اقترحته الولايات المتحدة وفرنسا وبريطانيا في مجلس الأمن بشأن الأسلحة الكيميائية في سورية لانها تلتزم بشكل كامل بكل الاتفاقيات التي توقعها وبأي شيء تعلن موافقتها عليه إضافة إلى اطمئنانها من الدور الذي تلعبه الصين وروسيا في المجلس كي لا يتم استخدام أي مبرر من اجل العدوان عليها.
وقال الرئيس الأسد في مقابلة مع التلفزيون الصيني سي سي تي في إن ما تقوم به الآن الولايات المتحدة وفرنسا وبريطانيا من خلال هذا القرار المطروح على مجلس الأمن أو الاتفاق الذي يريدون أن يتم الاتفاق عليه بين روسيا وأميركا الهدف منه هو أن يظهروا منتصرين في معاركهم ضد عدو وهمي يفترضون بانه سورية.
وأشار الرئيس الأسد إلى أن أول عامل يؤمن النجاح للمؤتمر الدولي حول سورية في جنيف هو إيقاف الأعمال الإرهابية وإيقاف دخول الإرهابيين من خارج سورية وإيقاف امداد هؤلاء الإرهابيين بالمال والسلاح.
وفيما يلي النص الكامل للمقابلة..
سي سي تي في..
مرحبا وتحياتي سيدي الرئيس.. شكرا جزيلا لموافقتكم على إجراء هذه المقابلة مع تلفزيون سي سي تي في الحكومي الصيني المركزي.
الرئيس الأسد..
أهلا وسهلا بك في سورية.. أرحب بك وأرحب بقناة سي سي تي في في سورية..
سي سي تي في..
وفقا للإتفاقية الإطارية بين روسيا والولايات المتحدة فإنه يتوجب بعد تسليم لائحة الأسلحة الكيميائية.. دخول الخبراء قبل تشرين الثاني وتدمير الأسلحة الكيميائية في أواسط عام 2014 هل تستطيع الحكومة السورية أن تكمل هذه المهمة في الوقت المحدد…
الرئيس الأسد..
نعم.. بالنسبة للحكومة السورية المطلوب منها شيئان.. الأول هو أن تقدم المعلومات والبيانات الضرورية لمنظمة حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية بحسب الاتفاقية الدولية وهذا تم تنفيذه منذ عدة أيام.. في الأسبوع الماضي لأن المعلومات جاهزة وموثقة. الأمر الآخر هو تأمين وصول المفتشين الذين سيأتون من منظمة حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية إلى مواقع إنتاج وتخزين الأسلحة الكيميائية وهذا طبعا أيضا لايوجد فيه مشكلة.. قد يكون هناك عقبة وحيدة وهي عقبة أساسية تتمثل بالوضع الأمني في بعض المناطق الأمر الذي ربما قد لا يسمح أو يضع بعض العقبات في وجه وصول بعض المفتشين.. أنا أقصد المناطق التي يوجد فيها مسلحون.. ربما يريدون عرقلة هذا العمل.. أي منع وصول المفتشين.. ونعرف بأن هؤلاء الإرهابيين يعملون تحت إمرة دول أخرى ربما تدفع الإرهابيين للقيام بأعمال تعيق وصول المفتشين من أجل اتهام الحكومة السورية بأنها تعرقل تنفيذ الاتفاقية.
سي سي تي في..
سيدي الرئيس.. كما ذكرت ربما هناك مشكلة في الوضع الميداني.. هل تظن أن الوضع الميداني داخل سورية الآن سيؤجل تنفيذ الاتفاقية…
الرئيس الأسد: مبدئيا المفترض لا.. لا يوجد أي مشكلة.. لكن كما قلت إذا كان هناك توجهات من بعض الدول التي تريد أن تطلب من الإرهابيين القيام بأعمال ضد المفتشين من أجل منعهم بهدف اتهام الحكومة السورية… تعلمين بأن الإرهابيين يستطيعون أن ينتقلوا من مكان إلى آخر.. هم ليسوا موجودين في مناطق محددة.. ولكن يبقى هذا مجرد احتمال. لا نستطيع أن نقدر هذا الشيء إلا عند مجيء المفتشين إلى سورية.
سي سي تي في.. قيل أن كميات الأسلحة الكيميائية في سورية كبيرة.. وانها تصل إلى 1000 طن.. هل هذا صحيح…
الرئيس الأسد..
سورية تنتج هذه الأسلحة منذ عقود.. ومن الطبيعي أن يكون هناك كميات كبيرة.. فنحن دولة في حالة حرب.. ونحن لدينا أراض محتلة منذ أكثر من 40 عاما.. لكن بكل الأحوال الجيش السوري هيأ نفسه بالأساس للقتال من خلال الأسلحة التقليدية.
سي سي تي في..
كيف تمنع الحكومة السورية المعارضة المسلحة من الوصول إلى هذه الأسلحة قبل تدميرها…
الرئيس الأسد..
الأسلحة الكيميائية دائما تخزن لدى أي دولة ولدى أي جيش في شروط خاصة من أجل منع العبث بها من قبل الإرهابيين أو من قبل أي مجموعات أخرى تخريبية.. قد تكون مجموعات تأتي من دول معادية.. فلا يوجد قلق بالنسبة لهذا الموضوع.. الأسلحة الكيميائية في سورية موجودة في مناطق ومواقع آمنة.. هناك سيطرة كاملة عليها من قبل الجيش العربي السوري.
سي سي تي في: ما زال لدى بعض الدول الغربية شكوك بنوايا الحكومة السورية فيما يتعلق بتدمير الأسلحة الكيميائية وفقا للقرار الذي اقترحته الولايات المتحدة وفرنسا وبريطانيا في الأمم المتحدة.. والذي يشير إلى أنه في حال لم تكمل سورية المهمة بحسب الاتفاقية الإطارية ستتخذ إجراءات عقابية ضد سورية.. كيف ترى ذلك…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا يوجد لدينا قلق من هذا الموضوع لسببين.. السبب الأول أن سورية منذ الاستقلال كانت دائما تلتزم بكل الاتفاقيات التي توقعها.. نحن نلتزم بشكل كامل بأي شيء نعلن أننا نوافق عليه.. فلا يوجد لدينا قلق من هذا الموضوع. الجانب الآخر الذي يجعلنا أيضا مطمئنين هو الدور الذي تلعبه اليوم الصين وروسيا في مجلس الأمن لكي لا يتم استخدام أي مبرر من أجل العدوان على سورية.. ولكن أريد أن أقول ان ما تقوم به الآن الولايات المتحدة وفرنسا وبريطانيا من خلال هذا القرار المطروح على مجلس الأمن.. أو الاتفاق الذي يريدون أن يتم الاتفاق عليه بين روسيا وأميركا.. الهدف منه هو أن يظهروا منتصرين في معاركهم ضد عدو وهمي يفترضون بأنه سورية.. لذلك علينا ألا نهتم كثيرا ولا نقلق من مثل هذه الطروحات أو مثل هذه الاتفاقيات.
سي سي تي في: في الصين نرى هذه الاتفاقية الإطارية حول تسليم الأسلحة الكيميائية مقابل السلام.. سيدي الرئيس هل أنتم قلقون من أن تقوم الدول الغربية باستغلال هذه الاتفاقية لإيجاد ذريعة أخرى للقيام بتدخل عسكري في سورية في المستقبل…
الرئيس الأسد..
هذا سؤال مهم جدا لأن الولايات المتحدة إذا أرادت أن تبحث عن مبرر للحرب فتستطيع أن تبحث عن مبررات أخرى.. وهي لم تتوقف عن الحرب لأن هناك فقط اتفاقا سوريا روسيا بالنسبة لتسليم الأسلحة الكيميائية.. وإنما لأن هناك رفضا عالميا ورفضا داخل الولايات المتحدة للحرب على سورية.. لأن الأسباب غير مقنعة.. وكذلك بنفس الوقت .. كما قلت قبل قليل.. الموقف الصيني والروسي داخل مجلس الأمن. طالما أن الولايات المتحدة تريد أن تستمر بسياسة الهيمنة على الدول الأخرى يجب أن نبقى قلقين بغض النظر عن الأزمة الحالية. طالما أن هناك دولا غربية تريد أن تتجاوز ميثاق الأمم المتحدة وتتجاوز القانون الدولي يجب أن نبقى قلقين دائما.. ليس فقط سورية وإنما الدول الصغرى تبقى دائما قلقة من أي تجاوز لميثاق الأمم المتحدة.
سي سي تي في: هل يمكن أن نعرف ما هو تأثير تسليم الأسلحة الكيميائية على الجيش السوري…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا توجد مشكلة حقيقية.. لأن الجيش السوري بني على أساس الحرب التقليدية.. هذه الترسانة من الأسلحة لن تتأثر بهذا الموضوع. أسلحة الدمار الشامل تستخدم عندما يذهب الوضع باتجاه الأسوأ.. البعض يصفه بحالة الانتحار.. نحن في سورية لا نذهب باتجاه حالة الانتحار. لذلك منذ عشر سنوات طرحنا على مجلس الأمن مقترحا سوريا من أجل إخلاء الشرق الأوسط من أسلحة الدمار الشامل.. فنحن مقتنعون بهذا الموضوع.. ولو كان يوءثر على قدرات الجيش في سورية لما قمنا بطرح هذه المبادرة منذ عشر سنوات.
سي سي تي في: خلال السنوات السابقة لماذا احتفظت سورية بالأسلحة الكيميائية…
الرئيس الأسد..
في الثمانينيات عندما بدأنا بإنتاجها.. كانت هناك فجوة بالنسبة للسلاح التقليدي بين سورية وإسرائيل.. وهي طبعا العدو الذي يحتل أراضينا. بعد تلك الفترة.. في النصف الثاني من التسعينيات توقفت سورية عن إنتاج هذه الأسلحة.. أي توقفت منذ أكثر من نحو خمسة عشر عاما.. بسبب أن الفجوة بالنسبة للأسلحة التقليدية تم ردم جزء منها.. واستمرينا بهذه السياسة. فإذا المبررات التي كان موجودة في الثمانينيات لوجود أسلحة دمار شامل في سورية لم تعد موجودة بشكل أساسي. ولذلك كما قلت قبل قليل طرحنا إخلاء الشرق الأوسط من أسلحة الدمار الشامل في عام 2003.
سي سي تي في: هل ستحصلون على شيء بالمقابل من حلفائكم بعد تسليم الأسلحة الكيميائية…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا أستطيع أن أقول انه شيء مقابل.. ولكن قبل المبادرة الروسية كان هناك عقود من الأسلحة بيننا وبين روسيا.. وكما أعلن الرئيس بوتين وعدد من المسؤولين الروس فهم مستمرون بتسليم هذه الأسلحة بحسب الاتفاقيات الموقعة بيننا وبين روسيا. فإذا تعزيز الترسانة السورية موجود قبل الاتفاقية وسيستمر وهو ليس له علاقة بالموضوع الكيميائي.. وإنما له علاقة بكوننا بلدا تعتدي عليه إسرائيل من وقت لآخر وتحتل أراضيه.. فمن الطبيعي أن نقوي الترسانة التقليدية ونعزز قوة القوات المسلحة لتكون قادرة على الدفاع عن سورية.
The Pentagon has put together a plan to equip and train “moderate” Syrian rebel forces. The move would mark the first instance of the American military having direct contact with the opposition.
Information regarding the new plan was relayed by two Obama administration officials to CNN. The idea has allegedly been under consideration since the first evidence emerged of a massive chemical weapons attack outside Damascus on August 21. The US maintains the attack was carried out by Assad’s government.
Though the two officials did not cite many specifics on the proposal, the effort would involve training that would take place in a country near Syria. However, weapons would not be directly supplied as the Pentagon has no authority to do so.
“We have any number of options under development that could expand our support to the moderate opposition, but no decision has been taken at this point,” Joint Chiefs…
President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to Fox News:
الرئيس الأسد لشبكة فوكس نيوز الأمريكية: سورية ستلتزم بجميع متطلبات انضمامها إلى اتفاقية حظر انتشار الأسلحة الكيميائية استجابة للمبادرة الروسية وانطلاقا من حاجات سورية وقناعاتها
19 أيلول , 2013
President Al-Assad’s interview with American Fox News – Part 1
President Al-Assad’s interview with American Fox News -Part2
Following is the full text of the interview conducted on Tuesday by Former U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich and Journalist Greg Palkot:
Fox News: Hello Mr. President, thank you very much for providing Fox News with this opportunity for an interview. I’m joined by my colleague, reporter Greg Palkot, and we’re very interested in proceeding. As you know, there’s been a number of breaking stories which we need to discuss with you. The UN has just released its chemical weapon report. My colleague Greg Palkot will be discussing that with you in a moment. I want to talk to you about other major developments regarding the chemical weapons plan, which has been agreed to by the US and the Russian government. Do you agree with this plan to secure and to eventually destroy the chemical weapons?
Syria joined the international agreement of preventing chemical WMDs
President Assad: Last week we joined the international agreement of preventing chemical WMDs, and part of this agreement, the main part, is to not to manufacture these armaments, not to store, and not to use, and of course not to distribute, and part of it is to get rid of those materials, the chemical materials. Of course, when we are part now of this agreement, we have to agree on that chapter.
Fox News: You have to agree on…?
President Assad: On getting rid of all these armaments, I mean to destroy them.
Fox News: Why do you agree now?
President Assad: No, actually it’s not now. If you go back ten years ago, when we were a non-permanent member of the Security Council in 2003, we proposed to the United Nations, to the Security Council, a Syrian proposal to get rid of the WMDs from the Middle East, to have chemical-free zone or WMD-free zone in the Middle East. And actually, the United States opposed that proposal, so as conviction, we wanted to see our region free of WMDs, all kinds of WMDs because it’s a very volatile region, it’s always on the verge of anarchy and wars, so that’s why we don’t say that we agreed now.
Fox News: We know that President Obama and Secretary Kerry have said in the past that you were lying – that’s their word, not mine – when you said that you didn’t have any chemical weapons. A few days ago, in an interview with Russia Channel 24 you admitted you had chemical weapon stockpiles. Now, I just want to make sure we’re clear before we go forward: do you or do you not have chemical weapons?
President Assad: First of all, regarding what Obama and Kerry said, I dare them to say that we said “no” once. We never said it. We never said no, we never said yes, but we always say it’s a classified issue, we don’t have to discuss it, and if we want to talk about it, we say “if” and “if” means you may have it, you may not. So, this is a blatant lie.
Fox News: Okay, but can you tell us now? Do you have chemical weapons or don’t you?
President Assad: Of course, when we joined the treaty last week, it means that we have, and we said that, so it’s not secret anymore.
Fox News: So, as far as the American people, you will agree that you do have a stockpile of chemical weapons?
President Assad: That’s why we joined the international agreement, in order to get rid of them.
Fox News: My former colleagues in Capitol Hill are sceptical about your agreement with this plan. They say it’s just a stalling tactic. Is it?
President Assad: A stalling tactic? To join the agreement?
Fox News: That you’re stalling right now for time, and that you really don’t have any intention of going along with the plan. Are you stalling?
President Assad: When you join the agreement, you have a mechanism, and you have to obey this mechanism, and according to the history of Syria, we never made an agreement with any party in this world and we didn’t fulfil what we have to do or our role in that agreement, never.
Fox News: So you would say that President Obama then can trust you to follow through?
President Assad: I don’t think that President Obama should trust me; first, the Syrian people should trust me, not President Obama. Second, when you talk about agreements and the international relations, you have mechanisms, and those mechanisms should be based on objective criteria, so if you want to trust or not trust, watch this country, see if they obey those mechanisms and those rules or not. This is where you can trust them or not. It’s not a personal relation.
Fox News: I understand. So, you’re under a tight time deadline. Are you going to be able to provide the list that is part of the agreement, a list of chemical weapons?
President Assad: It is a part. You should provide a list of the arsenal you have to the organization of chemical weapons.
Fox News: And are you ready to open chemical weapons sites to international inspection?
President Assad: We didn’t say that we are joining partially that agreement or that organization; we joined fully. We sent the letter, we sent the document, and you are committed to the full requirements of this agreement.
Fox News: Would you be ready to let our Fox News cameras have access to some of the chemical weapons sites so that the American people can see for themselves? Is that possible?
President Assad: In Syria we have institutions, we have rules, we have conditions, so we have to go back to these institutions to ask them for that request, and after they study the request, they can say yes or no, but it’s not about the President to take that decision alone. So, we have institutions, and you can do that after this interview, you can ask for permission.
Fox News: Can you destroy these chemical weapons quickly, and if not, why not?
President Assad: I think it’s a very complicated operation technically, and it needs a lot of money, some estimated about a billion for the Syrian stockpile. We’re not experts in that regard, but that’s the estimate that we’ve had recently. So, you have to ask the experts what do they mean by “quickly” because this has a certain schedule, it needs a year, maybe a little bit less or a little bit more. So, what do you mean by “quickly”?
Fox News: Since it’s the United States that demanded you give up chemical weapons, would you be prepared to turn over your chemical weapons to the US government for the purposes of safely destroying those weapons?
President Assad: As I said, it needs a lot of money, it needs about one billion, and it’s very detrimental to the environment. If the American administration is ready to pay this money and to take responsibility of bringing toxic materials to the United States, why don’t they do it? But of course it is going to be in cooperation a specified organization in the United Nations.
Fox News: But you’re prepared to hand them over at some point for the safe destruction of them?
President Assad: It doesn’t matter where. As I said, in the end, if you’re going to destroy them, it doesn’t matter where they go.
Fox News: Are there any conditions?
President Assad: No, we don’t have any conditions. Send it anywhere. In the end, if they’re going to be destroyed, they could be destroyed anywhere. As I said, it’s very detrimental to the environment, so whichever country is ready to take risk of these materials let them take it.
Fox News: Do you have a security agreement with the Russian government that, if and when you give up your chemical weapons, that you, in fact, will be protected so that you’re not vulnerable to attacks? Because we know there are other nations which gave up their weapons then they were attacked.
The Russian role, politically, was very efficient during the crisis in Syria
President Assad: You know, the Russian role, politically, was very efficient during the crisis in Syria, during the last two years and a half, and they vetoed three times in the Security Council, so actually they protected Syria politically. They don’t have to have a security agreement with Syria regarding this. It’s not only about the army and the war; it’s about politics. So, I think they are doing their job without having this agreement.
Fox News: So, just so summarize, you do have chemical weapons, you’re prepared to go along with the plan to destroy them, and that you’re prepared to cooperate with the international community in that.
President Assad: Again, as I said, what you mentioned all are part of the international agreement, and when we agreed to join this agreement we wanted to fully cooperate with this agreement, not partially. I think this is very clear.
Fox News: Greg?
Fox News: Thank you, Dennis. Mr. President, this is so important, let me just follow up on just one or two points then move on. Again, no conditions; you will agree to this plan to destroy your chemical weapons. You had put conditions on this in the past, in the past week or so. No conditions?
President Assad: The only conditions that the agreement will entail, propose and provide. So, now we are going to discuss the details with the international organization, so I don’t have all the details to discuss it with you now, and I’m not the expert; we have specialized people to discuss the details. But in general, as headlines, whenever we join an agreement, as Syria, we are always committed to those agreements.
Fox News: You problem was that there was a threat of force coming from the United States, there’s still discussion of the so-called Chapter Seven resolution being put forward to the UN which would include the possibility of force. Would that be a deal-breaker for you if that went forward?
President Assad: What is the deal-breaker?
Fox News: Chapter Seven resolution in the UN which allows bodies in the UN to use force if you’re not complying.
President Assad: There’s a misunderstanding that we agreed upon this agreement because of the American threat. Actually, if you go back before the G20, before the proposal of this Russian initiative, the American threat wasn’t about handing over the chemical arsenal; it was about attacking Syria in order not to use the arsenal again. So, it’s not about the threat. Syria never obeyed any threat. Actually, we responded to the Russian initiative and to our needs and to our conviction. So, whether they have Chapter Seven or don’t have Chapter Seven, this is politics between the great countries.
Fox News: So that’s irrelevant to you?
President Assad: No, no, irrelevant. We obeyed because we want to obey, we have completely different incentives.
Fox News: And again that timeframe which Dennis mentioned, one week to come up with a full account of your chemical weapons, November for the first inspectors to come in, mid 2014 for all your chemical weapons to be destroyed; that’s an ambitious timetable even by expert standards, but you think that is doable?
President Assad: Yeah, but we have to discuss these details with the organization first, this is first. Second, the time is not our problem; it is the problem of the organization, how much time do they need to implement this agreement.
Fox News: You don’t necessarily sign on to that time limit?
President Assad: No, no. The only thing we have to do is provide the information, and to make them accessible to our sites, which is not a problem. We can do it tomorrow, we don’t have any problem.
Fox News: You could do it tomorrow?
President Assad: Yeah, of course. We don’t have a problem. The problem is how fast they can be in getting rid of any chemical material, because this is a very complicated situation. It’s not about will; it’s about techniques. So, only experts can answer your question.
Fox News: Which leads to my last question on Dennis’s topic and that’s exactly what some people are saying, that this is just a ruse, just a game, because it is so difficult. Experts say it will be so difficult to get rid of these chemical weapons, especially in a war situation like this. This is indeed buying you a lot of time.
President Assad: Even if you don’t have war, it is difficult. Even if you have all the requirements afforded by every party, it takes time to get rid of them.
Fox News: So you’re saying this could take years?
President Assad: As I said we don’t have experience in that regard, but some say it takes one year. I didn’t say years. As I heard it takes about one year, maybe a little bit less, a little bit more. But at the end we have to see the experts, and they will tell us.
Fox News: Let’s go on to the latest breaking news. There’s a lot of breaking news in this region right now, and that’s the just-released UN report on the chemical weapon attack last month in the outskirts of Damascus right now. According to this report, and this is the report you said you were waiting for. You said you didn’t want to hear the US, you didn’t want to hear the UK, you didn’t want to hear France, you want the UN to speak, and they have spoken, and they have said and I quote “there’s clear and convincing evidence that the nerve gas Sarin has been used”, and they base this on environmental, chemical, medical samples, they say the killing happened on a relatively large scale, that killing included children. Do you agree with this assessment?
President Assad: They have the samples, and they’re supposed to be objective. We didn’t have any formal report, but the question is if I agree about the use of Sarin gas.
Fox News: No, do you agree with the assessment that a chemical weapon attack occurred on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21st?
20130919-023249.jpg
President Assad: That’s the information that we have, but information is different from evidence.
Fox News: It’s different. You disagree with the UN report?
President Assad: No, no, I don’t disagree. You have to wait till you have evidence. You can agree or disagree when you have evidence.
Fox News: They have the evidence. They’ve interviewed 40-50 people on the ground.
President Assad: Yeah, we have to discuss the evidence with them. We have to discuss it with them because they are coming back; they haven’t finished their mission yet. They are going back, and we have to discuss it with them, we have to see the details, but we cannot disagree without having the opposite evidence. So, nobody said that it was not used, because in March, we invited the delegation to Syria because Sarin gas was used in March. We have the evidence that it was used in March in Aleppo. So, when I talk as an official, I can talk about the evidence that I have.
Fox News: Okay, but they put out a 38-page report; I mean it’s been posted since yesterday. I don’t know whether you’ve had a chance to look at it.
President Assad: No, not yet. We have to look at it, we have to discuss it before saying we agree or disagree. It’s only yesterday evening.
Fox News: Let’s go hypothetical then. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has said that this is in fact a war crime, that it is despicable, and that it is a grave violation of international law. If that event happened as they say it did happen, would it be despicable, would it be a violation of international law?
President Assad: That is self-evident of course.
Fox News: Self-evident.
President Assad: Of course, that’s self-evident, it is despicable, and it’s a crime.
Fox News: Because I’m sure you’ve seen the videos that we have seen of the child gagging on the ground, of the people vomiting on the floor.
President Assad: Yeah, but no-one has verified the credibility of the videos and the pictures. No one verified them. The only verified things are the samples that the delegation went and took; samples of blood and other things from the soil and so on.
Fox News: Which is what they say they have.
President Assad: But you cannot build a report on videos if they are not verified, especially since we lived in a world of forgery for the last two years and a half regarding Syria. We have a lot of forgery on the internet.
Fox News: There’s a last key element to this UN report, and while the UN inspectors did not lay blame, that is they did not place culpability for the attack, there are many experts interpreting this report, some that I’ve spoken to in the last 12 hours, they frankly say this attack looks firmly like an attack coming from your government, from the Syrian government. They point to a few things; they say it was a large amount of gas, Sarin gas, maybe as much as a ton. The rebels could not have had that. They said the type of rocket, an M-14 artillery at 300 millimetres never used by the rebels before, that they needed large vehicles to send these rockets up, the rebels don’t have that, and maybe most importantly they point to the trajectory of the rockets. They say they were able to trace the rockets back from the impact point to where they came from, and in two different occasions, this is according to the UN, they say that the start point was Qasyoun Mountain, the headquarters of the republican guards. What do you say to that?
President Assad: Everything you mentioned is part of the report? All these points are part of the report?
Fox News: These points are all part of the report. These are all facts.
President Assad: The report didn’t mention anything regarding the republican guards or things like this.
Fox News: They said they gave the azimuth tracking of the trajectory, and people have extrapolated from the azimuth track that is where it was coming from, north-western Damascus.
President Assad: First of all, the Sarin gas is called kitchen gas, do you know why? Because anyone can make Sarin in his house.
Fox News: They said it is very high quality. Higher quality than even used in Iraq by Saddam Hussein, your neighbour at the time.
President Assad: First of all, any rebel can make Sarin. Second, we know that all those rebels are supported by governments, so any government that would have such chemical material can hand it over to those.
Fox News: The experts say that they have tracked nothing like this, a ton of Sarin gas, it is launchers, it is rockets, it’s a whole fleet, which happens to be, from time to time, those kinds of armaments, those kinds of munitions, happen to be in your bases.
President Assad: This realistically cannot be possible. You cannot use the Sarin beside your troops, this is first. Second, you don’t use WMD while you are advancing, you’ve not been defeated, and you’re not retreating. The whole situation was in favour of the army. Third, we didn’t use it when we had bigger problems last year. When they talk about any troops or any unit in the Syrian army that used this kind of weapon, this is false for one reason because chemical weapons can only be used by specialized units. It cannot be used by any other units like infantry or similar traditional units. So, all what you mentioned is not realistic and not true. Definitely, so far as government, we have evidence that the terrorist groups have used Sarin gas and those evidences have been handed over to the Russians. The Russian satellites, since the beginning of these allegations at the 21st of August, they said that they have information through their satellites that the rocket was launched from another area. So, why to ignore this point of view? So, the whole story doesn’t even hold together. It’s not realistic. In one word, we didn’t use any chemical weapons in the Ghouta, because if you want to use it, you would harm your troops, you would have harmed tens of thousands of civilians living in Damascus.
Fox News: Just to conclude this portion, Mr. President, will you allow more investigation? Will you allow UN investigators to come in, maybe to further investigate this attack, as you say, other attacks? There’s something like 14 different attacks where accusations are being made on both sides and even a UN team to decide on the culpability, the blame for this attack. You will allow those UN teams to come in?
President Assad: We invited them to come to Syria first, in March, and we’ve been asking them to come back to Syria to continue their investigations because we have more places to be investigated. The United States is the one who made pressure on them to leave recently before they finish their missions. When we invited the delegation, we wanted this delegation to have full authority to investigate everything, not only the use of the Sarin gas or the chemical weapons, but to investigate everything about who did it and how, but the United States made pressure in order to keep it only about was it used or not. Why? Because, I think the United States administration thought that if they’re going to investigate who and how, they’re going to reach the conclusion that the rebels or the terrorists have used it, not vice versa.
Fox News: Thank you, Mr. President. Dennis?
Fox News: Thank you. Mr. President, one of the things that appear possible is that Syria’s place as a secular state is at risk. Would you agree with that?
President Assad: Of course, when we have this kind of extremism and terrorism and violence, that will render the whole society into a more closed society, more ideologically fanatic, and that’s what the extremists are doing.
Fox News: But what does it mean to have a secular state? I mean there are questions about whether or not your position is authoritarian, whether you believe in democratic values. What is the secular state mean to Syria?
President Assad: Secular state means to deal with its citizen regardless of their religion, sect and ethnicity, because Syria is a melting pot. We have tens of different cultures in Syria. If we don’t have a secular state that reflects this secular society, Syria will disintegrate. So, that’s what it means to have a secular society.
Fox News: One of the notions about this very serious conflict is that it’s a civil war. Would you agree with that characterization that you’re involved in a civil war?
President Assad: No, civil war should start from within the society. Civil war needs clear lines, geographical lines, social lines and sectarian lines, but we don’t have these lines in Syria. Civil war doesn’t mean to have 80 or 83 nationalities coming to fight within your countries supported by foreign countries. What we have is not a civil war; what we have is a war, but it’s a new kind of war.
Fox News: So, you’re blaming outside interests for the acceleration of war. Now, there’s just some statistics that have come out from IHS James. They’re a defence analyst group. They estimate the opposition as a hundred thousand, 30,000 of which are hard-line Islamists sympathetic to the 10,000 Al Qaeda-inspired Jihadists. Are any of these Syrians? Are they all outsiders? Where are they getting their money?
President Assad: First of all, no-one has these precise numbers. This is exaggeration, because most of the Jihadists, when they come to Syria, don’t come through countries or organizations. They just come by plane to neighbouring countries and they cross the border like any other one, and they just want to come to Syria for the Jihad with the other Jihadists. So nobody has these numbers. We know that we have tens of thousands of Jihadists, but we are on the ground, we live in this country. What I can tell you is 80, and some say 90 – it is difficult to be precise, you don’t have clear and precise data – 80 to 90% of the rebels or terrorists on the ground are Al Qaeda and their offshoots.
Fox News: These are the rebels? You’re not maintaining that all of your opponents are Jihadists, are you?
President Assad: No, not all of them. Of course we have many other different groups, but they are small, they are becoming a minority. At the very beginning, the Jihadists were the minority. In the end of 2012, and during this year they became the majority with the flow of tens of thousands from different countries.
Fox News: Where are they getting their money from? Can you tell us right now?
President Assad: Mainly from donations.
Fox News: But donations from where? Can you name nations that are donating?
President Assad: From everywhere in the Islamic world. They mainly come from individuals, not from countries. We don’t know if some countries support them directly, we don’t have any information. I have to be very precise, but mainly from donations from people who carry the same ideology in their minds.
Fox News: You mentioned before that some figures that are given are exaggeration. Can you tell us now how many Syrians have died in this conflict?
President Assad: We have tens of thousands of Syrians that have died, mainly because of the terrorist attacks, assassinations, and suicide bombers, the majority.
Fox News: And how many are your government’s soldiers?
President Assad: More than 15,000.
Fox News: And how many are insurgents or Jihadists?
President Assad: We don’t have numbers, because we cannot count them.
Fox News: But there are innocent people being killed in this. And the reports are that your government has bombed villages in which innocent people are killed. What about them, Mr. President?
President al-Assad: No wise government in the world would kill its own people
President Assad: The majority of the innocent people have been killed by the terrorists, not by the government. No wise government in the world would kill its own people. How can you withstand if you kill your own people for two years and a half, while the West is against you, many of the regional countries are against you, and your people are against you while you kill them? Is it possible? Is it realistic?!
Fox News: So you’re saying you’re not killing your own people, but your forces have launched attacks on villages where your own people have been killed.
President Assad: No, actually what you’re talking about is when the terrorists infiltrate residential areas in villages and sometimes in the suburbs of the cities, and within large cities, and the army has to go there to get rid of those terrorists. The army should defend the civilians, not the opposite. You cannot leave the terrorists free, killing the people, assassinating the people, beheading the people and eating their hearts. When we go to defend them, you say you are killing your own people! You don’t, but in every war, you have casualties. This is war. You don’t have clean war, you don’t have soft war, and you don’t have good war.
Fox News: The international community reports that Syrian rebel forces opposed to you are equally if not more worried now about Jihadist fighters than they were previously by your government. Now, in this new development, is there an opening for you to achieve a rapprochement with your Syrian opponents?
President Assad: Yeah, here we have to differentiate between what you call opposition and the terrorists. Opposition is a political term. When you oppose somebody, like in your country and any other country in the world, you have your own program, your own vision, you have your own grassroots, and you go and propose whatever you want regarding the political system or anything else, and you can change that system if you oppose the other party. Opposition doesn’t mean to carry weapons, kill innocent people, destroy school and infrastructure, and behead. What’s the relation between opposition and beheading?
Fox News: Well, let me then, as a follow-up, ask you about diplomacy. What diplomatic moves are you prepared to make as confidence-building measures towards peace in your country?
President Assad: Any diplomatic move without having stability and getting rid of the terrorists is going to be just an illusion. Any diplomatic move should start with stopping the flow of the terrorists, the logistical support of those terrorists, the armament support and the money support. Then, you have a full plan, the Syrians could sit on the table, discuss the future of Syria, the political system, the constitution and everything.
Fox News: Would that future include negotiations with the Syrian opposition?
President Assad: Exactly, that doesn’t mean negotiating with the terrorists.
Fox News: I understand. Now, but does it mean that you’re ready for, let’s say, a program of reconciliation with those who have opposed you? Are you ready for that?
President Assad: Of course, we announced it at the beginning of this year. We said we are ready to discuss with any political party inside and outside Syria.
Fox News: Let’s take this down the road into next year. Would you be prepared to offer amnesty to all the Syrians who opposed your government?
President Assad: They didn’t breach the law, so if they oppose the government, they can come to Syria without amnesty. Amnesty should only be offered to anyone who violates or breaches the Syrian law. If you oppose it, it is not a crime.
Fox News: Do you believe in amnesty as a path towards peace?
President Assad: That depends on to whom; if it’s to whom stained their hands with Syrian blood, it could be as part of a national reconciliation.
Fox News: Would that include reparations to the families of those who were killed?
President Assad: It’s not the President who should put all these details. I think the Syrian meeting of every faction or all the parties that will define all these details.
Fox News: What would you say, Mr. President, to the millions of Syrians who are now refugees, as you move towards the peace process? What would you do to say “please come home?”
President Assad: Of course we want them to come back to their villages, to their cities, to their houses, to their homes, we want them to. But we have to help them with getting rid of the terrorists, because the majority of those refugees left because of the terrorists, not because of the government. Actually, we have refugees within Syria that are being helped by the government.
Fox News: Let me ask you this, have you spoken to President Obama?
President Assad: Never.
Fox News: Have you ever spoken to him?
President Assad: No.
Fox News: Are you interested in speaking to our President?
President Assad: That depends on the content. (Laughing) It’s not a chat.
Fox News: If you want to send him a message right now, what would you say to him?
President Assad: Listen to your people; follow the common sense of your people. That’s enough.
Fox News: And Pope Francis instructed the international community to lay aside the futile pursuit of a military solution. Do you believe the Pope’s advice is valid, for your government as well as other countries?
President Assad: Of course, we invited every militant in Syria to give up armament, and offered amnesty to whoever laid down his armament and wants to go back to his normal life as a Syrian citizen. Of course we believe in that.
Fox News: Thank you, now before I give this back to my colleague, I want to ask you a question that’s been bothering me and perhaps other Americans. Not everyone who’s watching this interview today knows that you’re a doctor, you’re an MD. You’ve done this before you were President. As you know, doctors take an oath never to do harm to anyone. That’s a direct quote from the Hippocratic Oath. Does a doctor give that up when he takes political office?
President Assad: First of all, doctors take the right decision to protect the life of the patient, so you cannot say they don’t do harm physically because sometimes they have to extract the bad member that could kill the patient. You could extract an eye, a leg and so on, but you don’t say that he’s a bad doctor. It is still a humanitarian job whatever they do; the same for politicians but in a larger scale. A doctor deals with one patient while the politician should with the public, with millions or tens of millions and so on. So, the question is whether your decision should help the life of the Syrians or not in such a situation. Nobody likes the violence, we are against the violence. But what will you do when the terrorists attack your country and kill the people? Will you say that I’m against violence or you defend? You have an army, you have police, they have to do their job, this is the constitution, and this is the role of any government. What did you do in Los Angeles in the 90s when you had rebels? Didn’t you send your army? You did. So this is the mission of the government. The most important thing is, when you take the decision, whether it harms or not, it should help the majority of the people. It is better that you take the decision that could help everyone, but sometimes, in certain circumstances, in difficult circumstances, you cannot, so you have to take the less harmful decision.
Fox News: Thank you, Mr. President. Greg?
Fox News: Mr. President, our time is limited and I want to briefly go back in time a little bit. I was here in 2000 for the funeral of your father. You assumed the position of President, and at that time some people had real hopes for you as a reformer, to change things, to bring more democracy to this country. In fact, however, critics and analysts say you pulled back to the point where now you are branded other things; you’re branded “dictator” and much, much worse. How does that make you feel when people say you lost the plot, that is, you lost the trail of what you might have done then, that might have avoided all of this now?
President Assad: First of all, if you want to talk about the hope, I would say I’m the hope of the Syrians, it doesn’t matter if I’m the hope of any foreign person, whether he’s official or any other one. So, all the terms that you’ve used in your question should be referred to the Syrians to see whether they agree upon these terms or not. At the end, it’s not about the term, it’s about the content. It doesn’t matter what they say, whether he is dictator or reformer. Today, you have propaganda. Do they say the same word about their allies in the Gulf States? Do they talk about dictatorship in the Gulf States?
Fox News: We’re talking about Syria.
Reform is not the job of a certain person, reform is a social process
President Assad: Yeah, I know, but I have the right to answer about the other states that are much far from democracy than the Syrian state. Going back to your question, the reform is not the job of a certain person in a country, whether the President or the government or the people. The President and the government can lead the reform, but the reform is a social process, and it’s influenced by many different things including the external factors, whether you have a war, whether you have stability, whether you have better economic conditions, whether you have very bad ideologies coming from abroad. So, talking about the reform in the way that I presented at the very beginning and I still believe in the same concept, values and principles. You should have democracy that reflects our own traditions, but democracy is not a goal; it means to reach prosperity, and democracy based on accepting the other. When you have a closed ideology and many taboos that prevent you from accepting the other culture in your country, you are going backwards. It doesn’t matter what the President does in that regard. Not the constitution, not the law, not any other process can make the democracy a real one, a realistic one in such a society. Only when the society makes this democracy, you can talk about it. It’s a culture. So, I’m still a reformer, I still believe in the same values, but if you go back to the history of the past decades, the most complicated situations happening in our region, this is one of the reasons why the democracy – not in Syria – in the whole region, is going backwards. We are going farther from democracy, not closer.
Fox News: But again, to stay with your country, and stay with a little bit of recent history, move back just two and a half year ago, that was the first protest here in this country. People said that was still a sign that people were unhappy, your own Syrian people, about your move to democracy, and that was simply what they were asking for: more democracy, more reform. They weren’t even asking for you to step down at the time. Critics will say you moved in too hard, too fast, with tanks, targeting protestors, torturing, etc. That is the critique of yours, and once again, missed another chance. How do you feel about that, two and a half years on?
President Assad: Let’s ask a very simple question: if we want to oppress those people because we don’t accept their requests, why did the President himself – I said in one of my speeches at the very beginning of the conflict, why did I say publically that those people have legitimate demands? This is first. Second, if we are going to use the force, why did we change the constitution? Why did we change the law? Why do we have now more than 15 new political parties in Syria? Why did we change so many laws that they asked for? Because we knew it wasn’t about democracy. If they asked for democracy, how they did kill some of those people – I’m not generalizing – some demonstrators demonstrated for the reasons you mentioned, but some others they killed soldiers and killed policemen in the first week of the conflict. What is the relation between asking for democracy and killing and assassinating? So, we have to be very precise and differentiate between people who ask for democracy and terrorists. Part of those people who were opposing the government at the very beginning, today they support the government against the terrorists, because they asked for reform, but they didn’t ask for terrorists. So, you’re talking about two completely different situations between the beginning of the conflict and today. So, we’re still moving forward in the path of democracy, and part of the solution that I just mentioned few minutes ago when we sit around the table, the Syrian people will say what is the best constitution, what is the best political system. Do they want it parliamentarian, presidential, quasi-presidential, and so on. What laws do they want? Everything! So, it’s not the president who is going to set. If the people want to set up their own system, this is democracy.
Fox News: Well, you bring up a point that leads to my next question. Some people will say that you have waged a war of attrition, that is, that you have weighted and ground people down, and some of those that felt, very peacefully, that they wanted a change here and democracy, now, after two and a half years of fighting, they’re willing to give in a little bit, and at the outset you talked about terrorists coming inside, and now you’ve created a situation on the ground because of the long period for the terrorists to come here. My point is: you’re not really changing people’s minds; you’re just forcing them into this box, this box where, over two and a half years on, 110,000 people dead, cities in ruins, and you’re hoping that your people will surrender to the idea. I mean, is that really where you wanted to go with that idea?
President Assad: So the core of the idea, is that I created the atmosphere to invite terrorists to Syria?
Fox News: You held on long enough against the demands of the people who wanted peaceful demands.
President Assad: From the very beginning we accepted the demands.
Fox News: You accepted the demands?
President Assad: From the very beginning, before the terrorists or those foreigners coming to Syria. From the very beginning, in 2011, six days after the conflict, we said we are going to change, and we started the process of changing the constitution two or three months after the beginning. And we had the vote. I didn’t change the constitution; there was a referendum, and the people voted in that referendum for this new constitution, in the beginning of 2012, in February, before the end of one year of the conflict. So, what you’re saying is a far cry from reality, it’s a completely different story, none of these things happened in Syria. This is about maybe another country. What happened in Syria, from the beginning we said if there are any demands, we are ready to change anything. What would the President do or how could he succeed if the people are against him? How can he succeed? Do you want to be the President just for the sake of being President? That’s not realistic, that’s impossible.
Fox News: Did you back your tactics in this war? A year ago, we stood in Homs, one of your great cities, and we watched as your artillery which was lined out around the outskirts of the city pound again and again relentlessly the centre of the city. You say you’re going for the enemy, you say you’re going for the terrorists, but that, some would call it indiscriminate shelling, has left many, many civilians dead and, frankly, left that city, and many of your other great cities like Aleppo and others, in ruins. I mean, is this the way to go after, if you think that there are some terrorists out there, the terrorist enemies of your state?
President Assad: So, it’s like if you say that when the terrorists infiltrate some area or attack a certain part of any city, the civilians would stay? That’s impossible. Whenever the terrorists enter an area, the civilians would leave unless they use them as human shields, but in most of the cases the civilians would quit their area because of the terrorists, and that’s why you have so many refugees. So, in most of the cases, the Syrian army attacked an area where there’s no civilians living in it. In most cases, you can hardly find civilians with terrorists. Fox News: But there are estimates, Mr. President, of the total of the 110,000 dead so far, is at least about 50,000 civilians. Are you saying that there were 50,000 human shields?
President Assad: First of all, what is the source of your information?
Fox News: That is a breakdown by analysts who look at these numbers. You think it is lower?
President Assad: Analysts living in the United States or Europe? You can only talk about facts; you cannot talk about estimations and allegations.
Fox News: 110,000 is a fact that everyone agrees with.
President Assad: Of course, I said there are tens of thousands of dead. I didn’t say the exact number for one reason: because we have thousands of missing people. We cannot count them as dead till we know that they are dead. It’s a war now. So, talking about the number, you have to be very precise. You’re talking about the number as a spread sheet, without knowing that they have family, this is tragedy. We live with these people. This is a human tragedy. It’s not about numbers; it’s about every family in Syria lost dear ones, including my family. We lost members of family. We lost friends and that’s why we’re fighting terrorism. So, should we allow the terrorists to continue without fighting them, this number, if it’s close to the real number, will be so many folds, will be millions, not hundreds of thousands.
Fox News: We don’t want to be lost in numbers, because as you say, it’s a human issue here. But again, you used the figure of 90% of the opposition, the rebels, are Al Qaeda. You stand by that? 90%?
President Assad: 80 to 90%, no one has the exact number. You don’t have the exact number, because they are coming and flowing irregularly.
Fox News: You don’t think that’s too high? I mean, people are putting that lower, at least 50/50. One would say that it’s at least 50/50.
President Assad: Which people? I’m sure not the Syrian people. No-one from Syria says they are 50/50. From abroad maybe, they have their own estimations. But at the end, it’s our conflict, we live here, it’s our own country. We can tell how much. But 50/50, how did they count it?
Fox News: But again, just to sum up on what you’ve been saying, in one quote you said “the opposition has been manufactured from abroad.” Do you really feel that?
President Assad: It’s not a feeling, and it’s not about how I feel. It’s about what facts are presented in front of us. If they don’t have Syrian grassroots – because we have opposition in Syria that has grassroots – Why to have opposition abroad, how do they live? Who gives them money? How are they financed? And we know that some of them belong to the United States, and Britain, and France, and Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. Real opposition only belongs to the Syrian people. As long as it doesn’t belong to this people, it’s made by other country. It’s self-evident.
Fox News: Are you minimizing the deaths by saying it’s not 50,000, it is 40,000 or 30,000?
President Assad: You cannot minimize it because in every house you have pain today; in every house you have sadness. You cannot minimize, whether this number or higher number. It’s a tragedy. We live in Syria. But we have to talk about the reasons. Who killed those? Not the government; the terrorists. We are defending our country. If we don’t defend, this number will be many folds, that is what I meant.
Fox News: I just wanted to clarify that. Now, looking at a broader picture here; this appears to be a watershed moment for the world, from here in war-torn Syria, a new road map towards world peace may be developing, by starting with you relinquishing your chemical weapons, and then moving forward with a concrete plan for peace in Syria. Do you think that we are at that kind of a moment?
President Assad: Are you talking about the situation within Syria? There’s no direct relation between the chemical issue and the conflict within Syria. It is completely different. So, if we want to move forward towards the political solution, we can, but that’s not related to the chemical agreement.
Fox News: I understand, but the fact that this chemical issue has brought the world together, to finally pay attention; is this a moment you can build from?
President Assad: That depends to large extents on the countries that are supporting the terrorists in Syria.
Fox News: Before I go back to Greg; there are a lot countries now involved in this process; not just the US and Russia, but Iran, Israel, Turkey and even China. So much depends on Syria’s cooperation with the Geneva process. Are you prepared to make sure that this opportunity doesn’t fall apart?
20130919-023326.jpg
President al-Assad: Syria supported Geneva process from the very beginning
President Assad: We supported the Geneva process from the very beginning. We cooperated with the UN envoys that came to Syria. Actually, the one who put obstacles wasn’t Syria neither Russia nor China; it was the United States, for many different reasons. One of the main reasons is that they don’t have real opposition abroad. They know this is one of their main problems, because the core of the Geneva conference is to be based on the will of the Syrian people, so whatever we agree upon in Geneva will be proposed to the Syrian people, and if you don’t have grassroots, you cannot convince the Syrian people to move with you. This is the American problem with their puppets, to be very clear and very frank.
Fox News: Thank you Mr President. Greg.
Fox News: Following up on that, Mr. President, others think indeed that there is a way forward here, that you are for the first time in this last two and a half years speaking seriously to the international community about a negotiation track, granted, just a narrow track of chemical weapons, and in fact, there could be the possibility of longer range talks. Could you be a part of that, or if your strong allies and, basically, the sponsor of this new wave of discussions and negotiations, Russia, feels that perhaps it would be more helpful not to have you in the position, what would be your stand? Are you in this to the end, or if it would facilitate things were you to step aside for the good of your country, would you do that as well?
President Assad: Being here or not being here, that position, as President, should be defined and decided by the Syrian people and by the ballot box, no-one else whether friend or opponent or anyone has word on that issue. If the Syrian people want you to be President, you have to stay. If they don’t want you, you have to quit right away, with the conference or without a conference. That’s self-evident, we don’t discuss it, and I said it many time. So, no-one has to say that, and Russia never tried to interfere in the Syrian matters. There’s mutual respect between Syria and Russia, and they never tried to involve themselves in those Syrian details. Only the American administration, their allies in Europe, and some of their puppets in the Arab world repeat these words, whether the President should leave, what the Syrian people should do, what kind of government; only this bloc interferes in the matters of a sovereign country.
Fox News: I know you said that there are elections scheduled here, at least, in 2014. You would stand for those, and you would see if the people should decide for or against you, and those could be conducted in this current atmosphere?
President Assad: You have to probe the mood of the people, the will and desire of the people at that time to see whether they want to run for presidency or not. If they don’t see it that they are positive, you don’t run. So, it is too early now because you have something new every day; it is too early to talk about it. I can make my decision before the elections.
Fox News: Mr. President, according to the New York Times President Obama said the greater goal with respect to Syria is to curb chemical weapons use and proliferation of chemical weapons worldwide. Do you believe this could be a chance to reset Syria’s relations with the United States?
President Assad: That depends on the credibility of the administration; any administration, and that depends on the US administration.
Fox News: But you do not say that our president does not have credibility; I am asking you if this is an opportunity for you to reset relations with the United States?
President Assad: As I said, the relation depends on the credibility of the administration. We never looked at the United States as enemy; we never looked at the American people as enemy. We always like to have good relations with every country in the world and first of all the United States because it is the greatest country in the world. That is normal and self-evident. But that does not mean to say and to go in the direction that the United States wants us to go in. We have our interest, we have civilization and we have our will. They have to accept and respect that. We do not have a problem with mutual respect. We want to have good relations, of course.
Fox News: Let me ask you some specifics with respect to going forward, are you going towards a kind of constitution for Syria that guarantee more freedom for the people of Syria? Will you really work for that?
President Assad: Our constitution today guarantees more freedom but that depends on the content of freedom. That’s what the Syrian parties could discuss on the table. It is not the constitution of the president; it is not my vision or my own project. It should be a national project. So, the Syrians should define exactly what they want and I have to accept whatever they want.
Fox News: What, for example, do you think of free elections?
President: Of course, we have free elections now in this constitution. We are going to have free election next year in May 2014.
Fox News: Is there anyone else who can be a president of Syria?
President Assad: Of course, anyone who wants to be now can be a president.
Fox News: So, you are not the only person who could do so?
President Assad: No, I would not be the only person.
Fox News: So, you believe that it is possible for Syria to have peaceful transition without you in power? Is that possible? President Assad: What do mean be transition; transition of what?
Fox News: A transition towards a resolution of the conflict and the war, is that possible with you not being in power?
President Assad: If the Syrian people want me not to be in the transitional, permanent or normal or natural situation, this means it is going to be peaceful. Anything people do not want cannot be peaceful.
Fox News: Let us look five years into the future, what will Syria look like? President Assad: We have so many challenges if we get rid of this conflict, of course, the shorter one is to get rid of the terrorists as I said, but the most important thing is their ideology. We have no doubt that the existence of terrorists from all over the world – extremist terrorists – have left so many side-effects within the hearts and minds of at least the young people. What would you expect from a child who tried to behead somebody with his hand! What would you expect from children that have been watching beheading and barbecuing heads and watching cannibals in Syria on the TV and the internet?! I am sure it has a lot of psychological and side-effects and bad effects on the society. So, we have to rehabilitate this generation to be open again as Syria used to be. Of course, I am talking about local focal that if we leave it, it is going to be like a ripple in the water that expands into the society, this is first. Second, we have to rebuild our infrastructure that has been destroyed recently, to rebuild our economy and, as I said, to have a new political system that suits the Syrian people and the economic system, and other accessories regarding main headlines.
Fox News: Mr. President, as a reporter, I just want to tell you what I see and I travel around the country. I have seen this crisis going on. Right now, looking as you do at your country with may be 60% or 70% of your territory out of your control, and may be 40% of your population out of your control; six million people are displaced; almost third of your country have been displaced by this war. We talk about the death toll and those who were injured. Do you see any way back, do you see any way that the people could again be behind you in totality? Do you see anything that you could do at this point to make up for these two and a half years of horror, bloody grinding war which this country had been put through?
President Assad: Today, after the majority of the people experienced the meaning of terrorism – I am talking about the country that used to be one of the safest countries in the world; we used to be number four on the international scale of safety – and after they directly experienced the extremism and terrorism, those people are supporting the government. So, they are behind the government. It does not matter if they are behind me or not. The most important thing is for the majority to be behind the institutions. Regarding the percentage you put, of course it is not correct. Anyway, the army and police do not exist anywhere in Syria, and the problem now is not a war between two countries and two armies that if you say that I took that land and I liberated the other land and so on. It is about the infiltration of terrorists. Even we liberate or get rid of terrorists in certain area, they will go to another area to destroy, kill and do their routine. The problem now is the infiltration of those terrorists into Syria and the most dangerous problem that we are facing is their ideology; this is more important than what percentage we have and what percentage they have. At the end, large numbers of them are foreigners not Syrians, and they will leave someday or they will de dead inside Syria but ideology will be the main worry of Syria and neighbouring countries, and this should be the worry of any country in the world, including the United States.
Fox News: Mr. President, Thank very much for this interview.
President Assad: Thank you for coming to Syria.
أكد السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد في مقابلة مع شبكة فوكس نيوز الأمريكية التزام سورية بجميع متطلبات انضمامها إلى اتفاقية حظر انتشار الأسلحة الكيميائية وموافقتها على تنفيذ مضمونها لجهة عدم تصنيع هذه الأسلحة أو تخزينها أو استعمالها أو توزيعها والتخلص منها وذلك استجابة للمبادرة الروسية وانطلاقا من حاجات سورية وقناعاتها والأمر لا علاقة له بالتهديد الذي لم ترضخ له سورية يوما.
وأوضح الرئيس الأسد أن القيادة السورية تنظر اليوم إلى الثقة التي يوليها إياها الشعب السوري وهي تبحث عن هذه الثقة بالذات مشددا على أن أي تحرك دبلوماسي بخصوص حل الأزمة في سورية دون تحقيق الاستقرار والتخلص من الإرهابيين سيكون مجرد وهم ولذلك فإن أي تحرك دبلوماسي ينبغي أن يبدأ بوقف تدفق الإرهابيين ووقف الدعم اللوجستي لهم ووقف دعمهم بالمال والسلاح.
وفيما يلي النص الكامل للمقابلة التي أجراها أمس الأول (الثلاثاء) عضو الكونغرس الأمريكي السابق دينيس كوسينيتش والصحفي غريغ بالكوت:
فوكس نيوز: مرحبا سيادة الرئيس.. وشكرا لكم على إتاحة فرصة إجراء هذه المقابلة لـ فوكس نيوز. وأود أن أقول إن معي زميلي المراسل غريغ بالكوت.. وكلانا نقدر فرصة وجودنا هنا. سيادة الرئيس.. هناك خبران جديدان نود أن نناقشهما معك. كما تعرفون.. هناك عدد من الأخبار الجديدة التي نرغب بمناقشتها معك. لقد أصدرت الأمم المتحدة التقرير المتعلق بالأسلحة الكيميائية. زميلي غريغ بالكوت سيناقش ذلك معكم بعد دقائق.. لكني أريد أن أتحدث معك حول تطورات رئيسية أخرى فيما يتعلق بالخطة المتعلقة بالأسلحة الكيميائية التي تم الاتفاق عليها من قبل حكومتي الولايات المتحدة وروسيا. هل توافقون على هذه الخطة القاضية بتأمين هذه الأسلحة الكيميائية وتدميرها في النهاية…
الرئيس الأسد..
في الأسبوع الماضي انضممنا إلى اتفاقية حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية.. وتنص هذه الاتفاقية على عدم تصنيع هذه الأسلحة وعدم تخزينها وعدم استعمالها.. وبالطبع عدم توزيعها. كما تنص الاتفاقية أيضا على التخلص من هذه المواد الكيميائية. وبالتالي فعندما ننضم إلى هذه الاتفاقية.. علينا الموافقة على ذلك الجزء.
فوكس نيوز: عليكم الموافقة على…
الرئيس الأسد..
الموافقة على التخلص من هذه الأسلحة.. أعني تدميرها.
فوكس نيوز: ولماذا توافقون الآن…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. لم نوافق الآن فحسب. إذا عدت إلى ما قبل عشر سنوات.. عندما كانت سورية عضوا غير دائم في مجلس الأمن التابع للأمم المتحدة عام 2003 قدمنا مقترحا للأمم المتحدة يقضي بأن تكون منطقة الشرق الأوسط خالية تماما من أسلحة الدمار الشامل. وحينذاك.. الولايات المتحدة هي التي عارضت ذلك المقترح. وبالتالي.. فإن لدينا القناعة بأن نرى منطقة الشرق الأوسط خالية من جميع أنواع أسلحة الدمار الشامل.. لأن هذه المنطقة متقلبة للغاية.. وهي دائما على حافة الفوضى والحروب. ولذلك لا تستطيع القول إننا وافقنا الآن فحسب.
فوكس نيوز: نعلم أن الرئيس أوباما ووزير الخارجية كيري قالا في الماضي.. وهذه كلماتهما وليست كلماتي.. إنكم تكذبون عندما قلتم إنه ليس لديكم أسلحة كيميائية. قبل أيام.. وفي مقابلة لكم مع القناة 24 الروسية.. اعترفتم بأن لديكم مخزونات من الأسلحة الكيميائية. أود أن نكون واضحين في هذه النقطة قبل أن نمضي قدما في هذه المقابلة. هل لديكم أسلحة كيميائية أم لا…
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا.. وفيما يتعلق بما قاله أوباما وكيري.. أتحداهما أن يقولا إننا قلنا إننا لا نملك هذه الأسلحة ولو مرة واحدة. نحن لم نقل ذلك. لم نقل لا ولم نقل نعم. كنا دائما نقول إنها قضية سرية ولا نناقشها وإذا أردنا أن نتحدث عنها نقول “إذا”. و”إذا” تعني أنه يمكن أن يكون لدينا أسلحة كيميائية أو ليس لدينا هذه الأسلحة. وبالتالي ما قاله كيري وأوباما كذبة صريحة.
فوكس نيوز: لكن هل تستطيع أن تخبرنا الآن.. هل لديكم أسلحة كيميائية أم لا…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع.. عندما انضممنا إلى اتفاقية حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية الأسبوع الماضي.. فإن هذا يعني أننا نمتلكها.. وقد قلنا ذلك. الأمر لم يعد سرا .
فوكس نيوز:إذن.. فيما يتعلق بالشعب الأمريكي.. أنتم تقرون بأن لديكم مخزونات من الأسلحة الكيميائية…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع.. ولذلك انضممنا إلى الاتفاقية الدولية للتخلص منها.
لم نعقد اتفاقا مع أي طرف في العالم إلا والتزمنا بما يترتب علينا بموجب هذا الاتفاق وقمنا بدورنا فيه
فوكس نيوز: زملائي السابقون في الكونغرس متشككون حيال موافقتكم على هذه الخطة.. ويقولون إنها مجرد تكتيك للمماطلة. هل هي كذلك…
الرئيس الأسد..
تكتيك للمماطلة… تعني الانضمام إلى الاتفاقية.
فوكس نيوز: نعم.. أي إنكم تماطلون الآن للحصول على المزيد من الوقت وإنكم لا تعتزمون المضي في هذه الخطة…
الرئيس الأسد..
عندما يتم الانضمام إلى الاتفاقية.. هناك آليات.. وعليك أن تلتزم بهذه الآليات. وإذا نظرت إلى تاريخ سورية.. تجد أننا لم نعقد اتفاقا مع أي طرف في هذا العالم إلا والتزمنا بما يترتب علينا بموجب هذا الاتفاق وقمنا بدورنا فيه.
فوكس نيوز: إذن.. تقول إن بوسع الرئيس أوباما أن يثق بكم في المضي قدما فيما يترتب على هذه الاتفاقية.
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا.. لا أعتقد أن من ينبغي أن يثق بي هو الرئيس أوباما بل ينبغي أن يثق بي الشعب السوري وليس الرئيس أوباما.. هذا أولا. ثانيا.. عندما نتحدث عن الاتفاقيات والعلاقات الدولية.. فهناك آليات. وينبغي أن تستند تلك الآليات إلى معايير موضوعية. فسواء كنت تثق أو لا تثق.. راقب ذلك البلد لمعرفة ما إذا كان يلتزم بتلك الآليات والقواعد أم لا. هذا ما يحدد ما إذا كان ينبغي الثقة بذلك البلد أم لا. المسألة ليست مسألة علاقة شخصية.
فوكس نيوز: أفهم ذلك. لديكم الآن جدول زمني ضيق. سيترتب عليكم بموجب الاتفاقية تقديم قائمة بالأسلحة الكيميائية التي تمتلكونها.
الرئيس الأسد..
ينبغي تقديم قائمة بالترسانة التي نمتلكها لمنظمة حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية.
فوكس نيوز: وهل أنتم مستعدون لفتح مواقع الأسلحة الكيميائية أمام التفتيش الدولي…
الرئيس الأسد..
لم نقل إننا ننضم جزئيا إلى هذه الاتفاقية أو هذه المنظمة. لقد انضممنا كليا. أرسلنا رسالة أو وثيقة تقول ذلك.. ونحن ملتزمون بجميع متطلبات هذه الاتفاقية.
فوكس نيوز: وهل يمكن أن تسمحوا لكاميرات فوكس نيوز بتصوير بعض مواقع الأسلحة الكيميائية هذه.. بحيث يتمكن الشعب الأمريكي من رؤيتها بنفسه… هل هذا ممكن…
الرئيس الأسد..
في سورية لدينا مؤسسات ولدينا قواعد وشروط.. وينبغي علينا العودة إلى هذه المؤسسات لنسألهم عن هذا الطلب.. وبعد دراستهم للطلب.. يمكنهم الرد بنعم أو لا. لا يتخذ الرئيس هذا القرار بمفرده. لدينا مؤسسات. وبعد هذه المقابلة.. يمكنكم طلب إذن بذلك.
فوكس نيوز: هل يمكنكم تدمير هذه الأسلحة الكيميائية بسرعة… وإذا كان الجواب لا.. فلم لا…
الرئيس الأسد..
أعتقد أنها عملية معقدة للغاية من الناحية التقنية وتحتاج للكثير من المال. وقد قدر البعض ذلك بمليار دولار للتخلص من مخزونات الأسلحة الكيميائية في سورية. لسنا خبراء في هذا الموضوع.. لكن هذا هو التقدير الذي طرح مؤخرا. إذن.. لمعرفة مدى سرعة التخلص منها ينبغي سؤال الخبراء.. ماذا يعنون عندما يقولون بسرعة لأن الأمر بحاجة إلى جدول زمني قد يحتاج إلى عام.. أو أقل بقليل أو أكثر بقليل. إذن.. فالأمر يعتمد على ما تعنيه عندما تقول بسرعة.
فوكس نيوز: بما أن الولايات المتحدة هي التي طالبت بتخليكم عن الأسلحة الكيميائية.. هل أنتم مستعدون للتخلي عن أسلحتكم الكيميائية للولايات المتحدة لأغراض تدمير تلك الأسلحة بشكل آمن…
الرئيس الأسد..
كما قلت.. العملية تحتاج إلى الكثير من المال.. نحو مليار دولار.. وهي ضارة جدا بالبيئة. إذا كانت الإدارة الأمريكية مستعدة لدفع ذلك المبلغ من المال وتحمل مسؤولية نقل هذه المواد السامة إلى الولايات المتحدة.. فلماذا لا يفعلونها… لكن ينبغي أن يتم ذلك بالتعاون مع المنظمة المعنية في الأمم المتحدة.
فوكس نيوز: هل أنتم مستعدون لتسليم هذه الأسلحة عند نقطة معينة كي يتم تدميرها بشكل آمن…
الرئيس الأسد..
كما قلت.. لا يهم أين يتم تدميرها. إذا كنا نريد تدميرها.. لا يهمنا أين تذهب.
فوكس نيوز: دون أي شروط…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. ليس لدينا أي شروط فيما يتعلق بإرسالها إلى أي مكان. إذا كانت ستدمر.. يمكن أن تدمر في أي مكان. كما قلت.. إنها ضارة جدا بالبيئة.. فأي بلد مستعد للمخاطرة المتعلقة بهذه المواد.. يمكنه استلامها.
الدور الروسي كان كفؤا جدا سياسيا خلال الأزمة في سورية
فوكس نيوز: لدي سؤال أخير قبل أن أعطي الكلام لزميلي المراسل غريغ بالكوت. هل لديكم اتفاق أمني مع الحكومة الروسية يقضي بأنه عندما تتخلون عن الأسلحة الكيميائية.. وإذا تخليتم عنها.. فإنكم ستتمتعون بالحماية.. ولا تكونون عرضة للهجمات. لأننا نعرف أن هناك دولا أخرى تخلت عن أسلحتها ومن ثم تمت مهاجمتها…
الرئيس الأسد..
تعرفون أن الدور الروسي كان كفؤا جدا سياسيا خلال الأزمة في سورية.. خلال العامين والنصف العام الماضيين. وقد استعملوا حق الفيتو ثلاث مرات في مجلس الأمن. وبالتالي.. فإن روسيا حمت سورية سياسيا.. ولا ينبغي أن تكون هناك اتفاقية أمنية بهذا الخصوص. الأمر لا يتعلق بالجيش والحرب وحسب.. بل يتعلق بالسياسة أولا وقبل كل شيء. إنهم يقومون بعملهم دون وجود هذه الاتفاقية.
فوكس نيوز: إذن.. وكي أوجز ما قلت.. لديكم أسلحة كيميائية.. وأنتم مستعدون للمضي قدما في خطة تدميرها.. وأنتم مستعدون للتعاون مع المجتمع الدولي بهذا الصدد.
الرئيس الأسد..
مرة أخرى.. ما قلته هو جزء من الاتفاقية الدولية.. وعندما نوافق على الانضمام إلى هذه الاتفاقية.. فإننا سنتعاون بشكل كامل مع هذه الاتفاقية.. وليس بشكل جزئي. أعتقد أن هذا واضح جدا.
فوكس نيوز..
غريغ
فوكس نيوز: شكرا دينيس. سيادة الرئيس.. هذا أمر مهم جدا.. ولذلك دعني أتابع بشأن نقطة أو نقطتين ثم أنتقل إلى مواضيع أخرى. ليس لديكم أي شروط. ستوافقون على هذه الخطة لتدمير أسلحتكم الكيميائية. كنتم قد وضعتم شروطا في الماضي.. خلال الأسبوع الماضي. ليس لديكم أي شروط.
الرئيس الأسد..
شروطنا الوحيدة هي الشروط التي تنص عليها الاتفاقية. الآن سنناقش التفاصيل مع المنظمة الدولية. ليس لدي جميع التفاصيل لأناقشها معكم الآن. كما أني لست خبيرا في هذا الموضوع.. ينبغي مناقشة هذا الأمر من قبل المختصين. لكن بشكل عام.. وفي العناوين.. فعندما ننضم إلى اتفاقية.. كسورية.. فإننا نلتزم دائما بتلك الاتفاقيات.
سورية لم ترضخ يوما للتهديد
فوكس نيوز: كانت مشكلتكم وجود تهديد باستعمال القوة من قبل الولايات المتحدة. ولا تزال هناك نقاشات بشأن اللجوء إلى قرار بموجب الفصل السابع في الأمم المتحدة يتضمن إمكانية استعمال القوة. هل من شأن ذلك أن يفسد هذا الاتفاق بالنسبة لكم إذا تم التحرك في ذلك الاتجاه…
الرئيس الأسد..
ما الذي سيفسد الاتفاق…
فوكس نيوز: إصدار قرار من الأمم المتحدة بموجب الفصل السابع يسمح لجهات في الأمم المتحدة باستعمال القوة إذا لم تلتزموا بالاتفاق.
الرئيس الأسد..
هناك سوء فهم مفاده اننا وافقنا على هذه الاتفاقية بسبب التهديدات الأمريكية. في الواقع.. إذا عدت إلى الوراء.. قبل انعقاد مؤتمر مجموعة العشرين وقبل المبادرة الروسية.. ترى بأن التهديد الأمريكي لم يكن يتعلق بتسليم الترسانة الكيميائية.. بل كان بمهاجمة سورية لمنعها من استخدام ترسانتها مرة أخرى. إذن.. الأمر لا يتعلق بالتهديد. سورية لم ترضخ يوما للتهديد. في الواقع.. لقد استجبنا للمبادرة الروسية ولحاجاتنا وقناعاتنا. وهكذا.. فسواء لجؤوا إلى الفصل السابع أم لم يلجؤوا.. فهذه تحركات سياسية بين الدول العظمى.
فوكس نيوز: إذن هذا لا يهمكم…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. لا يهمنا نحن نلتزم لأننا نريد الالتزام.. ولدينا دوافع مختلفة تماما.
فوكس نيوز: وفيما يتعلق بالإطار الزمني الذي ذكره دينيس.. أسبوع واحد لتقديم قائمة كاملة بأسلحتكم الكيميائية.. وقدوم طلائع المفتشين الدوليين في تشرين الثاني وأواسط عام 2014 كموعد نهائي لتدمير جميع أسلحتكم الكيميائية. هذا جدول زمني طموح حتى بمعايير الخبراء. لكن هل تعتقدون أنتم أنه يمكن القيام بذلك…
الرئيس الأسد..
لكن ينبغي أن نناقش هذه التفاصيل مع المنظمة أولا.
فوكس نيوز: عليكم مناقشة ذلك أولا…
الرئيس الأسد..
نعم.. هذا أولا. ثانيا.. الوقت ليس مشكلتنا نحن.. بل مشكلة المنظمة.. مقدار الوقت الذي يحتاجونه لتنفيذ هذه الاتفاقية.
فوكس نيوز: إذن.. لا ينبغي بالضرورة التوقيع على هذا الجدول الزمني بالذات.
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. الأمر الوحيد الذي ينبغي أن نفعله هو تقديم المعلومات ونتيح وصول المفتشين إلى مواقعنا.. وهذه ليست مشكلة. بوسعنا أن نفعل ذلك غدا. ليس لدينا أي مشكلة.
فوكس نيوز: يمكنكم فعل ذلك غدا…
الرئيس الأسد..
نعم.. بالطبع.. ليس هناك أي مشكلة. المشكلة هي في مدى سرعتهم في التخلص من أي مادة كيميائية.. لأن هذا الوضع معقد جدا. الأمر لا يتعلق بالإرادة بل بالتقنيات. الخبراء وحدهم هم الذين يستطيعون الإجابة عن سؤالك.
فوكس نيوز: وهو ما يقودني إلى سؤالي الأخير حول الموضوع الذي طرحه دينيس.. أي هذا تماما ما يقوله البعض.. إن هذه مجرد خدعة أو لعبة لأن الأمر صعب للغاية. يقول الخبراء إن ثمة صعوبة بالغة في التخلص من هذه الأسلحة الكيميائية وخصوصا في حالة حرب كهذه ما يجعلكم تكسبون الكثير من الوقت.
الرئيس الأسد..
حتى لو لم يكن هناك حرب.. فإن الأمر صعب. حتى لو كان لديك كل المتطلبات المقدمة من جميع الأطراف.. فالأمر يستغرق وقتا للتخلص منها.
فوكس نيوز: تقول إن الأمر قد يستغرق سنوات…
الرئيس الأسد..
كما قلت.. ليس لدينا خبرة في هذا المجال. البعض يقول إن ذلك يستغرق عاما. أنا لم أقل سنوات. كما سمعت.. الأمر يستغرق عاما أو أقل بقليل أو أكثر بقليل. لكن في النهاية علينا أن نلتقي الخبراء.. وهم سيخبروننا.
فوكس نيوز: شكرا سيادة الرئيس. لننتقل إلى آخر الأخبار.. وبالطبع هناك الكثير من الأخبار العاجلة. في هذه المنطقة الآن وآخرها صدور تقرير الأمم المتحدة حول الهجوم بالأسلحة الكيميائية الشهر الماضي في ضواحي دمشق. وطبقا لهذا التقرير.. وهو التقرير الذي قلتم إنكم تنتظرونه. قلتم إنكم لا تريدون أن تستمعوا للولايات المتحدة أو المملكة المتحدة أو فرنسا. تريدون للأمم المتحدة أن تتحدث.. وها هي قد تحدثت. وقالت.. وأنا اقتبس.. “هناك أدلة واضحة ومقنعة على أن غاز الأعصاب السارين قد استخدم”. وقد استندوا في ذلك إلى عينات بيئية.. وكيميائية.. وطبية.. وقالوا إن ذلك أدى إلى حالات وفاة على نطاق واسع نسبيا.. وان عمليات القتل شملت أطفالا. هل تتفقون مع هذا التقييم…
الرئيس الأسد..
لديهم العينات.. ويفترض أن يكونوا موضوعيين. لم يصلنا أي تقرير رسمي. المسألة هي أني إذا اتفقت مع أن غاز السارين قد استعمل…
فوكس نيوز: لكن هل تتفقون مع التقييم القائل بأن هجوما بالأسلحة الكيميائية قد حدث في ضواحي دمشق في 21 آب…
الرئيس الأسد..
تلك هي المعلومات التي بحوزتنا.. لكن المعلومات تختلف عن الأدلة.
فوكس نيوز: تختلف… إذن.. أنتم لا تتفقون مع تقرير الأمم المتحدة…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. أنا لا أختلف مع التقرير. علينا الانتظار حتى نحصل على الأدلة. نتفق أو نختلف عندما نحصل على الأدلة.
فوكس نيوز: لديهم الأدلة. لقد التقوا أربعين أو خمسين شخصا على الأرض.
20130919-012916.jpg
الرئيس الأسد..
نعم.. علينا أن نناقش الأدلة معهم لأنهم سيعودون. فهم لم يكملوا مهمتهم بعد. سيعودون.. وعلينا مناقشة الأدلة معهم لنرى التفاصيل. لكننا لا نستطيع الاختلاف مع التقرير دون أن تكون لدينا أدلة معاكسة. لا أحد يقول بأنها لم تستعمل.. لأننا في آذار دعونا وفدا للقدوم إلى سورية بسبب استعمال غاز السارين. كانت لدينا الأدلة بأن هذا الغاز استعمل في ذلك الوقت في حلب. عندما أتحدث كمسؤول.. أتحدث عن الأدلة التي أمتلكها.
فوكس نيوز: لقد وضعوا تقريرا من ثلاثين صفحة وظهر على الانترنت ليلة أمس.. ولا أعلم ما إذا كانت قد أتيحت لكم الفرصة لقراءته.
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. ليس بعد. علينا أن نقرأه ونناقشه قبل أن نقول إننا نتفق أو نختلف معه. لقد صدر مساء أمس فحسب.
فوكس نيوز: لنتحدث افتراضيا إذن. لقد قال الأمين العام للأمم المتحدة بان كي مون.. إن هذه في الواقع جريمة حرب.. وإنها شنيعة.. وانتهاك صارخ للقانون الدولي. إذا كان ذلك قد حدث.. كما يقولون إنه حدث.. فهل هو عمل شنيع.. وهل تعتبرونه انتهاكا للقانون الدولي…
الرئيس الأسد..
هذا بدهي.. بالطبع. إنه أمر شنيع. إنها جريمة.
فوكس نيوز: أنا متأكد أنكم رأيتم الفيديوهات التي رأيناها والأطفال والكبار يتقيؤون على الأرض.
الرئيس الأسد..
نعم.. لكن لم يتحقق أحد من مصداقية هذه الفيديوهات وهذه الصور. لم يتحقق أحد من ذلك. الأمر المحقق الوحيد يتكون من عينات أخذها الوفد.. عينات دم وعينات من التربة وما إلى ذلك.
فوكس نيوز: وهذا ما قالوا إنهم حصلوا عليه.
الرئيس الأسد..
لكن لا تستطيع وضع تقرير استنادا إلى لقطات فيديو لم يتم التحقق منها.
هناك الكثير من التزييف والفبركة على الانترنت
فوكس نيوز: لكنهم وضعوا التقرير استنادا إلى عينات الدم وغيرها.
الرئيس الأسد..
وخصوصا أننا نعيش في عالم من التزييف والفبركة منذ عامين ونصف العام فيما يتعلق بسورية. هناك الكثير من التزييف والفبركة على الانترنت.
فوكس نيوز: عنصر أخير ومهم في تقرير الأمم المتحدة هذا.. وفي حين أن المفتشين لم يحملوا المسؤولية عن الهجوم لأي طرف.. فإن العديد من الخبراء الذين انكبوا على تحليل هذا التقرير.. وقد تحدثت إليهم خلال الـ 12 ساعة الماضية.. وأكدوا بصراحة أن هذا الهجوم يبدو أن حكومتكم قد شنته.. الحكومة السورية. يشيرون إلى عدد من الأشياء فيقولون إنه كانت هناك كمية كبيرة من غاز السارين.. نحو طن.. وما كان للمتمردين أن يمتلكوا مثل تلك الكمية. وقالوا إن نوع الصاروخ ومدفعية ام14 من عيار 33 ملم لم يستعملها المتمردون من قبل لأن إطلاق تلك الصواريخ بحاجة إلى عربات كبيرة.. والمتمردون لا يملكون ذلك. وقد يكون الأمر الأهم هو أنهم تتبعوا مسار الصاروخ من نقطة وقوعه إلى نقطة انطلاقه. وطبقا للأمم المتحدة فإن نقطة الانطلاق كانت من جبل قاسيون حيث مقر الحرس الجمهوري. ما قولكم في ذلك…
الرئيس الأسد..
هل كل ما قلته جزء من التقرير…
فوكس نيوز: عذرا.. سيدي
الرئيس الأسد..
هل كل ما ذكرته.. كل هذه النقاط جزء من التقرير…
فوكس نيوز: جميعها جزء من التقرير. هذه كلها وقائع.
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. التقرير لم يذكر شيئا عن الحرس الجمهوري أو أشياء من هذا القبيل.
فوكس نيوز: قالوا إنهم تتبعوا مسار وسمت الصاروخ واستنتجوا إن هذا هو الموقع الذي انطلق منه الصاروخ شمال غرب دمشق.
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا.. غاز السارين يسمى عادة غاز المطبخ. هل تعلم لماذا… لأن أي شخص يستطيع صنع غاز السارين في منزله.
فوكس نيوز: قالوا إن الغاز المستعمل عالي الجودة.. وأعلى جودة حتى من الغاز الذي استخدم في العراق من قبل صدام حسين.. جاركم في ذلك الحين.
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا.. يمكن لأي متمرد أن يصنع السارين. ثانيا.. نعلم أن جميع أولئك المتمردين مدعومون من قبل حكومات. إذن.. أي حكومة تمتلك هذه المواد الكيميائية يمكنها تسليمها إلى أولئك المتمردين.
لدينا أدلة بأن المجموعات الإرهابية استعملت غاز السارين وتلك الأدلة سلمت إلى الروس
فوكس نيوز: يقول الخبراء إنهم لم يسبق وتتبعوا شيئا بهذا الحجم.. نحو طن من غاز السارين.. إضافة إلى منصات الصواريخ والصواريخ.. أسطول كامل. مثل هذه الأسلحة والذخائر موجودة في قواعدكم بين الحين والآخر.
الرئيس الأسد..
هذا غير ممكن من الناحية الواقعية. لا تستطيع استخدام السارين بالقرب من جنودك.. هذا أولا. ثانيا.. لا تستخدم أسلحة الدمار الشامل وأنت تحقق تقدما.. ولا تعاني هزيمة ولست في حالة انسحاب. الوضع بمجمله كان لمصلحة الجيش. ثالثا.. لم نستعملها عندما كنا نواجه مشاكل أكبر العام الماضي. رابعا.. عندما يتحدثون عن أي مجموعة من الجنود أو أي وحدة في الجيش السوري بأنها استعملت هذا النوع من الأسلحة.. فإن هذا كذب لسبب واحد هو أن الأسلحة الكيميائية يمكن أن تستعمل من قبل وحدات متخصصة فحسب. لا يمكن استعمالها من قبل أي وحدات أخرى كالمشاة وغيرها من الوحدات التقليدية. كل ما ذكرته غير واقعي وغير صحيح. من المؤكد أننا في سورية.. كحكومة سورية.. لدينا أدلة بأن المجموعات الإرهابية استعملت غاز السارين وأن تلك الأدلة سلمت إلى الروس. ثانيا.. رصدت الأقمار الصناعية الروسية منذ ظهور هذه المزاعم في 21 آب أن الصاروخ أطلق من منطقة أخرى. إذا.. لماذا يتم تجاهل وجهة النظر هذه… الرواية برمتها غير متماسكة وغير واقعية. بكلمة واحدة.. إننا لم نستعمل الأسلحة الكيميائية في الغوطة.. لأننا لو استعملناها لكنا ألحقنا الأذى بجنودنا وبعشرات آلاف المدنيين في دمشق.
فوكس نيوز: لإنهاء هذا الجزء من المقابلة.. سيادة الرئيس.. هل ستسمحون بإجراء المزيد من التحقيقات… هل ستسمحون لمحققي الأمم المتحدة بالدخول واستكمال تحقيقاتهم في هذا الهجوم وهجمات أخرى.. حيث يقال إن هناك أربعة عشر هجوما مختلفا.. وأطلقت الاتهامات من قبل الطرفين.. وحتى استقبال فريق من الأمم المتحدة لتحديد المسؤول عن هذه الهجمات… هل ستسمحون لفرق الأمم المتحدة بالدخول…
الرئيس الأسد..
نحن دعوناهم للقدوم إلى سورية في البداية في آذار ونحن طلبنا منهم العودة إلى سورية لاستكمال تحقيقاتهم لأن لدينا المزيد من الأماكن التي ينبغي التحقيق فيها. الولايات المتحدة هي التي ضغطت عليهم للمغادرة مؤخرا قبل أن ينهوا مهمتهم. عندما دعونا هذا الفريق.. أردنا أن يتمتع بسلطة كاملة للتحقيق في كل شيء.. وليس فقط في استعمال السارين أو الأسلحة الكيميائية.. بل التحقيق بكل شيء يتعلق بمن استخدم هذه الأسلحة وكيف. لكن الولايات المتحدة مارست ضغوطا لاقتصار المهمة على تحديد ما إذا كانت الأسلحة الكيميائية قد استعملت أم لا. لماذا… أعتقد لأن الإدارة الأمريكية تعرف بأنهم إذا حققوا في تحديد من استعملها وكيف.. فإنهم سيتوصلون إلى استنتاج مفاده أن المتمردين أو الإرهابيين هم من استعملها وليس العكس.
فوكس نيوز: شكرا سيادة الرئيس.
دينيس…
فوكس نيوز: هل تعتقد أن موقع سورية كدولة علمانية يمكن أن يكون في خطر في هذا الصراع…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع.. عندما يكون لدينا هذا النوع من التطرف والإرهاب والعنف.. فإن هذا سيجعل المجتمع برمته أكثر انغلاقا وأكثر تعصبا أيديولوجيا. وهذا ما يفعله المتطرفون.
الدولة العلمانية تعني التعامل مع المواطنين بصرف النظر عن دينهم وجنسهم وعرقهم
فوكس نيوز: لكن ما معنى أن يكون في سورية دولة علمانية… هناك أسئلة حول وضعكم كدولة سلطوية.. وما إذا كنتم تؤمنون بالقيم الديمقراطية. ما الذي تعنيه الدولة العلمانية لسورية…
الرئيس الأسد..
الدولة العلمانية تعني التعامل مع المواطنين بصرف النظر عن دينهم وجنسهم وعرقهم لأن سورية مزيج من الثقافات المختلفة. إذا لم تكن لدينا دولة علمانية تعكس مجتمعا علمانيا.. فإن سورية ستتفكك. هذا ما يعنيه المجتمع العلماني.
فوكس نيوز: إحدى الأفكار المتعلقة بهذا الصراع الخطر جدا هو أن هناك حربا أهلية. هل تتفقون مع هذا التشخيص بأنكم تخوضون حربا أهلية…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. فالحرب الأهلية تبدأ بالمجتمع.. تبدأ من الداخل.
فوكس نيوز.. إذن.. أنت تحمل المسؤولية للمصالح الخارجية…
الرئيس الأسد..
إنها بحاجة لخطوط واضحة.. خطوط جغرافية وخطوط اجتماعية وخطوط طائفية غير موجودة لدينا في سورية. الحرب الأهلية لا تعني وجود ثمانين أو ثلاث وثمانين جنسية تحارب داخل بلدنا تدعمها دول أجنبية. ما يحصل عندنا ليس حربا أهلية.. ما لدينا هو حرب لكن نوع جديد من الحرب.
ثمانون إلى تسعين بالمئة من المتمردين ينتمون إلى القاعدة أو المنظمات المرتبطة بها
فوكس نيوز: إذن.. أنت تحمل المسؤولية لمصالح خارجية عن تسارع هذه الحرب. الآن.. هناك بعض الإحصاءات الصادرة عن (آي اتش اس جينز) المتخصصة في تحليل الشؤون الدفاعية.. وهي تقدر المعارضة بمئة ألف من بينهم ثلاثون ألفا من المتعاطفين مع الإسلاميين المتشددين وعشرة آلاف من الجهاديين المرتبطين بالقاعدة. هل أي من هؤلاء سوري… هل جميعهم غير سوريين ومن أين يحصلون على المال…
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا.. لا أحد يمتلك هذه الأرقام الدقيقة. هذه مبالغة.. لأن معظم الجهاديين.. عندما يأتون إلى سورية.. لا يأتون من خلال بلدان ولا من خلال منظمات بل يأتون بالطائرة إلى بلدان مجاورة ومن ثم يعبرون الحدود كأي شخص آخر.. ويأتون إلى سورية من أجل الجهاد وحسب لينضموا إلى جهاديين آخرين. لا أحد يمتلك هذه الأرقام الدقيقة.. نعلم أن لدينا عشرات آلاف الجهاديين.. لكننا موجودون على الأرض ونعيش في هذا البلد. ما أستطيع قوله لك هو أن ثمانين إلى تسعين بالمئة.. من الصعب توخي الدقة هنا لأنه لا أحد يمتلك بيانات واضحة ودقيقة.. ثمانون إلى تسعين بالمئة من المتمردين ينتمون إلى القاعدة أو المنظمات المرتبطة بها.
فوكس نيوز: هؤلاء هم المتمردون… أنت لا تقول إن جميع خصومك جهاديون…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. ليس جميعهم. هناك مجموعات مختلفة لكنهم يشكلون أقلية. في البداية كان الجهاديون أقلية.. لكن في نهاية عام 2012 وخلال هذا العام.. أصبحوا الأغلبية بسبب تدفق عشرات الآلاف من مختلف البلدان.
فوكس نيوز: ومن أين يحصلون على المال… هل تستطيع أن تخبرنا هذا الآن…
الرئيس الأسد..
بشكل أساسي من التبرعات.
فوكس نيوز: لكن تبرعات من أين… هل لك أن تسمي بلدانا…
الرئيس الأسد..
إنها من كل مكان في العالم الإسلامي وتأتي من أشخاص مرتبطين بالقاعدة وليس بالدول. لا نعلم إذا كانت بعض الدول تدعمهم مباشرة. لا نعرف ذلك وليس لدينا معلومات. علي أن أكون دقيقا جدا. إن الأموال تأتيهم على شكل تبرعات من أفراد يحملون نفس الايديولوجيا في أذهانهم.
فوكس نيوز: ذكرت من قبل أن بعض الأرقام مبالغ بها. هل لك أن تخبرنا كم سوريا ماتوا في هذا الصراع…
الرئيس الأسد..
لدينا عشرات الآلاف من السوريين الذين ماتوا في هذا الصراع بشكل أساسي نتيجة الهجمات الإرهابية والاغتيالات والتفجيرات الانتحارية.
فوكس نيوز: وما عدد الجنود الحكوميين الذين قضوا في هذا الصراع…
الرئيس الأسد..
أكثر من خمسة عشر ألفا.
فوكس نيوز: وعدد القتلى من المتمردين أو الجهاديين…
الرئيس الأسد..
ليس لدينا أرقام لأننا لا نستطيع عدهم.
فوكس نيوز: لكن هناك أشخاص أبرياء يقتلون في هذا الصراع.. وتقول التقارير إن حكومتك قصفت قرى قتل فيها أبرياء. ماذا عن ذلك سيادة الرئيس…
الرئيس الأسد..
معظم الأبرياء قتلوا من قبل الإرهابيين وليس من قبل الحكومة. ما من حكومة حكيمة في العالم تقتل شعبها. كيف لك أن تصمد لعامين ونصف العام إذا كنت تقتل شعبك.. بينما الغرب ضدك والعديد من دول المنطقة ضدك.. وشعبك ضدك وأنت تقتله. هل هذا واقعي…
فوكس نيوز: إذن.. أنت تقول إنك لا تقتل شعبك.. لكن قواتك شنت هجمات على قرى قتل فيها أفراد من شعبك…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. في الواقع فإن ما تتحدث عنه يحدث عندما يتسلل الإرهابيون إلى المناطق السكنية في القرى والضواحي أو إلى المدن الكبرى ويترتب على الجيش الذهاب إلى تلك المناطق للتخلص من أولئك الإرهابيين. على الجيش أن يدافع عن المدنيين وليس العكس. لا تستطيع أن تتركهم أحرارا يقتلون ويغتالون الناس ويقطعون رؤوسهم ويأكلون قلوبهم.. وعندما تذهب للدفاع عنهم يقال إنك تقتل شعبك. لكن هناك ضحايا في كل الحروب. هذه حرب.. وليس هناك حرب نظيفة أو حرب ناعمة أو حرب جيدة.
المعارضة لا تعني حمل السلاح وقتل الأبرياء وتدمير المدارس والبنية التحتية وقطع الرؤوس
فوكس نيوز: يذكر المجتمع الدولي أن قوات المتمردين في سورية المعارضة لك تبدي نفس القدر من القلق الذي تبدونه الآن.. إن لم يكن أكثر حيال المقاتلين الجهاديين.. أكثر مما كانوا قلقين من حكومتكم. في هذا التطور الجديد.. هل هناك فرصة لك لتحقيق المصالحة مع خصومك السوريين…
الرئيس الأسد..
نعم.. وهنا عليك التمييز بين ما يسمى المعارضة والإرهابيين. المعارضة هي تعبير سياسي. عندما تعارض شخصا.. كما في بلادكم أو في أي بلاد أخرى في العالم.. يكون لديك برنامجك ورؤيتك وقواعدك وتقترح ما تريده فيما يتعلق بالنظام السياسي أو أي شيء آخر.. وبوسعك تغيير ذلك النظام إذا كنت تعارض الحزب الآخر. المعارضة لا تعني حمل السلاح وقتل الناس وقتل الأبرياء.. وتدمير المدارس وتدمير البنية التحتية وقطع الرؤوس. ما العلاقة بين المعارضة وقطع الرؤوس…
أي تحرك دبلوماسي دون تحقيق الاستقرار والتخلص من الإرهابيين سيكون مجرد وهم
فوكس نيوز: كمتابعة لذلك.. دعني اسألك عن الدبلوماسية. ما التحركات الدبلوماسية التي يمكن أن تقوم بها كإجراءات بناء ثقة للتحرك نحو السلام في بلدك…
الرئيس الأسد..
أي تحرك دبلوماسي دون تحقيق الاستقرار والتخلص من الإرهابيين سيكون مجرد وهم. ولهذا فإن أي تحرك دبلوماسي ينبغي أن يبدأ بوقف تدفق الإرهابيين ووقف الدعم اللوجستي لأولئك الإرهابيين ودعمهم بالمال والسلاح. ومن ثم لدينا خطة كاملة يمكن بموجبها للسوريين أن يجلسوا إلى الطاولة ويناقشوا مستقبل سورية.. والنظام السياسي.. والدستور.. وكل شيء.
فوكس نيوز: وهل يتضمن ذلك المستقبل مفاوضات مع المعارضة السورية…
الرئيس الأسد..
تماما.. لكن ذلك لا يعني التفاوض مع الإرهابيين.
فوكس نيوز: أفهم ذلك.. لكن هل يعني ذلك أنك مستعد لإطلاق برنامج مصالحة مع معارضيك… هل أنت مستعد لذلك…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع.. لقد أعلنا ذلك مطلع هذا العام. قلنا إننا مستعدون لإجراء نقاشات مع أي حزب سياسي داخل سورية أو خارجها.
فوكس نيوز: لننظر إلى المستقبل.. إلى العام القادم. هل ستكون مستعدا لتقديم العفو عن جميع أولئك السوريين الذين عارضوا حكومتك…
الرئيس الأسد..
إذا كانوا لم ينتهكوا القانون. إذا كانوا يعارضون الحكومة فإن بوسعهم القدوم إلى سورية دون عفو. العفو يمنح للأشخاص الذين يخرقون القانون السوري وحسب. المعارضة ليست جريمة.. ولدينا معارضة داخل سورية.
فوكس نيوز: لكن هل تؤمن بمنح العفو كمسار نحو تحقيق السلام…
الرئيس الأسد..
ذلك يعتمد على من ينبغي أن يشملهم هذا العفو. إذا كان الأمر يتعلق بأولئك الذين لطخوا أياديهم بدماء السوريين.. فإن ذلك يمكن أن يكون جزءا من المصالحة الوطنية.
فوكس نيوز: هل يمكن أن يشمل ذلك تعويضات لعائلات الذين قتلوا…
الرئيس الأسد..
ليس الرئيس هو من يضع هذه التفاصيل. أعتقد أن الاجتماع الذي يضم جميع الفصائل والأحزاب يمكن أن يحدد جميع هذه التفاصيل.
فوكس نيوز: ماذا تقول.. سيادة الرئيس.. لملايين السوريين الذين أصبحوا الآن لاجئين مع تحرككم نحو عملية السلام.. ما الذي يمكن أن تفعله لتقنعهم بالعودة…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع نريدهم أن يعودوا إلى قراهم ومدنهم ومنازلهم.. وعلينا أن نساعدهم بالتخلص من المجموعات الإرهابية.. لأن أغلبية هؤلاء اللاجئين غادروا بسبب الإرهابيين وليس بسبب الحكومة. لدينا مهجرون في سورية تساعدهم الحكومة.
فوكس نيوز: دعني أطرح عليك السؤال التالي.. هل تحدثت إلى الرئيس أوباما…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. أبدا.
فوكس نيوز: هل تحدثت إليه في أي وقت من الأوقات…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. أبدا.
فوكس نيوز: هل أنت مهتم بالتحدث إلى رئيسنا…
الرئيس الأسد..
ذلك يعتمد على محتوى الحديث. فأنا لست مهتما بالدردشة.
فوكس نيوز: إذا أردت أن تبعث له برسالة الآن.. فماذا تقول له…
الرئيس الأسد..
استمع إلى شعبك واتبع الحس السليم لشعبك.. وهذا يكفي.
فوكس نيوز: البابا فرنسيس وجه المجتمع الدولي للتخلي عن المسعى العبثي نحو حل عسكري. هل تعتقد أن نصيحة البابا يمكن أن تنطبق على حكومتك كما تنطبق على حكومات بلدان أخرى كذلك…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع.. فقد دعونا جميع من يحمل السلاح في سورية للتخلي عن أسلحتهم وقدمنا العفو عن كل من يسلم سلاحه ويرغب بالعودة إلى حياته الطبيعية كمواطن سوري. نحن بالطبع نؤمن بذلك.
فوكس نيوز: شكرا. قبل أن أعطي الكلمة لزميلي المراسل غريغ بالكوت.. أريد أن أطرح عليك سؤالا يقلقني كما يقلق غيري من الأميركيين. ليس كل من يشاهد هذه المقابلة اليوم يعرف أنك طبيب وأنك كنت تمارس الطب قبل أن تصبح رئيسا. وكما تعرف فإن الأطباء يقسمون على عدم إلحاق الأذى بأي شخص. هذا مقتبس حرفيا من قسم أبقراط. هل يتخلى الطبيب عن ذلك القسم. عندما يشغل منصبا سياسيا…
20130919-013034.jpg
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا وقبل كل شيء.. فإن الطبيب يقسم على اتخاذ القرار الصحيح لحماية حياة المريض. ولذلك لا تستطيع القول إنه لا يمكنهم إلحاق الضرر الجسدي. في بعض الأحيان قد يتوجب عليهم استئصال العضو السيئ الذي يمكن أن يقتل المريض. يمكن أن نستأصل عينا أو ساقا أو غير ذلك. لكنك لا تقول إن هذا طبيب سيئ.. إن كل ما يفعله هو عمل إنساني. والأمر ذاته ينطبق على السياسي لكن على نطاق أوسع.. فالطبيب يعالج مريضا واحدا.. أما السياسي فيتعامل مع جمهور واسع يتكون من ملايين أو عشرات الملايين. السؤال هو ما إذا كان القرار سيساعد حياة السوريين أم لا في مثل هذا الوضع. لا أحد يحب العنف. نحن ضد العنف. لكن ماذا تفعل عندما يهاجم الإرهابيون بلدك ويقتلون الناس… هل تقول أنا ضد العنف أم تدافع عن الشعب. لديك جيش ولديك شرطة وعليهم أن يقوموا بواجبهم بموجب الدستور. وهذا دور أي حكومة. ماذا فعلت الإدارة الأمريكية في لوس انجلوس في التسعينيات عندما كان هناك متمردون… ألم تنزلوا الجيش إلى الشوارع… لقد فعلتم. هذه مهمة الحكومة. الأمر الأكثر أهمية هو أنه عندما تتخذ قرارا.. سواء كان يلحق بعض الضرر أم لا.. المهم أن يكون لمصلحة أغلبية الناس. من الأفضل بالطبع اتخاذ قرار يساعد الجميع.. لكن في بعض الأحيان وفي ظروف صعبة.. لا تستطيع ذلك. ولذلك يجب عليك اتخاذ القرار الأقل ضررا.
الإصلاح عملية اجتماعية تتأثر بأمور مختلفة كثيرة بما في ذلك العوامل الخارجية
فوكس نيوز: شكرا سيادة الرئيس..
غريغ
فوكس نيوز: سيادة الرئيس.. وقتنا محدود.. لكني أريد أن أعود إلى الماضي باختصار. كنت هنا في عام 2000 في جنازة والدك. ثم أصبحت رئيسا.. وفي ذلك الحين علق البعض آمالا عليك كمصلح يمكن أن تغير في الأمور وإحداث درجة أكبر من الديمقراطية في هذا البلد. لكن منتقديك وبعض المحللين يقولون إنك تراجعت إلى حد أنك بت توصف بأشياء أخرى غير المصلح. بت توصف بالديكتاتور وبأشياء أسوأ بكثير. كيف يجعلك ذلك تشعر عندما يقول بعض الناس.. بالتعبير الأمريكي.. انك خرجت عن المسار الذي كان يمكن أن تسلكه حينذاك وكان يمكن أن يجنبك كل ما يحدث الآن…
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا وقبل كل شيء.. إذا أردت التحدث عن الأمل.. فأنا أمل السوريين. لا يهمني أن أكون أمل أي شخص أجنبي سواء كان مسؤولا أو أي شخص آخر. وهكذا.. ينبغي إحالة جميع التعابير والمفردات التي استخدمتها في سؤالك إلى الشعب السوري لترى إذا كانوا يوافقون على هذه التعابير أم لا. في المحصلة فإن الأمر لا يتعلق بالمصطلحات بل بالمحتوى. لا يهم أن يقولوا ديكتاتور أو مصلح. اليوم هناك حملات دعائية. هل يقولون الشيء ذاته عن حلفائهم في دول الخليج… هل يتحدثون عن الديكتاتورية في دول الخليج…
فوكس نيوز: نحن نتحدث عن سورية.
الرئيس الأسد..
أعرف ذلك.. لكن من حقي أن أتحدث عن الدول الاخرى الأبعد كثيرا عن الديمقراطية من الدولة السورية. بالعودة إلى سؤالك.. فإن الإصلاح ليس مسؤولية شخص معين في البلد.. سواء كان الرئيس أو الحكومة أو الشعب. يمكن للرئيس أو الحكومة قيادة الإصلاح.. لكن الإصلاح عملية اجتماعية تتأثر بأمور مختلفة كثيرة بما في ذلك العوامل الخارجية.. فيما إذا كان هناك حرب.. أو إذا كنت تتمتع بالاستقرار.. أو بالظروف الاقتصادية أو ما إذا كنت تواجه أيديولوجيات سيئة للغاية تأتيك من الخارج وهكذا.. بالتحدث عن الإصلاح بالطريقة التي قدمتها في البداية.. وحيث نؤمن بنفس القيم والمبادئ والمفاهيم.. ينبغي أن يكون لدينا ديمقراطية تعكس تقاليدنا. لكن الديمقراطية ليست هدفا بل أداة لتحقيق الرخاء.. وينبغي أن تستند الديمقراطية إلى القبول بالآخر. عندما يكون لديك أيديولوجيات منغلقة والعديد من المحظورات التي تمنعك من قبول الآخر.. والثقافات الأخرى في بلدك.. فإنك تتراجع بصرف النظر عما يفعله الرئيس بهذا الصدد. لا الدستور ولا القوانين ولا أي عملية أخرى يمكن أن تجعل الديمقراطية حقيقية وواقعية في مثل هذا المجتمع. المجتمع وحده هو الذي ينتج مثل هذه الديمقراطية ويمكن أن نتحدث عنه. إنها مسألة ثقافة. وبالتالي.. فإني ما زلت مصلحا.. وما زلت أؤمن بنفس القيم. لكن إذا عدت إلى تاريخ العقد الماضي تجد أن أحداثا معقدة جدا قد حصلت.. وهذا أحد الأسباب التي جعلت الديمقراطية.. ليس في سورية وحسب.. بل في المنطقة برمتها.. أكثر بعدا وليس أكثر قربا.
فوكس نيوز: لكن مرة أخرى.. وبالتحدث عن بلدكم.. وتاريخ الأحداث الأخيرة إذا عدنا إلى ما قبل عامين ونصف العام وعندما ظهر أول الاحتجاجات في هذا البلد.. قال البعض إن تلك كانت علامة على أن الناس لم يكونوا راضين.. وهنا أتحدث عن السوريين.. الذين لم يكونوا راضين عن تحرككم نحو الديمقراطية وأن ذلك كان ما يطالبون به.. المزيد من الديمقراطية والمزيد من الإصلاح.. ولم يكونوا يطالبون في ذلك الحين بتنحيك عن السلطة. يقول منتقدوك إنك تحركت بسرعة وبقسوة حيث استهدفت الدبابات المتظاهرين واستعمل التعذيب إلى آخر ما هنالك. هذه هي الانتقادات التي توجه إليك.. ومرة أخرى أضعت فرصة أخرى. كيف تشعر حيال ذلك بعد عامين ونصف العام…
الرئيس الأسد..
دعنا نطرح سؤالا بسيطا.. إذا أردت أن تقمع أولئك الناس لأنك لا تقبل بمطالبهم فلماذا يقول الرئيس نفسه “أنا قلت في أحد خطاباتي في بداية الصراع” إن لدى هؤلاء الناس مطالب مشروعة.. هذا أولا. ثانيا.. إذا كنت تريد استعمال القوة.. لماذا غيرت الدستور لماذا غيرنا القوانين. لدينا الآن أكثر من خمسة عشر حزبا سياسيا جديدا في سورية… لماذا غيرت قوانين كثيرة لم يطالبوا هم بتغييرها… لأننا كنا نعلم أن الأمر لا يتعلق بالديمقراطية.. لو كانوا يطالبون بالديمقراطية فكيف قتل بعض أولئك المتظاهرين وأنا هنا لا أعمم لأن بعض الناس تظاهروا للأسباب التي ذكرتها.. لكن آخرين قتلوا جنودا ورجال شرطة في أول أسبوع من الصراع. ما العلاقة بين المطالبة بالديمقراطية والقتل والاغتيال… ولهذا علينا أن نكون دقيقين في التمييز بين الناس الذين يطالبون بالديمقراطية والإرهابيين.. هذا أولا. ثانيا.. جزء من هؤلاء الناس الذين كانوا يعارضون الحكومة في البداية يدعمون الحكومة اليوم ضد الإرهابيين لأنهم طالبوا بالإصلاح لكنهم لم يطالبوا بالإرهاب. وبالتالي.. فأنت تتحدث عن حالتين مختلفتين تماما عند بداية الصراع والآن. وهكذا.. ما زلنا نتقدم في مسارنا نحو الديمقراطية. وجزء من الحل هو الذي ذكرته قبل دقائق.. فعندما نجلس إلى الطاولة يقرر الشعب السوري ما الدستور الأفضل وما النظام السياسي الأفضل. هل يريدون نظاما برلمانيا.. أم رئاسيا.. أم شبه رئاسي أو ما إلى ذلك.. ما القوانين التي يريدونها. إذن ليس الرئيس هو من يضع هذا النظام. إذا أراد الناس وضع نظام جديد فهذه هي الديمقراطية.
فوكس نيوز: لكنك تذكر نقطة تقود إلى سؤالي التالي. سيقول بعض الناس إنك تشن حرب استنزاف وانك انتظرت وانتظرت وقمعت الناس وان أولئك الذين أرادوا تحقيق تغيير سلمي نحو الديمقراطية في البداية باتوا الآن.. وبعد عامين ونصف العام من القتال.. مستعدين للتراجع قليلا. في البداية تحدثت عن دخول الإرهابيين.. والآن خلقت وضعا على الأرض أو سمحت بظهور هذا الوضع الذي سمح بدخول أولئك الإرهابيين بسبب هذه الفترة الطويلة من الزمن. هذا يعني أنك لم تغير تفكير الناس بل إنك تحصرهم في هذا الصندوق.. فبعد عامين ونصف العام ومقتل 110 آلاف شخص ودمار المدن.. فأنت تأمل في أن يستسلم شعبك لهذه الفكرة وحسب. هل هذا ما كنت تهدف إليه من كل هذه العملية…
الرئيس الأسد..
جوهر ما تقوله هو اني أنا من دعوت الإرهابيين وأنا من هيأت الظروف لقدوم الإرهابيين إلى سورية.
فوكس نيوز: تمسكت بموقفك لفترة طويلة في مواجهة مطالب الناس السلمية بتحقيق الديمقراطية.
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. لقد قبلنا بمطالبهم منذ البداية.
فوكس نيوز: قبلت بمطالبهم…
الرئيس الأسد..
منذ البداية وقبل قدوم أولئك الإرهابيين أو الأجانب إلى سورية. في عام 2011 بعد ستة أيام من بداية الصراع.. قلنا إننا سنجري تغييرات.. وبدأنا عملية تغيير الدستور بعد شهرين أو ثلاثة أشهر من بداية الصراع.. لست أنا من غير الدستور.. فقد صوت الناس في استفتاء شعبي على دستور جديد. كان ذلك في بداية عام 2012 في شباط.. وقبل مرور عام على بداية الصراع. وبالتالي.. فإن ما تقوله بعيد جدا عن الواقع. إنها رواية مختلفة جدا ولا تتعلق إطلاقا بما يحدث في سورية. لا شيء من هذا يحدث في سورية. ربما تتحدث عن بلد آخر. ما حدث في سورية أننا منذ البداية قلنا إنه إذا كان هناك أي مطالب فإننا مستعدون لتغيير أي شيء. ماذا يمكن للرئيس أن يفعله.. أو كيف يمكن أن ينجح إذا كان الشعب ضده. كيف له أن ينجح… هل يريد البقاء رئيسا من أجل أن يكون رئيسا وحسب… هذا ليس واقعيا.. بل هو مستحيل.
فوكس نيوز: ماذا عن التكتيكات التي تستعملها في حربك… كنا نقف في حمص.. إحدى المدن العظيمة في سورية.. وراقبنا مدفعيتكم تحيط بالمدينة وتقصف باستمرار مركز المدينة. تقول إنكم تلاحقون الأعداء أو الإرهابيين. لكن قد يقول البعض إن هذا قصف غير تمييزي ترك العديد من المدنيين قتلى وترك تلك المدينة بصراحة.. كالعديد من المدن العظيمة الأخرى في سورية.. مثل حلب ومدن أخرى.. في حالة من الدمار. هل هذه طريقة لملاحقة بعض الإرهابيين أو أعداء الدولة…
الرئيس الأسد..
تبدو وكأنك تقول انه إذا تسلل الإرهابيون إلى منطقة معينة أو هاجموا جزءا معينا من مدينة.. فإن المدنيين يبقون فيها. هذا مستحيل. حالما يدخل الإرهابيون إلى منطقة.. فإن المدنيين يغادرونها ما لم يستعملوهم كدروع بشرية. لكن في معظم الأحيان فإن المدنيين يغادرون مناطقهم.. ولهذا هناك الكثير من اللاجئين. وبالتالي.. ففي معظم الأحيان يهاجم الجيش السوري مناطق لا يوجد فيها أي مدنيين. في معظم الأحيان لا تستطيع العثور على مدنيين يتعايشون مع الإرهابيين.
فوكس نيوز: لكن التقديرات التقريبية.. سيادة الرئيس.. التي تقول بمقتل 110 آلاف شخص تعني أن بين هؤلاء نحو 50 ألف مدني. هل تقول إن الإرهابيين استعملوا 50 ألفا كدروع بشرية…
الرئيس الأسد..
أولا.. ما مصدر معلوماتك…
فوكس نيوز: هذه تقديرات المحللين الذين نظروا إلى هذه الأرقام.
الرئيس الأسد..
محللون من الولايات المتحدة ويعيشون في الولايات المتحدة أم ماذا… يمكنك أن تتحدث عن الوقائع فحسب دعنا لا نتحدث عن التقديرات والمزاعم.
فوكس نيوز: الجميع متفقون على الرقم 110 آلاف.
الرئيس الأسد..
قلت إن عشرات الآلاف قتلوا ولم أذكر رقما محددا لأن هناك آلاف المفقودين.. ولذلك لا يمكن أن تحسبهم مع القتلى لأنك لا تعرف إذا كانوا قتلى. هناك حرب الآن. ولهذا ينبغي أن نكون دقيقين عندما نتحدث عن الأرقام.. أنت تتحدث عن الأرقام وكأنك تتحدث عن جدول إحصائي دون أن تعرف أن لهؤلاء عائلات وأن هذه مأساة. نحن نعيش مع هؤلاء الناس. هذه مأساة إنسانية. الأمر لا يتعلق بالأرقام بل يمس كل أسرة في سورية فقدت شخصا عزيزا عليها.. بما في ذلك عائلتي.. نحن فقدنا أفرادا من عائلتنا.. وفقدنا أصدقاء.. ولهذا السبب نحارب الإرهاب. إذا سمحنا للإرهابيين بالاستمرار دون محاربتهم فإن هذا العدد.. إذا كان قريبا من الرقم الحقيقي.. سيكون أضعافا مضاعفة وبالملايين وليس بمئات الآلاف.
فوكس نيوز: لا نريد أن نضيع في الأرقام.. لكن كما قلت.. وهذا صحيح.. فإنها قضية إنسانية. لكنك مرة أخرى استعملت رقم 90 بالمئة لتقول إن هذه النسبة من المعارضة أو من المتمردين هم من القاعدة. هل تؤكد على هذا الرقم…
الرئيس الأسد..
80 إلى 90 بالمئة. لا أحد يعرف الرقم الدقيق لأن هؤلاء يدخلون ويتدفقون بشكل غير منتظم.
فوكس نيوز: ألا تعتقد أن هذا الرقم مرتفع جدا. كثيرون يقدرون بأن النسبة هي 50 بالمئة.
الرئيس الأسد..
من هم هؤلاء… أنا متأكد أنهم ليسوا سوريين. لا أحد في سورية يقول إن نسبتهم هي 50 بالمئة. في الخارج قد يكون لهم تقديراتهم الخاصة.. لكن في المحصلة فإن هذا صراعنا.. ونحن نعيش هنا.. وهذا بلدنا. نستطيع أن نعرف نسبتهم. كيف توصلوا إلى نسبة 50 بالمئة…
فوكس نيوز: لكن مرة أخرى دعني أوجز ما تقوله.. وأقتبس أنك قلت مرة إن المعارضة مصنعة في الخارج. هل تعتقد فعلا أن المعارضة لحكومتك مصنعة في الخارج…
الرئيس الأسد..
هذا ليس شعوري والمسألة لا تتعلق بالمشاعر. الأمر يتعلق بالحقائق التي نراها. إذا لم يكن لديهم قواعد شعبية في سورية.. لأن لدينا معارضة في سورية ولديها قواعد شعبية.. لماذا يعارضون من الخارج… كيف يعيشون… من يقدم لهم المال… كيف يمولون… جميعنا يعرف أن بعضهم ينتمي إلى الولايات المتحدة وبعضهم لبريطانيا وبعضهم لفرنسا ولقطر والسعودية. المعارضة الحقيقية تنتمي إلى الشعب السوري وحسب. وطالما أنهم لا ينتمون إلى الشعب السوري فإن هذه المعارضة هي من صنع بلدان أخرى.. هذا دليل بسيط.
فوكس نيوز: أنا استمع إلى أجوبتك على غريغ بالكوت وأريد أن أتأكد من أمر واحد. هل تقلل من شأن عدد القتلى بقولك إن العدد ليس 50 ألفا أو 40 ألفا…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا طبعا. لا تستطيع التقليل من شأن هذه الخسائر. لأن كل بيت في سورية يشعر بالألم الآن. كل بيت يشعر بالحزن.. لا تستطيع التقليل من شأن ذلك.. سواء كان العدد أكثر أو أقل. إنها مأساة. نحن نعيش في سورية لكن علينا التحدث عن الأسباب. من قتل هؤلاء… ليست الحكومة بل الإرهابيون. نحن ندافع عن بلدنا.. وإذا لم نفعل ذلك فإن هذا العدد سيكون أضعافا مضاعفة. هذا ما عنيته.
فوكس نيوز: أردت فقط أن استوضح نقطة إذا نظرنا إلى الصورة الأوسع.. يبدو أن هذه لحظة مفصلية بالنسبة للعالم وموقف العالم من سورية.. قد تكون هناك خارطة طريق جديدة نحو السلام العالمي قيد التطوير. بداية بتخليكم عن الأسلحة الكيميائية والمضي قدما لخطة ملموسة لتحقيق السلام في سورية.. هل تعتقد أننا وصلنا إلى مثل تلك اللحظة…
الرئيس الأسد..
هل تتحدث عن الوضع داخل سورية… ليس هناك علاقة مباشرة بين قضية الأسلحة الكيميائية والصراع داخل سورية. الأمر مختلف تماما. وبالتالي.. إذا أردنا أن نتحرك إلى الأمام نحو حل سياسي.. نستطيع فعل ذلك.. لكن لا علاقة لذلك بالاتفاق حول الأسلحة الكيميائية.
فوكس نيوز: أفهم ذلك.. لكن كون قضية الأسلحة الكيميائية دفعت العالم أجمع أخيرا للانتباه.. هل تستطيعون البناء على هذه اللحظة…
الرئيس الأسد..
هذا يعتمد إلى حد بعيد على الدول التي تدعم الإرهابيين في سورية.
جوهر مؤتمر جنيف ينبغي أن يستند إلى إرادة الشعب وكل ما نتفق عليه في جنيف سيطرح على الشعب
فوكس نيوز: قبل أن أعود إلى غريغ.. هناك عدد كبير من البلدان التي باتت ضالعة في هذه العملية.. وليس فقط الولايات المتحدة وروسيا.. بل كذلك إيران.. وإسرائيل.. وتركيا وحتى الصين. الكثير يعتمد على تعاون سورية مع عملية جنيف. هل أنتم مستعدون لضمان ألا تتداعى هذه الفرصة…
الرئيس الأسد..
لقد دعمنا عملية جنيف منذ البداية. تعاونا مع مبعوثي الأمم المتحدة الذين أتوا إلى سورية. في الواقع.. فإن الجهة التي وضعت العقبات لم تكن سورية ولا روسيا ولا الصين.. بل الولايات المتحدة.. ولأسباب عديدة مختلفة. أحد الأسباب هو أنه ليس هناك معارضة حقيقية في الخارج. إنهم يعرفون هذا وهذه إحدى مشاكلهم الرئيسية لأن جوهر مؤتمر جنيف ينبغي أن يستند إلى إرادة الشعب السوري.. وكل ما نتفق عليه في جنيف سيطرح على الشعب السوري.. فإذا لم يكن لديك قواعد شعبية.. لا تستطيع إقناع الشعب السوري بالتحرك معك. هذه مشكلة الولايات المتحدة مع الدمى التابعة لها بكل صراحة ووضوح.
هناك احترام متبادل بين سورية وروسيا
فوكس نيوز: شكرا سيادة الرئيس.
غريغ..
فوكس نيوز: متابعة لذلك.. سيادة الرئيس.. يعتقد آخرون أن ثمة مجالا للتحرك للأمام هنا وأنك للمرة الأولى خلال العامين ونصف العام الماضيين تتحدث بجدية إلى المجتمع الدولي حول مسار تفاوضي. صحيح أنه مسار ضيق فيما يتعلق بالأسلحة الكيميائية.. لكن في الواقع هناك إمكانية لإجراء محادثات أبعد مدى. هل يمكن أن تكون جزءا من ذلك… وكيف سيكون موقفك إذا شعر حلفاؤك الأقوياء.. وبشكل أساسي راعية هذه الموجة الجديدة من النقاشات والمفاوضات.. أي روسيا.. أنه قد يكون من الأفضل ألا تكون في منصبك. هل ستتابع في هذا المسار حتى النهاية أم انك إذا وجدت أن تنحيك سيسهل الأمور من أجل مصلحة البلد.. فهل ستفعل ذلك أيضا…
الرئيس الأسد..
إن وجودي أو عدم وجودي في هذا المنصب.. كرئيس.. ينبغي تحديده واتخاذ قرار بشأنه من قبل الشعب السوري وعبر صناديق الاقتراع. لا أحد آخر سواء كان صديقا أم خصما أم أي أحد آخر يمكن أن يكون له كلمة في تلك القضية. إذا أراد الشعب السوري أن تبقى رئيسا.. ينبغي أن تبقى. إذا لم يردك الشعب السوري.. فعليك أن ترحل مباشرة.. بمؤتمر أو دونه. هذا بدهي ولا نناقشه.. وقد قلت ذلك مرات عديدة. ولذلك.. لا ينبغي لأحد أن يقول ذلك.. كما ان روسيا لم تحاول أبدا التدخل في الشؤون السورية. هناك احترام متبادل بين سورية وروسيا ولم يحاولوا أبدا إقحام أنفسهم في تلك التفاصيل السورية. وحدها الإدارة الأمريكية.. وحلفاؤها في أوروبا.. وبعض دماها في العالم العربي تكرر هذه الكلمات فيما إذا كان على الرئيس أن يرحل.. وما ينبغي على الشعب السوري أن يفعله ونوعية الحكومة التي ينبغي أن تكون له. هذه المجموعة وحدها التي تتدخل في شؤون بلد ذي سيادة.
فوكس نيوز: أعلم أنك قلت إن هناك انتخابات على الأقل في عام 2014 وإنك سترشح نفسك لتلك الانتخابات وسترى ما يقرره الشعب معك أو ضدك. هل يمكن لهذه الانتخابات أن تجرى في هذا المناخ…
الرئيس الأسد..
عليك أن تختبر مزاج الناس.. وإرادة ورغبة الشعب في ذلك الحين لمعرفة ما إذا كان ينبغي الترشح للرئاسة أم لا. إذا وجدت أن المناخ غير إيجابي.. لا تترشح. وبالتالي فمن المبكر جدا التحدث في هذا الموضوع لأن هناك شيئا جديدا كل يوم. يمكنني اتخاذ القرار قبل الانتخابات.
فوكس نيوز: سيادة الرئيس طبقا لنيويورك تايمز فإن الرئيس أوباما قال إن الهدف الأكبر فيما يتعلق بسورية هو منع استعمال الأسلحة الكيميائية وانتشارها عالميا. هل تعتقد أن هذه فرصة لإعادة صياغة العلاقات السورية مع الولايات المتحدة…
الرئيس الأسد..
هذا يعتمد على مصداقية الإدارة.. أي إدارة.. ويعتمد على الإدارة الأمريكية.
فوكس نيوز: لكنك لا تقول إن رئيسنا لا يتمتع بالمصداقية. أنا أسألك أنت إذا كانت هذه فرصة بالنسبة لك لإعادة صياغة العلاقات مع الولايات المتحدة…
الرئيس الأسد..
كما قلت إن العلاقات تعتمد على مصداقية الإدارة. نحن لم ننظر إلى الولايات المتحدة أبدا كعدو.. ولم ننظر للشعب الأمريكي أبدا كعدو. نحن نريد دائما أن تكون علاقاتنا جيدة مع أي بلد في العالم وفي المقدمة الولايات المتحدة لأنها دولة عظمى. هذا طبيعي وبدهي. لكن هذا لا يعني أن علينا المضي في الاتجاه الذي تحدده لنا الولايات المتحدة. نحن لنا مصالحنا.. ولنا حضارتنا.. ولنا إرادتنا. عليهم أن يقبلوا وأن يحترموا ذلك. ليس لدينا مشكلة عندما يكون هناك احترام متبادل. نحن نريد أن يكون بيننا علاقات جيدة بالطبع.
فوكس نيوز: دعني أسألك عن بعض التفاصيل فيما يتعلق بخطواتكم نحو المستقبل.. هل تسعون لوضع دستور في سورية يضمن حرية الشعب السوري… هل ستعملون فعلا لتحقيق ذلك…
الرئيس الأسد..
دستورنا اليوم يضمن مزيدا من الحريات.. لكن ذلك يعتمد على ماهية هذه الحرية. هذا ما يمكن للأحزاب السورية أن تناقشه على الطاولة. إنه ليس دستور الرئيس.. وليس رؤيتي ولا مشروعي. بل ينبغي أن يكون هذا مشروعا وطنيا. وبالتالي يجب أن يحدد السوريون تماما ما يريدونه وعلي أن أقبل بذلك.
فوكس نيوز: ما رأيك.. على سبيل المثال.. بالانتخابات الحرة…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع دستورنا ينص على إجراء انتخابات حرة.. سنجري انتخابات حرة العام القادم.. في أيار 2014.
فوكس نيوز: هل يمكن لشخص آخر أن يصبح رئيسا لسورية…
الرئيس الأسد..
بالطبع.. أي شخص يرغب بذلك يمكن أن يكون رئيسا.
فوكس نيوز: إذن.. لست الشخص الوحيد الذي يمكن أن يكون الرئيس…
الرئيس الأسد..
لا.. لن أكون الشخص الوحيد.
فوكس نيوز: إذن.. تعتقد أنه يمكن لسورية أن تمر بمرحلة انتقالية سلمية دون أن تكون موجودا في السلطة… هل هذا ممكن…
الرئيس الأسد..
ماذا تعني بالعملية الانتقالية.. أي انتقال…
فوكس نيوز: انتقال نحو تسوية الصراع وإنهاء الحرب. هل هذا ممكن دون وجودك في السلطة…
الرئيس الأسد..
إذا كان الشعب السوري لا يريدني أن أكون في المرحلة الانتقالية أو الدائمة أو الطبيعية أو أي وضع كان.. فهذا يعني أنه سيحدث بطريقة سلمية. وأي شيء لا يريده الشعب لا يمكن أن يكون سلميا.
فوكس نيوز: دعنا ننظر إلى المستقبل بعد خمس سنوات. كيف ستبدو سورية حينها…
الرئيس الأسد..
لدينا العديد من التحديات إذا انتهينا من هذا الصراع.. وسيكون التحدي على المدى القصير التخلص من الإرهابيين كما قلت.. لكن الأمر الأكثر أهمية هو أيديولوجية هؤلاء. لا شك لدينا أن وجود إرهابيين من جميع أنحاء العالم.. إرهابيين متطرفين.. ترك الكثير من الآثار الجانبية في قلوب وعقول الشباب على الأقل. ماذا تتوقع من طفل حاول قطع رأس أحدهم بيده… ماذا تتوقع من أطفال يشاهدون قطع الرؤوس وشيها ومشاهدة أكلة لحوم البشر في سورية على شاشات التلفزيون وعلى الانترنت… أنا متأكد أن لهذا الكثير من الآثار النفسية والجانبية والآثار السيئة في المجتمع. ولذلك علينا إعادة تأهيل هذا الجيل كي يكون منفتحا مرة أخرى كما كانت سورية دائما. أنا أتحدث بالطبع عن بؤر محلية ستكون.. إذا تركناها.. شبيهة بالأثر الذي يحدثه رمي حجر في بركة ماء حيث تتوسع لتشمل المجتمع كله.. هذا أولا. ثانيا.. علينا أن نعيد بناء بنيتنا التحتية التي تم تدميرها.. وإعادة بناء الاقتصاد.. وكما قلت أن نبني نظاما سياسيا جديدا يناسب الشعب السوري ونظاما اقتصاديا.. وجميع القضايا الفرعية النابعة من العناوين الرئيسية.
فوكس نيوز: سيادة الرئيس.. كمراسل.. أريد أن أخبرك بما أراه وأنا أتجول في أنحاء بلدكم. لقد رأيت هذه الأزمة خلال تطورها. الآن.. عندما تنظر إلى بلادك وترى أن 60 أو 70 بالمئة من أراضيك خارج سيطرتك.. وربما 40 بالمئة من سكان البلاد خارج سيطرتك.. مع وجود 6 ملايين مهجر.. أي ان ثلث سكان البلاد قد هجروا. إضافة لعدد القتلى والجرحى. هل ترى مجالا للعودة… هل تستطيع أن ترى أي طريقة يعود بها الشعب بمجمله ليقف وراءك… هل تستطيع أن ترى أي شيء في هذه اللحظة يعوض عن العامين ونصف العام من الرعب ومن الحرب الدامية والساحقة التي تعرض لها هذا البلد…
الرئيس الأسد..
اليوم.. وبعد أن عرف أغلبية الشعب السوري معنى الإرهاب وأنا أتحدث عن بلد كان أحد أكثر بلدان العالم أمانا.. حيث كانت سورية تحتل المرتبة الرابعة عالميا من حيث الأمان وبعد أن عانوا مباشرة الإرهاب والتطرف.. فإن هؤلاء الناس يدعمون الحكومة. إذن.. هم خلف الحكومة. لا يهم إذا كانوا خلفي أم لا. الأمر الأهم هو أن تكون أغلبية الشعب وراء المؤسسات. فيما يتعلق بالنسب التي ذكرتها.. فهي ليست صحيحة بالطبع. على أي حال.. فإن الجيش والشرطة لا يتواجدان في كل مكان من سورية.. والمشكلة ليست في أن هناك حربا بين بلدين أو جيشين بحيث تقول إني سيطرت على أراض معينة أو حررت أراضي معينة وما إلى ذلك. الأمر يتعلق بتسلل الإرهابيين. حتى لو تخلصنا منهم في منطقة معينة.. فإنهم سينتقلون إلى منطقة أخرى من أجل التدمير والقتل وفعل ما يفعلونه عادة. المشكلة الآن هي في تسلل أولئك الإرهابيين إلى سورية. والمشكلة الأخطر التي نواجهها هي أيديولوجيتهم.. وهذا أهم من نسبة المناطق التي نسيطر عليها نحن أو التي يسيطرون عليها هم. في المحصلة فإن أعدادا كبيرة منهم أجانب وغير سوريين وسيغادرون يوما ما أو سيقتلون داخل سورية.. لكن أيديولوجيتهم ستظل مصدر القلق الأكبر لسورية والبلدان المجاورة. وينبغي أن يكون هذا مصدر قلق لأي بلد في العالم.. بما في ذلك الولايات المتحدة.
فوكس نيوز: سيادة الرئيس شكرا لك لمنحنا هذه المقابلة.
An official statement from the General Command of Army and Armed Forces:
“Earlier today 09-16-2013, a Syrian Air Force helicopter was missing in a recon mission over the Syrian-Turkish border villages or Latakia countryside, and after rescanning our radars showed that the helicopter accidentally crossed the Turkish airspace for a short distance before given an order of withdrawing and guided back inside the Syrian airspace, during its withdrawal the Turkish air force shot down the helicopter to fall inside the Syrian territory.
The hasty reaction from the Turkish side, especially that the helicopter was unarmed, on a recon mission and on its way back to Syrian space, is an evidence of the real intentions of Erdoğan`s government toward Syria by escalating the situation on the borders and adding tension between the two countries and.”
If Syria is to come under chemical arms scrutiny, so must Israel
An American analyst says the Israeli Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) must come under scrutiny the same way Syria has been subjected to such a measure, Press TV reports.
“Israel should be brought under the same microscope as Syria; [until] Israel is forced to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and … they open their nuclear, chemical and biological capability to international inspection and sanction, we’re going to continue to have problems,” said Mark Dankof, a Texas-based broadcaster and analyst in a Press TV interview.
Dankof described as inaccurate US Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent claim that Syria owns the largest chemical weapons arsenal in the Middle East, adding that it is in fact the Zionist regime that is the record holder in terms of the amount of WMDs possessed
Lavrov and Kerry agree on no military solution in Syria
Sep 14, 2013 – Geneva, (SANA) – Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry announced Saturday they reached a deal on chemical weapons in Syria.
In a joint press conference following talks in Geneva, Lavrov and Kerry said the Russian and U.S. delegations have arranged a package of agreements regarding the chemical weapons in Syria, but noted that these agreements are only proposals that should first be approved by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
Lavrov clarified that Syria’s decision to join the Chemical Weapons Convention and its readiness to implement its commitments by the time this decision is enforced formed a “starting point” for Russia and the US agreeing on the joint steps to deal with the chemical weapons in Syria.
He underscored that the Russia-US deal did not include…
Hands Off Syria condemns #UN Commission: ‘It is acting to incite further massacres’
15 September 2013 at 10:55
Press Release: Hands Off Syria (Australia) condemns United Nations Commission of Inquiry on #Syria: ‘It is acting to incite further massacres’
Hands Off Syria (Australia) condemns the #United_Nations_Commission_of_Inquiry on Syria (COI) and calls for its disbanding and replacement by a body which does not act as a partisan propaganda organ for the foreign powers waging war against Syria.
Hands Off Syria member Ms Hanadi Assoud says ‘The Commission of Inquiry has proven itself a partisan body, inciting massacres and protecting the main architects of this crisis: the USA and its proxies, in particular Saudi Arabia.’
Dr Tim Anderson, Hands Off Syria member and academic at the University of Sydney, said ‘There is a fatal conflict of interest here. So long as the sectarian Islamist fighters are backed by the big powers, the COI seems incapable of recognising their well-publicised crimes. The UN should disband the Commission of Inquiry and then reconstitute it excluding the influence of those states promoting war and violence, in particular the #USA and the Gulf monarchies.
‘The latest Commission of Inquiry report on the gas attacks in east Damascus, like the general report last month and the report on the dreadful Houla massacre last year actively covered up the crimes of ruthless Takfiri-Islamists. In its report on the Houla massacre (May 2012) the COI investigators were literally led by the hand by the killers. The technical report on the Damascus gas attacks is also being used to set up a major attack on Syria. The COI is being led by the nose by the US-backed sectarian Islamists’, Dr Anderson added.
Ms Assoud said: ‘This Commission of Inquiry is responding cynically to each new provocation, inciting repeated massacres by holding out hope to the terrorists that, if only their next massacre is big enough, they might get US air force backing for their ‘holy war’.’
Dr Anderson: ‘At best the Commission of Inquiry has been arguing ‘a plague on both your houses’, which implies that the Syrian nation cannot act to defend its own people from foreign backed terrorists; at worst the COI recklessly accuses the government, thus inciting foreign intervention. Further, by pretending a moral equivalence between the Syrian Government and the foreign backed terrorists, the COI betrays the Charter of the United Nations, which embodies respect for nations and their right to self-determination, while selectively ignoring the many U.N. resolutions on the need to combat terrorism.’
Hands off Syria calls for the disbanding of the UN’s Commission of Inquiry, and for a new and independent U.N. body, not shaped those states which persist in promoting the war against Syria. Foreign powers cannot be both aggressors and judges.
Some background on the Commission of Inquiry and the Ghouta incident is attached.
Further information:
Ms. Hanadi Assoud: 0405-225-615
Dr. Tim Anderson: 0418-604-488
===============
Background: the United Nations Commission of Inquiry (COI) on Syria
The Human Rights Council (HRC) motion S-17/1 that established the U.N.’s Commission of Inquiry on Syria (22 August 2011), immediately condemned the Syrian Government, before any inquiry. The founding text decided there had been ‘continued grave and systematic human rights violations by the Syrian authorities … including indiscriminate attacks on the Syrian population’. Little wonder the Syrian Government has been reluctant to cooperate.
President of the HRC, Polish diplomat Remigiusz Achilles Henczel, appointed four members, two of whom were from countries (Turkey and the USA) deeply involved in the aggression. The Turkish delegate was soon replaced by Swiss lawyer Carla del Ponte, but the US delegate Karen Koning AbuZayd remains deputy to the chair, Brazilian diplomat Paulo Sergio Pinheiro. Apart from her UN roles, AbuZayd is a board member of the Washington based Middle East Policy Council (MEPC), a body which includes US generals and delegates from the oil-rich Gulf monarchies –the major sponsors of international terrorism against Syria. The Commission was thus poisoned against Syria from the beginning.
The #Houla ‘False Flag’ massacre , May 2012
The COI’s second report on the Houla massacre (15 August 2012) relied on interviews organised by members of the #Farouk #FSA Brigade, then blamed unnamed government militia (‘shabiha’); no motive was given. However a number of independent investigators showed Houla to have been a ‘false flag’ massacre, organised to falsely blame the Syrian Army so as to incite the UN Security Council to intervene.
Interviews by German journalist Rainer Hermann showed that the Houla victims were ‘nearly exclusively families from the Alawi and Shia minorities … and the family of a Sunni member of parliament who was considered [by the FSA] a government collaborator’. A large FSA brigade, led by Abdurrazzaq Tlass and Yahya Yusuf , had swept aside the small army posts, and carried out the killings. They took over the area and then organised the COI’s access to witnesses. Hermann’s report was supported by Russian journalist Marat Musin and Arabic speaking Dutch writer Martin Janssen. Melchite nun Mother Agnes Mariam also spoke with witnesses and observed the manipulation of bodies as this ‘false flag’ massacre was presented to the world. The COI missed all this, either through wanton negligence or plain malice.
Report of August 16, 2013
The COI produced another partisan report on the violence on 16 August, once again highly selective and relying on pro-FSA sources. This report was useless in the sense of independent evidence. It also ignored major massacres committed by the #Takfiri-Islamists (sectarian #Islamists fighting to replace the secular Syrian Government with an Islamic state), such as the August 2012 massacre at Daraya (after the failure of a prisoner swap), the December 2012 massacre of Alawi villagers at Aqrab (documented by a British journalist), the multiple al Nusra-FSA attacks on students at Aleppo University (as part of their close down the university campaign) and the al Nusra Sarin gas attacks on Aleppo in early 2013.
The al Ghouta incidents
On 21 August 2013, some crude chemical weapons seem to have killed many people in parts of eastern Damascus (al Ghouta) under the control of Takfiri-Islamists. Video images were released immediately, accusing the Syrian Arab Army of having attacked and killed hundreds of civilians. Video also shows a number of people walking through the laid out dead bodies; several of these people have been identified as Islamist fighters.
The publicity given to these killings derailed the attention of the COI team which had just arrived in Damascus to investigate Syrian Government evidence of the sectarian Islamists using sarin gas in the #Khan al Assal area of Aleppo, in March 2013. This investigation did not take place because the team was diverted to al Ghouta; a convenient diversion because UN investigator Carla del Ponte had announced earlier that the evidence of sarin use provisionally pointed to ‘the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities.’ Russia had provided a large brief of evidence to the UN. However the COI’s brief was technical and did not include determining who was responsible for the attacks.
Partisan ‘evidence’ from Washington
The Obama administration immediately asserted that the Syrian Government was to blame; later it presented some circumstantial evidence (30 August). Obama was backed up by the Washington based group Human Rights Watch (10 September). Both claim the Syrian Government’s motives were ‘to gain the upper hand or break a stalemate’ in certain areas. Foreign Policy magazine (11 September), claimed a UN inquiry group would produce a ‘strong circumstantial case’ against the government. The main US claims are:
1. The ‘opposition’ (i.e. Islamist fighters) does not have the capacity to make and deploy chemical weapons. The White House and HRW both say that the Islamist ‘rebels’ have no access to the 140mm and 330mm rockets they say were used in the attack.
2. Communications intercepts show government activity around the attacks, and the extent of social media postings is too wide to have been fabricated. In this area the Obama administration mixes the questions of whether CW were used and who used them.
Independent evidence implicating the foreign-backed fighters
Evidence implicating the foreign-backed fighters, as in previous massacres, is more specific, and the motive is more obvious: to incite a ‘humanitarian intervention’ that will help them.
1. Islamist fighters in Syria do indeed have chemical weapons and rocket capacity. They have posted video and photos of themselves firing large blue tank-canisters from artillery. In April al Nusra stole 400 tonnes of liquid chlorine from an Aleppo factory. In May six anti-Syrian ‘rebels’ were arrested and later indicted by Turkish authorities; 2kgs of ‘kitchen variety’ sarin was seized. In July the government seized 261 barrels of chemicals from terrorist groups in #Baniyas. Then 26 people including soldiers were killed by al Nusra chemicals attacks in Aleppo. The army also discovered a chemical fabrication plant in #Jobar (Damascus countryside), making use of ingredients from Saudi Arabia.
2. The first independent interviews of people in al #Ghouta indicated that Islamist fighters there were collecting chemical weapons. Jordan-based journalists Dale Gavlak and Yahya Abaneh interviewed: (a) the father of a fighter who said his son had died while mishandling chemical weapons provided by a Saudi man; (b) townspeople who said fighters had been sleeping in mosques and houses while their tunnels were used to store tanks or canisters; and (c) two fighters who complained that they had not been trained in the handling of chemical weapons.
3. Syrian analysts have released video which begins to identify the dead at al Ghouta, and those around them. Establishing who the victims are may be the key to proving who is responsible. Two weeks before the killings in al Ghouta many women and children were kidnapped from the site of an al Nusra massacre in Lattakia. It is believed many of these are amongst the dead at al Ghouta. Video also shows several alive and identifiable, kidnapped government supporters, later seen as dead victims at al Ghouta.
Adam Larson says the crime at al Ghouta was either: ‘the perfect gift from the ‘regime’ to its hostile opponents, or a custom sewn false flag event of great audacity’.
A dozen former senior US military and intelligence officers wrote to President Obama, reminding him of the lies told about WMDs in Iraq. They said ‘the most reliable intelligence shows that [President] Bashar al-Assad was NOT responsible for the chemical incident that killed and injured Syrian civilians on August 21 … [and] the various groups trying to overthrow Syrian President … have ample incentive to get the U.S. more deeply involved’.
Chemical weapons agreement
The Syrian government has now agreed to a Russian initiative, to join the Chemical Weapons Convention, heading off the immediate threat of missile attacks from US warships, stationed in the eastern Mediterranean. However that agreement does not resolve the matter. The al Ghouta incident was just the latest in a long chain of pretexts for war. The US clearly wants to dominate the entire region, and cannot tolerate any independent state.
Bitterly disappointed at the delay in a direct US attack on Syria, the ruthless and sectarian Islamist fighters will most likely try to stage another ‘false flag’ attack. The partisan United Nations COI will almost certainly act, once again, to lend them credibility. For its part, the US will pursue any new disarmament commitments as part of its attempts to topple the Syrian government. And double standards in disarmament will continue. Under the Chemical Weapons Convention the USA was due to destroy all its chemical weapons by 2012; Washington now says it will comply by the year 2023.
#Syria: GRAPHIC: TIME Magazine’s eyewitness to young Syrian man beheaded by Obama-backed terrorists:
Thou they have no proof ,they do not “forget” to blame the SAA ,a demonstration of bias pushed to extremes!
TIME wrote:”militants publicly executing, by decapitation, a young Syrian in the town of Keferghan, near Aleppo, on August 31, 2013.”-of course they claimed that they had no idea “why”?!Aren’t there any Arabic translators when you need them?Why only their comments and not the sound of “cheerers ” was aired?
Foreign media is trying to suggest the lose of control !Which is not the case!What about a better suggestion:CLOSE THE ROOT OF POURING DEVILS ON SYRIA’S BORDERS!THOSE FANATICS ARE THE AL QAEDA YOUR #OBOMBER IS FINANCING AND SENDING GUNS TO,
NOT REBELS,AS THEY ARE NOT SYRIANS!AND FOR SURE NOT A MIDDLE AGES SCENE,BUT FOR USA,MAYBE!FOR THOSE LIVING IN THERE IT MEANS #NEANDERTHAL!!!!!!!!!AND USA’s NEW WAVE OF TRAINED SOLDIERS!!!!!!!!!
The man was brought in to the square. His eyes were blindfolded. I began shooting pictures, one after the other. It was to be the fourth execution that day I would photograph. I was feeling awful; several times I had been on the verge of throwing up. But I kept it under control because as a journalist I knew I had to document this, as I had the three previous beheadings I had photographed that day, in three other locations outside Aleppo.
The crowd began cheering. Everyone was happy. I knew that if I tried to intervene I would be taken away, and that the executions would go ahead. I knew that I wouldn’t be able to change what was happening and I might put myself in danger.
I saw a scene of utter cruelty: a human being treated in a way that no human being should ever be treated. But it seems to me that in two and a half years, the war has degraded people’s humanity. On this day the people at the execution had no control over their feelings, their desires, their anger. It was impossible to stop them.
I don’t know how old the victim was but he was young. He was forced to his knees. The rebels around him read out his crimes from a sheet of paper. They stood around him. The young man was on his knees on the ground, his hands tied. He seemed frozen.
Two rebels whispered something into his ear and the young man replied in an innocent and sad manner, but I couldn’t understand what he said because I don’t speak Arabic.
At the moment of execution the rebels grasped his throat. The young man put up a struggle. Three or four rebels pinned him down. The man tried to protect his throat with his hands, which were still tied together. He tried to resist but they were stronger than he was and they cut his throat. They raised his head into the air. People waved their guns and cheered. Everyone was happy that the execution had gone ahead.
That scene in Syria, that moment, was like a scene from the Middle Ages, the kind of thing you read about in history books. The war in Syria has reached the point where a person can be mercilessly killed in front of hundreds of people—who enjoy the spectacle.
REPORTERUL COLABORATOR PENTRU TIME MAGAZINE ASISTA LA CRIMA COMISA DE NOUL VAL DE LUPTATORI PENTRU HEGEMONIA LUI OBAMA =AL QAEDA=AL NUSRA=ARMATA LIBERA DIN SIRIA=REBELII…DECAPITEAZA UN TANAR
افتتاحية قناة فوكس نيوز الإخبارية الأمريكية،
شاهدوا بأم أعينكم كيف يتحدث الإعلام الأمركي عن أوباما ويصفه بالكاذب والفاقد للمصداقية:
—————————————————————————
حقاً سيدي الرئيس ؟؟ أتريد من الشعب الأمريكي الآن و بعد كل ما مر عليه من أزمات أن يصدق ما تقوله له و يتبعك بشكل أعمى للدخول في نزاع شرق أوسطي جديد؟؟
تسعى إدارة الرئيس أوباما في هذا الأسبوع للحصول على موافقة الكونغرس لتوجيه ضربة لسورية، و ما الذي تقوله هنا؟: ندخل سورية و نقوم فيها بضربة عسكرية صغيرة تستغرق بضعة أيام دون الهدف لتغيير النظام و نتوقف بعد ذلك، سوف نريهم قدرتنا. لكن في هذا الوقت تصطف المدمرات الروسية و الأمريكية و عدد غير مصرح عنه من الغواصات قبالة الساحل السوري، كما أن القوارب الإيرانية السريعة متواجدة بالفعل في الخليج الفارسي حيث تتوضع سفن أمريكية أخرى هناك.
الآن دعني أستوضح فيما إذا كنت أفهم ما يحصل: نحن نتوجه لقصف سورية بسبب هجوم مزعوم بالسلاح الكيماوي، و نجازف بحصول مواجهة مباشرة محتملة مع إيران و روسيا في تحرك، من سيكون المستفيد منه في نهاية المطاف ،القاعدة.؟
وماذا عن إسرائيل ؟ نحن نعلم أنك لا تحب بيبي( لقب نيتينياهو)، و لكن أليس من التزاماتنا ألا نضع حلفائنا في مرمى الخطر،و ما هو مبررك؟؟
لقد قلتَ سابقا: “أنا لم أقل إن ذلك خط أحمر، العالم هو من قال إنه خط أحمر، إن الكونغرس هو من قال إنه خط أحمر عندما صادق على المعاهدة. إن مصداقيتي الشخصية ليست على المحك، إن مصداقية المجتمع الدولي هل التي على المحك”
هذا ليس صحيحاُ، هذا فقط حوار آخر من حواراتك الزائفة كهذا أيضا
عندما قلتَ “إن الخط الأحمر بالنسبة لنا هو، عندما نبدأ بالقول أن كمية من الأسلحة الكيميائية قد نقلت من مكان إلى آخر أو أنها استخدمت، فهذا ما سيغير من حساباتي”
الكذبة تبقى كذبة، أنت قلتها و العالم سمعها.و سوريا سمعتها و لم تكترث لك، و مضت بفعل ما تريده بكل الأحوال.و بالمناسبة إذا كنت قلت بأنك لم تضع أية خطوط حمراء ،إذا لماذا سنذهب إلى الحرب؟ لا أحد يحترمنا، لا أحد يخشانا، أنت من فعل بنا هذا. لماذا تضع خطوطاً حمراء في الوقت الذي يعرف فيه العالم أجمع أنها ليست إلا أضواء خضراء, مراراً و تكراراً!
ولكني اتفق معك في شي، إن مصداقيتك الشخصية ليست على المحك، فمع احترامي لك سيدي الرئيس أنت لا تملك المصداقية ، فلكي يمتلك المرء المصداقية عليه أن يتمتع بالوضوح و الثبات، و يجب أن تكون تحركاتك سريعة و لا ريب فيها. لقد فقدت مصداقيتك عندما تركت هؤلاء الأمريكان فوق سطح المبنى في بنغازي ، بينما انطلقت بطائرتك الرئاسية لحضور حفل خيري في لاس فيغاس.و كان ذلك إشارة واضحة إلى العالم بأن الوقت ملائم لمهاجمة الأمريكيين بمن فيهم السفير، وبالمناسبة ماذا حدث لتعهدك عندما قلت: ” إننا سنضعهم بين يدي العدالة “، لقد مضت سنة على ذلك، فأين هي تلك العدالة!؟
والآن أنت تختبأ وراء الكونغرس كي تتمكن من إلقاء اللوم عليه في عدم اتخاذك لأي تحرك، أو أنك ستقول بأننا سنذهب للحرب بكل الأحوال، ما هذا الذي يحدث، إن ذلك يوحي بأن هذا وقت وقت تفتقد فيه واشنطن للبصيرة و الحرفية. إن أرواح الأمريكيين على المحك، إننا أمة أنهكتها الحرب، و قد اعترفت بذلك بنفسك، لقد تعبنا من إراقة دماء الشبان و الشابات الأمركيين في جزء من العالم حيث يكرهوننا،و لتزيد الطين بلة، فانت لا تهتم بالمقاتلين السابقين بعد عودتهم إلى البلاد، و قد فقدوا بعض أعضاء أجسادهم و أصبحوا بحاجة للمساعدة أكثر من وقت مغادرتهم للبلاد.
وإن كنت حازماً بشدة ضد قتل الأطفال لدرجة أنك مستعد لإرسالنا إلى نزاع جديد، فهل تستطيع أن تضمن بأن صواريخ تومهاوك بزنة الآلاف الباوندات التي ستسقطها على سورية لن تقتل الأطفال؟ أم أنهم سيكونون ببساطة أضرارك الجانبية التي لا مفر منها؟ هل ستكون حياة أولئك أقل أهمية من حياة الأطفال الذين سنذهب للانتقام لهم؟ قل لنا، ما هي المصلحة الاستراتيجية لأمريكا؟ و ما هي نهاية اللعبة؟ هل فكرت بمخرج لذلك ؟ أم أن السياسة هي جزء من معادلاتك الشخصية التي تجعل المسألة كلها معنية بك.
هل القصد هو توجيه ضربة تحذيرية لتحميل الأسد المسؤوولية؟ أم لتقليص قدرته على القيام بالمزيد من الهجمات مستقبلاً؟ أو هي لردع تصرفاته في المستقبل؟ هل تعتقد جدلاً بأن هذا الرجل و بعد مقتل أكثر من 100 ألف شخص يخاف منك؟!
و إن كنت لا تعتزم إسقاطه و تتوقع أن يتمكن من تجاوز الضربة، فإنك تجعل الولايات المتحدة تبدو أكثر ضعفاً. سوريا البلد الصغير ينجو من هجمة يتعرض لها من أقوى دولة عسكرياً في العالم، أو على الأقل هذا ما كنا عليه قبل ظهورك.
و إلى جانب من تقف أنت؟؟ دعنا نفكر في هذا الأمر. هؤلاء هم الثوار السوريون الذين تريد الوقوف إلى جانبهم (كما تظهر الصورة) يقومون بقتل شباب في مقتبل العمر بطريقة الإعدام رمياً بالرصاص.
وإن كان استخدام الأسلحة الكيماوية يعتبر انتهالكاً للمعايير الدولية، فلماذا لا يساندك المجتمع الدولي في موقفك. إن البريطانيين رفضوا و لأول مرة منذ عام 1782 طلباً بالتدخل العسكري. كما رفض الناتو ذلك أيضاً. و رفضه الاتحاد الأوروبي أيضاً. الأمم المتحدة ما تزال تحقق طبعاً. و الإيطاليون- هم طبعاً ما زالوا مشغولين بالرقص مع برلسكوني في حفلاته الماجنة.
وصديقك العزيز بوتين اضطر لتلقينك درساً في القانون الدولي حين قال لك: “فقط مجلس الأمن بإمكانه فرض استخدام القوة على الدول ذات السيادة, وأية ذريعة أخرى قد يتم استخدامها لفرض القوة ضد الدول ذات السيادة, هو أمر مرفوض ولا يمكن تفسيره إلا بأنه عدوان”.
لا يسعك دفع عصا في عين النمر دون أن تتوقع منه الرد عليك. إن الثوار الذين ترغب بدعمهم هم من القاعدة (هل تذكرهم، هم من دمروا برجي التجارة العالمية)،و أنصار الشريعة، لا بد أنك تذكرهم ( فقد قتلوا أربعة أمريكيين في بنغازي)، و ماذا عن الإخوان المسلمين ( لقد ضحيت بصديقنا حسني مبارك من أجلهم، و من وقتها و الأمور جيدة في مصر)..
وبالمناسبة، لم يقتل مواطنون أمريكيون في سورية كما قتل غيرهم في بنغازي، لكن علينا الذهاب إلى الحرب لحفظ ماء الوجه بسبب تصريحات غبية تقول الآن أنك لم تصرح بها؟. هل فكرت فيما سينتهي عليه الأمر؟ إن سياستك الخارجية الغير مسؤولة ، و مظهر القوة الذي ادعيته قد فرضا عليك ما لم تكن لتريده.
سيدي الرئيس ، في الماضي عندما كانت أمريكا تحظى بالاحترام و المهابة،لم يكن أحد ليتجرأ على تجاوز خط أحمر لرئيس أمريكي. تذكر قولك بأن لن تذهب إلى الحرب إلا إذا كان هناك تهديد وشيك لللأمن القومي. فما هي حجتك، و على حد علمي، لم يقم الأسد يوماً بمهاجمتنا. و بالمناسبة أيضاً، ألم يتم انتخابك كرئيس معادٍ للحروب،ألم تصوت ضد الحرب على العراق؟ ها نحن بعد خمس سنوات من توليك الرئاسة، و رجالنا و نسائنا الأمريكان ما زالوا في الميدان، يقاتلون رجالاً همجيين في كهوف أفغانستان، و هم سيعودون إلى قبائلهم حالما نخرج من هناك. كما لم يسر موضوع الانسحاب من العراق بشكل سلس هو الآخر.
والسيناتور ماكين، نحن جميعاً نحترمك لخدماتك، و للتضحيات التي قدمتها لهذه البلاد، لكن في النهاية قد تكون على حق، ربما الأمر كله مجر لعبة (في إشارة للصورة التي التقطت لماكين وهو يلعب البوكر على هاتفه أثناء مناقشة موضوع سوريا في لجنة الشؤون الخارجية).
سيدي الرئيس، هل بإمكانك أن تفهم لماذا يعارض الأمريكيون هذه الحرب بشكل حازم؟ إننا ننظر إلى الحروب من خلال الموشور العراقي، و من خلال الأكاذيب و القصص المزيفة المتعلقة ببنغازي. تريدنا أن نثق بك، لكنك لا تمتلك المصداقية، لماذا يتوجب على الأمريكان الإيمان بأن ما تقوله صادق؟
ليس هناك من مخرج لهذا الوضع،و نحن لا نستطيع تحمل تبعات ذلك، إننا لا نريد حرباً عالميةً ثالثة.
وفي معرض الحديث، سيدي الرئيس ألم تفز بجائزة نوبل للسلام؟!! نعم ، كان ذلك أنت.. أعدها.
“Syria submitted a proposal to the United Nations for more than ten years ago to rid the weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East ,considering the turbulent wars in the area for decades and perhaps centuries.Giving up the non-conventional weapons would contribute to achieving stability in the region and the United States knew about the Syrian proposal at the time. We, as a principle do not believe that the existence of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East is a positive thing. Just the opposite, we always think and strive for peace. ”
Syria has agreed to the Russian proposal, but not because of US threats, the Syrian president said, adding two conditions: chemical weapons disarmament must not be unilateral, and the US must stop threatening Damascus and arming the opposition.
During an interview with the channel “Russia 24”, the Syrian President made it clear that Damascus will send to the United Nations documents in order to prepare a convention on the matter.
The Syrian President set a new equation urging Washington to stop arming militant groups and stop threatening military force if it wanted a plan for Syria to hand over chemical weapons to work.
“When we see that the United States truly desires stability in our region and stops threatening and seeking to invade, as well as stops arms supplies to terrorists then we can believe that we can follow through with the necessary processes,” he told the Russian television, adding that Washington should dispense with the “politics of threats.”
But he also signaled that he was willing to comply with international pressure. “Syria will be sending an appeal to the UN and the Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in a few days, which will have technical documents necessary to sign the agreement,” he added in the translated remarks
Mr.President al Assad also called on the US to ”give up their military projects against Damascus using an artificial pretext to motivate their attack”.
“US has failed to present evidence that the Syrian government was behind the chemical attack incident.”
“None of the Middle East countries should possess WMD, including Israel.”
“Any war against Syria will become a war that will destroy the whole region.”
“Countries that supplied rebels with chemical weapons should be held accountable for that.”
Президент Сирии Башар Асад дал эксклюзивное интервью телеканалу “Россия 24”. Глава государства подробнее рассказал о ситуации в охваченной войной стране и на Ближнем Востоке в целом.
Дамаск согласился поставить под международный контроль свое химическое оружие не из-за агрессивной риторики Вашингтона, а из-за предложения Москвы. Ожидается, что вскоре сирийские власти направят в ООН все необходимые документы для присоединения к конвенции о нераспространении химического оружия, а через месяц после этого – данные о своем арсенале.
Башар Асад посоветовал своему американскому коллеге отказаться ото лжи и “своих военных планов в отношении Сирии, используя в качестве повода для нападения надуманный предлог”. Кроме того, он сообщил, что слухи о том, что военные запрашивали разрешения на применение химоружия, не соответствуют действительности.
Что касается тех, кто находится в стране, то говоря о боевиках, сирийский лидер подчеркнул, что имеющие в своем распоряжении оружие массового поражения “террористы пытаются спровоцировать американское нападение на Сирию”. Их, по словам Башара Асада, снабжают из-за границы.
Политик предостерег от возможных провокаций со стороны вооруженной оппозиции, отметив, что те могут использовать химическое оружие, например, против соседнего Израиля. Чтобы стабилизировать обстановку в регионе, президент Сирии предлагает лишить оружия массового уничтожения весь Ближний Восток, однако, по его мнению, США мешают этому процессу. “Одна из причин заключается в том, чтобы разрешить Израилю обладать подобным оружием, пояснил он. — Если мы желаем стабильности на Ближнем Востоке, необходимо всем странам придерживаться соглашений, и первая страна, которая должна придерживаться договоренностей, это Израиль, так как Израиль владеет атомным, химическим и биологическим оружием и всеми видами оружия массового поражения”.
Башар Асад призвал наказать всех виновных в том, что у боевиков появилось химоружие, но, прежде всего, тщательно расследовать этот факт. “Все страны говорят, что они не сотрудничают с террористами, но мы реально знаем, что Запад оказывает им логистическую поддержку, — добавил он. — Они говорят, что это предметы нелетального действия или гуманитарная помощь, но в результате Запад и страны региона, такие, как Турция и Саудовская Аравия и ранее Катар контактируют с террористами напрямую и поддерживают их всеми видами оружия. Мы думаем, что одна из этих стран поставляла террористам химоружие”.
“سورية قدمت مقترحاً للأمم المتحدة منذ أكثر من عشر سنوات من أجل إخلاء منطقة الشرق الأوسط من أسلحة الدمار الشامل.. لأن هذه المنطقة مضطربة وهي منطقة حروب منذ عقود وربما منذ قرون.. فإخلاؤها من الأسلحة غير التقليدية يساهم في تحقيق الاستقرار في هذه المنطقة، وكانت العقبة في وجه هذا المقترح السوري هي الولايات المتحدة في ذلك الوقت. فإذاً نحن كمبدأ لا نعتقد بأن وجود أسلحة الدمار الشامل في الشرق الأوسط هو شيء إيجابي.. بالعكس تماماً نحن دائماً نفكر بالاستقرار ونسعى من أجل السلام.”
“لاشك بأن سورية تفكر بشكل جدي كدولة، بتجنيب نفسها وتجنيب دول المنطقة بشكل عام حرباً أخرى مجنونة يسعى البعض من أنصار الحرب في الولايات المتحدة إلى إشعالها في منطقتنا، ونحن مازلنا اليوم ندفع ثمن الحروب التي شنتها الولايات المتحدة سواء في أفغانستان – وهي بعيدة عن سورية – أو في العراق وهي دولة مجاورة لنا.. نعتقد بأن أي حرب تُشن على سورية ستكون حرباً مدمرة للمنطقة وتُدخل المنطقة في سلسلة من المشاكل وعدم الاستقرار ربما لعقود أو لأجيال مقبلة.”
“الجانب الأهم الذي دفع سورية للعمل من أجل التوقيع على اتفاقية حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية، هو المبادرة الروسية نفسها.. لو لم يكن هناك مبادرة روسية لكان من الصعب على سورية أن تتحرك بهذا الاتجاه والعلاقة بيننا وبين روسيا هي علاقة ثقة وتمتّنت تلك الثقة بشكل خاص خلال هذه الأزمة في سورية منذ سنتين ونصف، حيث أثبتت روسيا وعيها لما يحصل في المنطقة، وأثبتت مصداقيتها وأثبتت أنها دولة كبرى يمكن الاعتماد عليها.”
“لم تكن التهديدات الأمريكية لسورية منذ أسابيع قليلة حول نزع أسلحة الدمار الشامل الموجودة فيها.. بل كانت حول توجيه ضربة لسورية على خلفية الادعاءات التي سوّقتها الإدارة الأميركية والمتعلقة باستخدام الأسلحة الكيميائية في غوطة دمشق.. فالحقيقة لم يكن هناك تهديد أمريكي بشأن التخلي عن الأسلحة الكيميائية، هذا الكلام غير صحيح.. إذ بدأ الأميركيون بالحديث عن ذلك بعد قمة العشرين الأخيرة في روسيا وليس قبلها، وما دفعنا فعلياً بهذا الاتجاه هو المبادرة الروسية نفسها، وأؤكد بأنه لولا هذه المبادرة لما كان يمكن على الإطلاق أن نناقش هذا الموضوع مع أية دولة أخرى.. القضية الأساسية هي قناعات سورية، والدور الروسي فيها.”
“الاجراءات الروتينية التي تتم والتي سنسير بها بخصوص التوقيع على اتفاقية حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية ليست من طرف واحد، فهي ليست أن تقوم سورية بالتوقيع أو التطبيق وانتهى الأمر، هذا الموضوع باتجاهين، يعتمد بالدرجة الأولى على تخلّي الولايات المتحدة عن سياساتها العدوانية تجاه سورية، وعلى استجابتها للمبادرة الروسية.. عندما نرى بأن أمريكا صادقة في توجهاتها تجاه الاستقرار بالمنطقة والتوقف عن التهديد والعمل من أجل العدوان أو حتى إرسال سلاح للإرهابيين.. عندها نعتبر بأن السير بهذه الإجراءات إلى المراحل النهائية يمكن أن يكون قابلاً للتطبيق من قبل سورية.”
Proof you cannot ignore! Al-Farouk Brigade, led by a members of the Syrian National Council, namely Fahed Awad are behind the chemical weapons attack in Syria. The terrorist organization goes around to the towns they try to liberate, and kidnap ordinary Syrian civilians, not just the SAA they capture, and them commit crimes against humanity on them. They are murdered out right, and then videos are uploaded claiming Assad forces committed the crimes. They have worked with the Turkish government of Erdogan for 2 years now, out of a television studio in Ankara. They are led by many pieces of filth I previously exposed in exposing “Souria2011Archives.” The US, Israel, Saudi, Qatar and Turkey claim the Assad government gassed their own citizens while the United Nations just happen to be there investigating a prior chemical weapons attack. Like, who believes that?
Obama backed and supported Al Qaeda/FSA terrorists have threatened several times how they are going to spread Sharia Law around the world when they have finished in the Syria and the USA are are supporting this. They are supporting Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. Starting the Arab Spring and supporting Muslim Brotherhood in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, against the wishes of the people in these countries.
It is not the Assad government who is a threat to the USA it is Obama, who invaded Syria, which was in peace, by forming the FSA in the USA and using them along with Al Qaeda to attack Syria, destroy it and kill the innocent citizens and then pretend it was the opposition political party. The Opposition was founded in the USA, each ex. pat Syrian that Hilary Clinton’s so called friends of Syria meetings elected as head of this USA made…
UN rights council says Syria gas attack videos, photos fake: Russia
Posted on September 10, 2013 by friendsofsyria
Syrian Truth l Press TV l UN rights council says Syria gas attack videos, photos fake: Russia
Russia says the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) has confirmed that the videos and photos purporting to show the victims of a chemical attack near the Syrian capital, Damascus, were fabricated.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a Tuesday statement that international experts as well as Syrian public and religious leaders presented their evidence to the 24th session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on September 9.
It also said evidence provided by numerous witnesses confirms that militants fighting against the Syrian government used chemical weapons in the Damascus suburb of western Ghouta last month.
The participants in the UN Human Rights Council session warned of the consequences of a military strike against Syria, noting that such an attack would constitute a crude violation of international law.
The US administration has been using the footage and the photos in question to lobby for a military strike on Syria.
The recent war rhetoric against Syria first gained momentum on August 21, when the militants operating inside the Middle Eastern country and the country’s foreign-backed opposition claimed that over a thousand people had been killed in a government chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus.
The Syrian government categorically rejected the accusation.
Nevertheless, a number of Western countries, with the US being at the forefront, quickly started campaigning for war.
On August 31, US President Barack Obama said he would seek Congress authorization before the possible strikes on Syria.
However, reports indicate a majority of Congress members are either against the planned strikes on Syria or are yet undecided. The Senate has meanwhile postponed a vote on the US administration-proposed resolution to attack Syria.
Syria has been gripped by deadly unrest since 2011. The United Nations has reported that more than 100,000 people have been killed and millions displaced due to the violence.
Syrian Truth l Press TV l UN rights council says Syria gas attack videos, photos fake: Russia
Russia says the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) has confirmed that the videos and photos purporting to show the victims of a chemical attack near the Syrian capital, Damascus, were fabricated.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a Tuesday statement that international experts as well as Syrian public and religious leaders presented their evidence to the 24th session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on September 9.
It also said evidence provided by numerous witnesses confirms that militants fighting against the Syrian government used chemical weapons in the Damascus suburb of western Ghouta last month.
The participants in the UN Human Rights Council session warned of the consequences of a military strike against Syria, noting that such an attack would constitute a crude violation of international law.
Armed rebels affiliated to the Al-Qaeda terrorist group beheaded tens of Syrian civilians in a village in Reef (countryside of) Damascus in Southern Syria.
FNA correspondent in Northern Syria reported that the Al-Nusra terrorists have attacked the Christian city of Maloula in Damascus countryside on Sunday and cut off the heads of 30 civilians.
The report said that a number of women and children were also among those beheaded by the Al-Qaeda terrorists.
The armed rebels also abducted a total of 15 other Christian citizens in Maloula city last night.
The conflict in Syria started in March 2011, when sporadic pro-reform protests turned into a massive insurgency following the intervention of western and regional states.
The unrest, which took in terrorist groups from across Europe, the Middle-East and North Africa, has transpired as one of the bloodiest conflicts in recent history.
As the foreign-backed insurgency in Syria continues without an…
-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to American CBS news.
Following is the full text of the interview:
Charlie Rose: Mr. President thank you very much for this opportunity to talk to you at a very important moment because the President of the United States will address the nation this week and, as you know an important conversation is taking place in Washington and important things are happening here in your country. Do you expect an airstrike?
President al-Assad: As long as the United States doesn’t obey the international law and trample over the Charter of the United Nations we have to worry that any administration – not only this one – would do anything. According to the lies that we’ve been hearing for the last two weeks from high-ranking officials in the US administration we have to expect the worst.
Charlie Rose: Are you prepared?
President al-Assad: We’ve been living in difficult circumstances for the last two years and a half, and we prepare ourselves for every possibility. But that doesn’t mean if you’re prepared things will be better; it’s going to get worse with any foolish strike or stupid war.
Charlie Rose: What do you mean worse?
President al-Assad: Worse because of the repercussions because nobody can tell you the repercussions of the first strike. We’re talking about one region, bigger regions, not only about Syria. This interlinked region, this intermingled, interlocked, whatever you want to call it; if you strike somewhere, you have to expect the repercussions somewhere else in different forms in ways you don’t expect.
Charlie Rose: Are you suggesting that if in fact there is a strike; there will be repercussions against the United States from your friends in other countries like Iran or Hezbollah or others?
President al-Assad: As I said, this may take different forms: direct and indirect. Direct when people want to retaliate, or governments. Indirect when you’re going to have instability and the spread of terrorism all over the region that will influence the west directly.
Charlie Rose: Have you had conversations with Russia, with Iran or with Hezbollah about how to retaliate?
President al-Assad: We don’t discuss this issue as a government, but we discuss the repercussions, which is more important because sometimes repercussions could be more destroying than the strike itself. Any American strike will not destroy as much as the terrorists have already destroyed in Syria; sometimes the repercussions could be many doubles the strike itself.
Charlie Rose: But some have suggested that it might tip the balance in the favor of the rebels and lead to the overthrow of your government.
Any strike will be as direct support to Al-Qaeda
President al-Assad: Exactly. Any strike will be as direct support to Al-Qaeda offshoot that’s called Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. You’re right about this. It’s going to be direct support.
Charlie Rose: This is about chemical warfare. Let’s talk about that. Do you approve of the use of chemical warfare, the use of deadly chemicals? Do you think that it is an appropriate tool of war, to use chemicals?
President al-Assad: We are against any WMD, any weapons of mass destruction, whether chemical or nuclear.
Charlie Rose: So you’re against the use of chemical warfare?
20130910-065004.jpg
President al-Assad: Yes, not only me. As a state, as a government, in 2001 we proposed to the United Nations to empty or to get rid of every WMD in the Middle East, and the United States stood against that proposal. This is our conviction and policy.
Charlie Rose: But you’re not a signatory to the chemical warfare agreement.
President al-Assad: Not yet.
Charlie Rose: Why not?
President al-Assad: Because Israel has WMD, and it has to sign, and Israel is occupying our land, so that’s we talked about the Middle East, not Syria, not Israel; it should be comprehensive.
Charlie Rose: Do you consider chemical warfare equivalent to nuclear warfare?
President al-Assad: I don’t know. We haven’t tried either.
Charlie Rose: But you know, you’re a head of state, and you understand the consequences of weapons that don’t discriminate.
President al-Assad: Technically, they’re not the same. But morally, it’s the same.
Charlie Rose: Morally, they are the same.
President al-Assad: They are the same, but at the end, killing is killing. Massacring is massacring. Sometimes you may kill tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands with very primitive armaments.
Charlie Rose: Then why do you have such a stockpile of chemical weapons?
President al-Assad: We don’t discuss this issue in public because we never said that we have it, and we never said that we don’t have it. It’s a Syrian issue; it’s a military issue we never discuss in public with anyone.
Charlie Rose: This is from the New York Times this morning: Syria’s leaders amassed one of the world’s largest stockpiles of chemical weapons with help from the Soviet Union and Iran as well as Western European suppliers, and even a handful of American companies. According to American diplomatic cables and declassified intelligence records, you have amassed one of the largest supplies of chemical weapons in the world.
President al-Assad: To have or not to have is a possibility, but to depend on what media says is nonsense, or to depend on some of the reports of the intelligence is nonsense and that was proven when they invaded Iraq ten years ago and they said “Iraq has stockpiles of WMD” and it was proven after the invasion that this was false; it was fraud. So, we can’t depend on what one magazine wrote. But at the end, I said it’s something not to be discussed with anyone.
Charlie Rose: You accept that the world believes that you have a stockpile of chemical weapons?
President al-Assad: Who?
Charlie Rose: The world. The United States and other powers who also said that you have chemical weapons.
President al-Assad: It isn’t about what they believe in, it’s about the reality that we have, and this reality, we own it, we don’t have to discuss it.
Charlie Rose: Speaking of reality, what was the reality on August 21st? What happened in your judgment?
President al-Assad: We’re not in the area where the alleged chemical attack happened. I said alleged. We’re not sure that anything happened.
Charlie Rose: Even at this date, you’re not sure that chemical weapons – even though you have seen the video tape, even though you’ve seen the bodies, even though your own officials have been there.
President al-Assad: I haven’t finished. Our soldiers in another area were attacked chemically. Our soldiers – they went to the hospital as casualties because of chemical weapons, but in the area where they said the government used chemical weapons, we only had video and we only have pictures and allegations. We’re not there; our forces, our police, our institutions don’t exist there. How can you talk about what happened if you don’t have evidence? We’re not like the American administration, we’re not social media administration or government. We are a government that deals with reality. When we have evidence, we’ll announce it.
Charlie Rose: Well, as you know, Secretary Kerry has said there is evidence and that they saw rockets that fired from a region controlled by your forces into a region controlled by the rebels. They have evidence from satellite photographs of that. They have evidence of a message that was intercepted about chemical weapons, and soon thereafter there were other intercepted messages, so Secretary Kerry has presented what he views as conclusive evidence.
Kerry reminds about the big lie that Collin Powell said in front of the world on satellites about the WMD in Iraq
President al-Assad: No, he presented his confidence and his convictions. It’s not about confidence, it’s about evidence. The Russians have completely opposite evidence that the missiles were thrown from an area where the rebels control. This reminds me – what Kerry said – about the big lie that Collin Powell said in front of the world on satellites about the WMD in Iraq before going to war. He said “this is our evidence.” Actually, he gave false evidence. In this case, Kerry didn’t even present any evidence. He talked “we have evidence” and he didn’t present anything. Not yet, nothing so far; not a single shred of evidence.
Charlie Rose: Do you have some remorse for those bodies, those people, it is said to be up to at least a thousand or perhaps 1400, who were in Eastern Ghouta, who died?
President al-Assad: We feel pain for every Syrian victim.
Charlie Rose: What about the victims of this assault from chemical warfare?
President al-Assad: Dead is dead, killing is killing, crime is crime. When you feel pain, you feel pain about their family, about the loss that you have in your country, whether one person was killed or a hundred or a thousand. It’s a loss, it’s a crime, it’s a moral issue. We have family that we sit with, family that loved their dear ones. It’s not about how they are killed, it’s about that they are dead now; this is the bad thing.
Charlie Rose: But has there been any remorse or sadness on behalf of the Syrian people for what happened?
President al-Assad: I think sadness prevails in Syria now. We don’t feel anything else but sadness because we have this killing every day, whether with chemical or any other kind. It’s not about how. We feel with it every day.
Charlie Rose: But this was indiscriminate, and children were killed, and people who said goodbye to their children in the morning didn’t see them and will never see them again, in Ghouta.
President al-Assad: That is the case every day in Syria, that’s why you have to stop the killing. That’s why we have to stop the killing. But what do you mean by “indiscriminate” that you are talking about?
Charlie Rose: Well, the fact that chemical warfare is indiscriminate in who it kills, innocents as well as combatants.
20130910-065057.jpg
President al-Assad: Yeah, but you’re not talking about evidence, you’re not talking about facts, we are talking about allegations. So, we’re not sure that if there’s chemical weapon used and who used it. We can’t talk about virtual things, we have to talk about facts.
Charlie Rose: It is said that your government delayed the United Nations observers from getting to Ghouta and that you denied and delayed the Red Cross then the Red Crescent from getting there to make observations and to help.
President al-Assad: The opposite happened, your government delayed because we asked for a delegation in March 2013 when the first attack happened in Aleppo in the north of Syria; they delayed it till just a few days before al-Ghouta when they sent those team, and the team itself said in its report that he did everything as he wanted. There was not a single obstacle.
Charlie Rose: But they said they were delayed in getting there, that they wanted to be there earlier.
President al-Assad: No, no, no; there was a conflict, there was fighting, they were shooting. That’s it. We didn’t prevent them from going anywhere. We asked them to come; why to delay them? Even if you want to take the American story, they say we used chemical weapons the same day the team or the investigation team came to Syria; is it logical? It’s not logical. Even if a country or army wanted to use such weapon, they should have waited a few days till the investigation finished its work. It’s not logical, the whole story doesn’t even hold together.
Charlie Rose: We’ll come back to it. If your government did not do it, despite the evidence, who did it?
President al-Assad: We have to be there to get the evidence like what happened in Aleppo when we had evidence. And because the United States didn’t send the team, we sent the evidence to the Russians.
Charlie Rose: But don’t you want to know the answer, if you don’t accept the evidence so far, as to who did this?
President al-Assad: The question is who threw chemicals on the same day on our soldiers. That’s the same question. Technically, not the soldiers. Soldiers don’t throw missiles on themselves. So, either the rebels, the terrorists, or a third party. We don’t have any clue yet. We have to be there to collect the evidences then we can give answer.
Charlie Rose: Well, the argument is made that the rebels don’t have their capability of using chemical weapons, they do not have the rockets and they do not have the supply of chemical weapons that you have, so therefore they could not have done it.
President al-Assad: First of all, they have rockets, and they’ve been throwing rockets on Damascus for months.
Charlie Rose: That carry chemical weapons?
President al-Assad: Rockets in general. They have the means – first. Second, the sarin gas that they’ve been talking about for the last weeks is a very primitive gas. You can have it done in the backyard of a house; it’s a very primitive gas. So, it’s not something complicated.
Charlie Rose: But this was not primitive. This was a terrible use of chemical weapons.
President al-Assad: Third, they used it in Aleppo in the north of Syria. Fourth, there’s a video on YouTube where the terrorists clearly make trials on a rabbit and kill the rabbit and said “this is how we’re going to kill the Syrian people.” Fifth, there’s a new video about one of those women who they consider as rebel or fighter who worked with those terrorists and she said “they didn’t tell us how to use the chemical weapons” and one of those weapons exploded in one of the tunnels and killed twelve. That’s what she said. Those are the evidence that we have. Anyway, the party who accused is the one who has to bring evidences. The United States accused Syria, and because you accused you have to bring evidence, this first of all. We have to find evidences when we are there.
Charlie Rose: What evidence would be sufficient for you?
President al-Assad: For example, in Aleppo we had the missile itself, and the material, and the sample from the sand, from the soil, and samples from the blood.
Charlie Rose: But the argument is made that your forces bombarded Ghouta soon thereafter with the intent of covering up evidence.
President al-Assad: How could bombardment cover the evidence? Technically, it doesn’t work. How? This is stupid to be frank, this is very stupid.
Charlie Rose: But you acknowledge the bombardment?
President al-Assad: Of course, there was a fight. That happens every day; now you can have it. But, let’s talk… we have indications, let me just finish this point, because how can use WMD while your troops are only 100 meters away from it? Is it logical? It doesn’t happen. It cannot be used like this. Anyone who’s not military knows this fact. Why do you use chemical weapons while you’re advancing? Last year was much more difficult than this year, and we didn’t use it.
Charlie Rose: There is this question too; if it was not you, does that mean that you don’t have control of your own chemical weapons and that perhaps they have fallen into the hands of other people who might want to use them?
President al-Assad: That implies that we have chemical weapons, first. That implies that it’s being used, second. So we cannot answer this question until we answer the first part and the second part. Third, let’s presume that a country or army has this weapon; this kind of armaments cannot be used by infantry for example or by anyone. This kind of armament should be used by specialized units, so it cannot be in the hand of anyone.
Charlie Rose: Well, exactly, that’s the point.
President al-Assad: Which is controlled centrally.
Charlie Rose: Ah, so you are saying that if in fact, your government did it, you would know about it and you would have approved it.
President al-Assad: I’m talking about a general case.
Charlie Rose: In general, you say if in fact it happened, I would have known about it and approved it. That’s the nature of centralized power.
President al-Assad: Generally, in every country, yes. I’m talking about the general rules, because I cannot discuss this point with you in detail unless I’m telling you what we have and what we don’t have, something I’m not going to discuss as I said at the very beginning, because this is a military issue that could not be discussed.
Charlie Rose: Do you question the New York Times article I read to you, saying you had a stockpile of chemical weapons? You’re not denying that.
President al-Assad: No, we don’t say yes, we don’t say no, because as long as this is classified, it shouldn’t be discussed.
Charlie Rose: The United States is prepared to launch a strike against your country because they believe chemical weapons are so abhorrent, that anybody who uses them crosses a red line, and that therefore, if they do that, they have to be taught a lesson so that they will not do it again.
President al-Assad: What red line? Who drew it?
Charlie Rose: The President says that it’s not just him, that the world has drawn it in their revulsion against the use of chemical weapons, that the world has drawn this red line.
We have our red lines: our sovereignty, our independence
President al-Assad: Not the world, because Obama drew that line, and Obama can draw lines for himself and his country, not for other countries. We have our red lines, like our sovereignty, our independence, while if you want to talk about world red lines, the United States used depleted uranium in Iraq, Israel used white phosphorus in Gaza, and nobody said anything. What about the red lines? We don’t see red lines. It’s political red lines.
Charlie Rose: The President is prepared to strike, and perhaps he’ll get the authorization of Congress or not. The question then is would you give up chemical weapons if it would prevent the President from authorizing a strike? Is that a deal you would accept?
President al-Assad: Again, you always imply that we have chemical weapons.
Charlie Rose: I have to, because that is the assumption of the President. That is his assumption, and he is the one that will order the strike.
President al-Assad: It’s his problem if he has an assumption, but for us in Syria, we have principles. We’d do anything to prevent the region from another crazy war. It’s not only Syria because it will start in Syria.
Charlie Rose: You’d do anything to prevent the region from having another crazy war?
President al-Assad: The region, yes.
Charlie Rose: You realize the consequences for you if there is a strike?
President al-Assad: It’s not about me. It’s about the region.
Charlie Rose: It’s about your country, it’s about your people.
President al-Assad: Of course, my country and me, we are part of this region, we’re not separated. We cannot discuss it as Syria or as me; it should be as part, as a whole, as comprehensive. That’s how we have to look at it.
Charlie Rose: Some ask why would you do it? It’s a stupid thing to do if you’re going to bring a strike down on your head by using chemical weapons. Others say you’d do it because A: you’re desperate, or the alternative, you do it because you want other people to fear you, because these are such fearful weapons that if the world knows you have them, and specifically your opponents in Syria, the rebels, then you have gotten away with it and they will live in fear, and that therefore, the President has to do something.
President al-Assad: You cannot be desperate when the army is making advances. That should have happened – if we take into consideration that this presumption is correct and this is reality – you use it when you’re in a desperate situation. So, our position is much better than before. So, this is not correct.
Charlie Rose: You think you’re winning the war.
President al-Assad: “Winning” is a subjective word, but we are making advancement. This is the correct word, because winning for some people is when you finish completely.
Charlie Rose: Then the argument is made that if you’re winning, it is because of the recent help you have got from Iran and from Hezbollah and additional supplies that have come to your side. People from outside Syria supporting you in the effort against the rebels.
President al-Assad: Iran doesn’t have any soldier in Syria, so how could Iran help me?
Charlie Rose: Supplies, weaponry?
President al-Assad: That’s all before the crisis. We always have this kind of cooperation.
Charlie Rose: Hezbollah, Hezbollah fighters have been here.
President al-Assad: Hezbollah fighters are on the borders with Lebanon where the terrorists attacked them. On the borders with Lebanon, this is where Hezbollah retaliated, and this is where we have cooperation, and that’s good.
Charlie Rose: Hezbollah forces are in Syria today?
President al-Assad: On the border area with Lebanon where they want to protect themselves and cooperate with us, but they don’t exist all over Syria. They cannot exist all over Syria anyway, for many reasons, but they exist on the borders.
Charlie Rose: What advice are you getting from the Russians?
President al-Assad: About?
Charlie Rose: About this war, about how to end this war.
Every friend of Syria is looking for peaceful solution
President al-Assad: Every friend of Syria is looking for peaceful solution, and we are convinced about that. We have this advice, and without this advice we are convinced about it.
Charlie Rose: Do you have a plan to end the war?
President al-Assad: Of course.
Charlie Rose: Which is?
President al-Assad: At the very beginning, it was fully political. When you have these terrorists, the first part of the same plan which is political should start with stopping the smuggling of terrorists coming from abroad, stopping the logistic support, the money, all kinds of support coming to these terrorists. This is the first part. Second, we can have national dialogue where different Syrian parties sit and discuss the future of Syria. Third, you can have interim government or transitional government. Then you have final elections, parliamentary elections, and you’re going to have presidential elections.
Charlie Rose: But the question is: would you meet with rebels today to discuss a negotiated settlement?
President al-Assad: In the initiative that we issued at the beginning of this year we said every party with no exceptions as long as they give up their armaments.
Charlie Rose: But you’ll meet with the rebels and anybody who’s fighting against you if they give up their weapons?
President al-Assad: We don’t have a problem.
Charlie Rose: Then they will say “you are not giving up your weapons, why should we give up our weapons?”
President al-Assad: Does a government give up its weapons? Have you heard about that before?
Charlie Rose: No, but rebels don’t normally give up their weapons either during the negotiations; they do that after a successful…
President al-Assad: The armament of the government is legal armament. Any other armament is not legal. So how can you compare? It’s completely different.
Charlie Rose: There’s an intense discussion going on about all the things we’re talking about in Washington, where if there’s a strike, it will emanate from the United States’ decision to do this. What do you want to say, in this very important week, in America, and in Washington, to the American people, the members of Congress, to the President of the United States?
President al-Assad: I think the most important part of this now is, let’s say the American people, but the polls show that the majority now don’t want a war, anywhere, not only against Syria, but the Congress is going to vote about this in a few days, and I think the Congress is elected by people, it represents the people, and works for their interest. The first question that they should ask themselves: what do wars give America, since Vietnam till now? Nothing. No political gain, no economic gain, no good reputation. The United States’ credibility is is at an all-time low. So, this war is against the interest of the Untied States. Why? First, this war is going to support Al-Qaeda and the same people that killed Americans in the 11th of September. The second thing that we want to tell Congress, that they should ask and that what we expect them to ask this administration about the evidence that they have regarding the chemical story and allegations that they presented.
I wouldn’t tell the President or any other official, because we are disappointed by their behavior recently, because we expected this administration to be different from Bush’s administration. They are adopting the same doctrine with different accessories. That’s it. So if we want to expect something from this administration, it is not to be weak, to be strong to say that “we don’t have evidence,” that “we have to obey the international law”, that “we have to go back to the Security Council and the United Nations”.
Charlie Rose: The question remains; what can you say to the President who believes chemical weapons were used by your government; that this will not happen again.
President al-Assad: I will tell him very simply: present what you have as evidence to the public, be transparent.
Charlie Rose: And if he does? If he presents that evidence?
President al-Assad: This is where we can discuss the evidence, but he doesn’t have it. He didn’t present it because he doesn’t have it, Kerry doesn’t have it. No one in your administration has it. If they had it, they would have presented it to you as media from the first day.
Charlie Rose: They have presented it to the Congress.
President al-Assad: Nothing. Nothing was presented.
20130910-065134.jpg
Charlie Rose: They’ve shown the Congress what they have, and the evidence they have, from satellite intercepted messages and the like.
President al-Assad: Nothing has been presented so far.
Charlie Rose: They have presented it to the Congress, sir.
President al-Assad: You are a reporter. Get this evidence and show it to the public in your country.
Charlie Rose: They’re presenting it to the public representative. You don’t show your evidence and what you’re doing and your plans to people within your own council. They’re showing it to the people’s representative who have to vote on an authorization to strike, and if they don’t find the evidence sufficient…
President al-Assad: First of all, we have the precedent of Collin Powell ten years ago, when he showed the evidence, it was false, and it was forged. This is first. Second, you want me to believe American evidence and don’t want me to believe the indications that we have. We live here, this is our reality.
Charlie Rose: Your indications are what?
President al-Assad: That the rebels or the terrorists used the chemical weapons in northern Aleppo five months ago.
Charlie Rose: And on August 21st?
President al-Assad: No, no, no. That was before. On the 21st, again they used it against our soldiers in our area where we control it, and our soldiers went to the hospital, you can see them if you want.
Charlie Rose: But Ghouta is not controlled by your forces, it’s controlled by the rebel forces. The area where that attack took place is controlled by rebel forces.
President al-Assad: What if they have stockpiles and they exploded because of the bombardment? What if they used the missile by mistake and attacked themselves by mistake?
Charlie Rose: Let me move to the question of whether a strike happens, and I touched on this before. You have had fair warning. Have you prepared by moving possible targets, are you moving targets within civilian populations, all the things that you might have done if you have time to do that and you have had clear warning that this might be coming?
President al-Assad: Syria is in a state of war since its land was occupied for more than four decades, and the nature of the frontier in Syria implies that most of the army is in inhabited areas, most of the centers are in inhabited areas. You hardly find any military base in distant areas from the cities unless it’s an airport or something like this, but most of the military bases or centers within inhabited areas.
Charlie Rose: Will there be attacks against American bases in the Middle East if there’s an airstrike?
President al-Assad: You should expect everything. Not necessarily through the government, the governments are not the only player in this region. You have different parties, different factions, you have different ideologies; you have everything in this region now. So, you have to expect that.
Charlie Rose: Tell me what you mean by “expect everything.”
President al-Assad: Expect every action.
Charlie Rose: Including chemical warfare?
President al-Assad: That depends. If the rebels or the terrorists in this region or any other group have it, this could happen, I don’t know. I’m not a fortuneteller to tell you what’s going to happen.
Charlie Rose: But we’d like to know more, I think the President would like to know, the American people would like to know. If there is an attack, what might be the repercussions and who might be engaged in those repercussions?
President al-Assad: Okay, before the 11th of September, in my discussions with many officials of the United States, some of them are Congressmen, I used to say that “don’t deal with terrorists as playing games.” It’s a different story. You’re going to pay the price if you’re not wise in dealing with terrorists. We said you’re going to be repercussions of the mistaken way of dealing with it, of treating the terrorism, but nobody expected 11th of September. So, you cannot expect. It is difficult for anyone to tell you what is going to happen. It’s an area where everything is on the brink of explosion. You have to expect everything.
Charlie Rose: Let’s talk about the war today. A hundred thousand people dead. A million refugees. A country being destroyed. Do you take some responsibility for that?
President al-Assad: That depends on the decision that I took. From the first day I took the decision as President to defend my country. So, who killed? That’s another question. Actually, the terrorists have been killing our people since the beginning of this crisis two years and a half ago, and the Syrian people wanted the government and the state institutions and the army and the police to defend them, and that’s what happened. So we’re talking about the responsibility, my responsibility according to the Syrian constitution that said we have to defend ourselves.
Charlie Rose: Mr. President, you constantly say “it’s terrorists.” Most people look at the rebels and they say that Al-Qaeda and other forces from outside Syria are no more than 15 or 20 percent of the forces on the ground. The other 80% are Syrians, are defectors from your government, and defectors from your military. They are people who are Syrians who believe that their country should not be run by a dictator, should not be run by one family, and that they want a different government in their country. That’s 80% of the people fighting against you, not terrorists.
President al-Assad: We didn’t say that 80%, for example, or the majority or the vast majority, are foreigners. We said the vast majority are Al-Qaeda or Al-Qaeda offshoot organizations in this region. When you talk about Al-Qaeda it doesn’t matter if he’s Syrian or American or from Europe or from Asia or Africa. Al-Qaeda has one ideology and they go back to the same leadership in Afghanistan or in Syria or in Iraq. That’s the question. You have tens of thousands of foreigners, that’s definitely correct. We are fighting them on the ground and we know this.
Charlie Rose: But that’s 15 or 20% of this. That’s a realistic look at how many.
President al-Assad: Nobody knows because when they are dead and they are killed, they don’t have any ID. You look at their faces, they look foreigners, but where are they coming from? How precise this estimate is difficult to tell, but definitely the majority are Al-Qaeda. This is what concerns us, not the nationality. If you have Syrian Al-Qaeda, or Pakistani Al-Qaeda or Saudi Al-Qaeda, what’s the difference? What does it matter? The most important thing is that the majority are Al-Qaeda. We never said that the majority are not Syrians, but we said that the minority is what they call “free Syrian army.” That’s what we said.
Charlie Rose: Do you believe this is becoming a religious war?
President al-Assad: It started partly as a sectarian war in some areas, but now it’s not, because when you talk about sectarian war or religious war, you should have a very clear line between the sects and religions in Syria according to the geography and the demography in Syria, something we don’t have. So, it’s not religious war, but Al-Qaeda always use religions, Islam – actually, as a pretext and as a cover and as a mantle for their war and for their terrorism and for their killing and beheading and so on.
Charlie Rose: Why has this war lasted two and a half years?
President al-Assad: Because of the external interference, because there is an external agenda supported by, or let’s say led by the United States, the West, the petrodollar countries, mainly Saudi Arabia, and before was Qatar, and Turkey. That’s why it lasted two years and a half.
Charlie Rose: But what are they doing, those countries you cited?
The West wanted to undermine the Syrian positions
President al-Assad: They have different agendas. For the West, they wanted to undermine the Syrian positions. For the petrodollar countries like Saudi Arabia, they’re thinking undermining Syria will undermine Iran on sectarian basis. For Turkey, they think that if the Muslim Brotherhood take over the rest of the region, they will be very comfortable, they will be very happy, they will make sure that their political future is guaranteed. So they have different agendas and different goals.
Charlie Rose: But at the same time, as I said, you used Hezbollah and got support from Iran, from Russia. So, what is happening here. Is this a kind of war that exists because of support from outside Syria on both sides?
President al-Assad: This is cooperation, I don’t know what you mean by support. We have cooperation with countries for decades. Why talk about this cooperation now?
Charlie Rose: Then you tell me, what are you receiving from Iran?
President al-Assad: Political support. We have agreements with many countries including Iran, including Russia, including other countries that are about different things including armament. It’s cooperation like any cooperation between any two countries, which is normal. It’s not related to the crisis. You don’t call it support, because you pay money for what you get. So, you don’t call it support, it’s cooperation, call it whatever you want, but the word “support” is not precise. From Russia for example, we have political support, which is different from the cooperation. We have cooperation for 60 years now, but now we have political support.
Charlie Rose: Well, the Russians said they have ongoing support for you, but beyond just political cooperation. I mean they have treaties that existed with Syria.
President al-Assad: Exactly.
Charlie Rose: And they provide all kinds of defensive weapons.
President al-Assad: You said treaties, and a Russian official said; we have not agreement… contracts, that we have to fulfill, and those contracts are like any country; you buy armaments, you buy anything you want.
Charlie Rose: But do you believe this has become a conflict of Sunni vs. Shia’a?
President al-Assad: No, not yet. This is in the mind of the Saudis, and this is in the minds of the Wahabists.
Charlie Rose: And in the minds of the Iranians?
President al-Assad: No, no, actually what they are doing is the opposite. They tried to open channels with the Saudi, with many other Islamic entities in the region in order to talk about Islamic society, not Sunni and Shi’ite societies.
Charlie Rose: Was there a moment for you, when you saw the Arab spring approaching Syria, that you said “I’ve seen what happened in Libya, I’ve seen what happened in Tunisia, I’ve seen what happened in Egypt, it’s not gonna happen to Bashar al-al-Assad. I will fight anybody that tries to overthrow my regime with everything I have.”
President al-Assad: No, for one reason; because the first question that I ask: do I have public support or not. That is the first question that I asked as President. If I don’t have the public support, whether there’s the so-called “Arab spring” – it’s not spring, anyway – but whether we have this or we don’t, if you don’t have public support, you have to quit, you have to leave. If you have public support, in any circumstances you have to stay. That’s your mission, you have to help the people, you have to serve the people.
Charlie Rose: When you say “public support” people point to Syria and say a minority sect, Alawites, control a majority Sunni population, and they say “dictatorship” and they do it because it because of the force of their own instruments of power. That’s what you have, not public support, for this war against other Syrians.
President al-Assad: Now, it’s been two years and a half, ok? Two years and a half and Syria is still withstanding against the United States, the West, Saudi Arabia, the richest countries in this area, including Turkey, and, taking into consideration what your question implies, that even the big part or the bigger part of the Syrian population is against me, how can I withstand till today? Am I the superhuman or Superman, which is not the case!
Charlie Rose: Or you have a powerful army.
President al-Assad: The army is made of the people; it cannot be made of robots. It’s made of people.
Charlie Rose: Surely you’re not suggesting that this army is not at your will and the will of your family.
President al-Assad: What do you mean by “will of the family?”
Charlie Rose: The will of your family. Your brother is in the military. The military has been… every observer of Syria believes that this is a country controlled by your family and controlled by the Alawites who are your allies. That’s the control.
President al-Assad: If that situation was correct – what you’re mentioning – we wouldn’t have withstood for two years and a half. We would have disintegration of the army, disintegration of the whole institution in the state; we would have disintegration of Syria if that was the case. It can’t be tolerated in Syria. I’m talking about the normal reaction of the people. If it’s not a national army, it cannot have the support, and if it doesn’t have the public support of every sect, it cannot do its job and advance recently. It cannot. The army of the family doesn’t make national war.
Charlie Rose: Some will argue that you didn’t have this support because in fact the rebels were winning before you got the support of Hezbollah and an enlarged support from the Iranians, that you were losing and then they came in and gave you support so that you were able to at least start winning and produce at least a stalemate.
President al-Assad: No, the context is wrong, because talking about winning and losing is like if you’re talking about two armies fighting on two territories, which is not the case. Those are gangs, coming from abroad, infiltrate inhabited areas, kill the people, take their houses, and shoot at the army. The army cannot do the same, and the army doesn’t exist everywhere.
Charlie Rose: But they control a large part of your country.
President al-Assad: No, they went to every part there’s no army in it, and the army went to clean and get rid of them. They don’t go to attack the army in an area where the army occupied that area and took it from it. It’s completely different, it’s not correct, or it’s not precise what you’re talking about. So, it’s completely different. What the army is doing is cleaning those areas, and the indication that the army is strong is that it’s making advancement in that area. It never went to one area and couldn’t enter to it – that’s an indication. How could that army do that if it’s a family army or a sect army? What about the rest of the country who support the government? It’s not realistic, it doesn’t happen. Otherwise, the whole country will collapse.
Charlie Rose: One small point about American involvement here, the President’s gotten significant criticism because he has not supported the rebels more. As you know, there was an argument within his own counsels from Secretary of State Clinton, from CIA Director David Petraeus, from the Defense Department, Leon Penetta, Secretary of Defense, and others, that they should have helped the rebels two years ago, and we would be in a very different place, so the President has not given enough support to the rebels in the view of many people, and there’s criticism that when he made a recent decision to give support, it has not gotten to the rebels, because they worry about the composition.
President al-Assad: If the American administration want to support Al-Qaeda – go ahead. That’s what we have to tell them, go ahead and support Al-Qaeda, but don’t talk about rebels and free Syrian army. The majority of fighters now are Al-Qaeda. If you want to support them, you are supporting Al-Qaeda, you are creating havoc in the region, and if this region is not stable, the whole world cannot be stable.
Charlie Rose: With respect, sir, most people don’t believe the majority of forces are Al-Qaeda. Yes, there is a number of people who are Al-Qaeda affiliates and who are here who subscribe to the principles of Al-Qaeda, but that’s not the majority of the forces as you know. You know that the composition differs within the regions of Syria as to the forces that are fighting against your regime.
The American officials should learn to deal with reality
President al-Assad: The American officials should learn to deal with reality. Why did the United States fail in most of its wars? Because it always based its wars on the wrong information. So, whether they believe or not, this is not reality. I have to be very clear and very honest. I’m not asking them to believe if they don’t want to believe. This is reality, I’m telling you the reality from our country. We live here, we know what is happening, and they have to listen to people here. They cannot listen only to their media or to their research centers. They don’t live here; no one lives here but us. So, this is reality. If they want to believe, that’s good, that will help them understand the region and be more successful in their policies.
Charlie Rose: Many people think this is not a sustainable position here; that this war cannot continue, because the cost for Syria is too high. Too many deaths – a hundred thousand and counting, too many refugees, too much destruction; the soul of a country at risk. If it was for the good of the country, would you step down?
President al-Assad: That depends on the relation of me staying in this position and the conflict. We cannot discuss it just to say you have to step down. Step down, why, and what is the expected result? This is first. Second, when you’re in the middle of a storm, leaving your country just because you have to leave without any reasonable reason, it means you’re quitting your country and this is treason.
Charlie Rose: You say it would be treason for you to step down right now because of your obligation to the country?
President al-Assad: Unless the public wants you to quit.
Charlie Rose: And how will you determine that?
President al-Assad: By the two years and a half withstanding. Without the public support, we cannot withstand two years and a half. Look at the other countries, look what happened in Libya, in Tunisia and in Egypt.
Charlie Rose: You worry about that, what happened to Gaddafi?
President al-Assad: No, we are worried that rebels are taking control in many countries, and look at the results now. Are you satisfied as an American? What are the results? Nothing. Very bad – nothing good.
Charlie Rose: There was a report recently that you had talked about, or someone representing you had talked about some kind of deal in which you and your family would leave the country if you were guaranteed safe passage, if you were guaranteed that there would be no criminal prosecution. You’re aware of these reports?
President al-Assad: We had this guarantee from the first day of the crisis.
Charlie Rose: Because of the way you acted?
President al-Assad: No, because of the agenda that I talked about. Some of these agendas wanted me to quit, very simply, so they said “we have all the guarantees if you want to leave, and all the money and everything you want.” Of course, you just ignore that.
Charlie Rose: So, you’ve been offered that opportunity?
President al-Assad: Yeah, but it’s not about me, again, this fight is not my fight, it’s not the fight of the government; it’s the fight of the country, of the Syrian people. That’s how we look at it. It’s not about me.
Charlie Rose: It’s not about you?
President al-Assad: It’s about every Syrian.
Charlie Rose: How will this war end? I referred to this question earlier. What’s the endgame?
President al-Assad: It’s very simple; once the Western countries stop supporting those terrorists and making pressure on their puppet countries and client states like Saudi Arabia and Turkey and others, you’ll have no problem in Syria. It will be solved easily, because those fighters, the Syrian part that you’re talking about, lost its natural incubators in the Syrian society – they don’t have incubators anymore; that’s why they have incubators abroad. They need money from abroad, they need moral support and political support from abroad. They don’t have any grassroots, any incubator. So, when you stop the smuggling, we don’t have problems.
Charlie Rose: Yeah, but at the same time, as I’ve said before, you have support from abroad. There are those who say you will not be able to survive without the support of Russia and Iran. Your government would not be able to survive.
President al-Assad: No, it’s not me, I don’t have support. Not me; all Syria. Every agreement is between every class and every sector in Syria; government, people, trade, military, culture, everything; it’s like the cooperation between your country and any other country in the world. It’s the same cooperation. It’s not about me; it’s not support for the crisis.
Charlie Rose: I mean about your government. You say that the rebels only survive because they have support from Saudi Arabia and Turkey and the United States, and Qatar perhaps, and I’m saying you only survive because you have the support of Russia and Iran and Hezbollah.
External support can never substitute internal support
President al-Assad: No, the external support can never substitute internal support, it can never, for sure. And the example that we have to look at very well is Egypt and Tunisia; they have all the support from the West and from the Gulf and from most of the countries of the world. When they don’t have support within their country, they couldn’t continue more than – how many weeks? – three weeks. So, the only reason we stand here for two years and a half is because we have internal support, public support. So, any external support, if you want to call it support, let’s use this world, is… how to say… it’s going to be additional, but it’s not the base to depend on more than the Syrian support.
Charlie Rose: You and I talked about this before; we remember Hama and your father, Hafez al-Assad. He… ruthlessly… set out to eliminate the Muslim Brotherhood. Are you simply being your father’s son here?
President al-Assad: I don’t know what you mean by ruthlessly, I’ve never heard of soft war. Have you heard about soft war? There’s no soft war. War is war. Any war is ruthless. When you fight terrorists, you fight them like any other war.
Charlie Rose: So, the lessons you have here are the lessons you learned from your father and what he did in Hama, which, it is said, influenced you greatly in terms of your understanding of what you have to do.
President al-Assad: The question: what would you do as an American if the terrorists are invading your country from different areas and started killing tens of thousands of Americans?
Charlie Rose: You refer to them as terrorists, but in fact it is a popular revolution, people believe, against you, that was part of the Arab spring that influenced some of the other countries.
President al-Assad: Revolution should be Syrian, cannot be revolution imported from abroad.
Charlie Rose: It didn’t start from abroad; it started here.
President al-Assad: These people that started here, they support the government now against those rebels, that’s what you don’t know. What you don’t know as an American you don’t know as a reporter. That’s why talking about what happened at the very beginning is completely different from what is happening now – it’s not the same. There’s very high dynamic, things are changing on daily basis. It’s a completely different image. Those people who wanted revolution, they are cooperating with us.
Charlie Rose: I’m asking you again, is it in fact you’re being your father’s son and you believe that the only way to drive out people is to eliminate them the same way your father did?
President al-Assad: In being independent? Yes. In fighting terrorists? Yes. In defending the Syrian people and the country? Yes.
Charlie Rose: When I first interviewed you, there was talk of Bashar al-al-Assad… he’s the hope, he’s the reform. That’s not what they’re saying anymore.
President al-Assad: Who?
Charlie Rose: People who write about you, people who talk about you, people who analyze Syria and your regime.
President al-Assad: Exactly, the hope for an American is different from the hope of a Syrian. For me, I should be the hope of the Syrian, not any other one, not American, neither French, nor anyone in the world. I’m President to help the Syrian people. So, this question should start from the hope of the Syrian people, and if there is any change regarding that hope, we should ask the Syrian people, not anyone else in the world.
Charlie Rose: But now they say – their words – a butcher. Comparisons to the worst dictators that ever walked on the face of the Earth, comparing you to them. Using weapons that go beyond warfare. Everything they could say bad about a dictator, they’re now saying about you.
President al-Assad: First of all, when you have a doctor who cut the leg to prevent the patient from the gangrene if you have to, we don’t call butcher; you call him a doctor, and thank you for saving the lives. When you have terrorism, you have a war. When you have a war, you always have innocent lives that could be the victim of any war, so, we don’t have to discuss what the image in the west before discussing the image in Syria. That’s the question.
Charlie Rose: It’s not just the West. I mean it’s the East, and the Middle East, and, I mean, you know, the eyes of the world have been on Syria. We have seen atrocities on both sides, but on your side as well. They have seen brutality by a dictator that they say put you in a category with the worst.
President al-Assad: So we have to allow the terrorists to come and kill the Syrians and destroy the country much, much more. This is where you can be a good President? That’s what you imply.
Charlie Rose: But you can’t allow the idea that there’s opposition to your government from within Syria. That is not possible for you to imagine.
President al-Assad: To have opposition? We have it, and you can go and meet with them. We have some of them within the government, we have some of them outside the government. They are opposition. We have it.
Charlie Rose: But those are the people who have been fighting against you.
President al-Assad: Opposition is different from terrorism. Opposition is a political movement. Opposition doesn’t mean to take arms and kill people and destroy everything. Do you call the people in Los Angeles in the nineties – do you call them rebels or opposition? What did the British call the rebels less than two years ago in London? Did they call them opposition or rebels? Why should we call them opposition? They are rebels. They are not rebels even, they are beheading. This opposition, opposing country or government, by beheading? By barbecuing heads? By eating the hearts of your victim? Is that opposition? What do you call the people who attacked the two towers on the 11th of September? Opposition? Even if they’re not Americans, I know this, but some of them I think have nationality – I think one of them has American nationality. Do you call him opposition or terrorist? Why should you use a term in the Untied States and England and maybe other countries and use another term in Syria? This is a double standard that we don’t accept.
Charlie Rose: I once asked you what you fear the most and you said the end of Syria as a secular state. Is that end already here?
President al-Assad: According to what we’ve been seeing recently in the area where the terrorists control, where they ban people from going to schools, ban young men from shaving their beards, and women have to be covered from head to toe, and let’s say in brief they live the Taliban style in Afghanistan, completely the same style. With the time, yes we can be worried, because the secular state should reflect secular society, and this secular society, with the time, if you don’t get rid of those terrorists and these extremists and the Wahabi style, of course it will influence at least the new and the coming generations. So, we don’t say that we don’t have it, we’re still secular in Syria, but with the time, this secularism will be eroded.
Charlie Rose: Mr. President, thank you for allowing us to have this conversation about Syria and the war that is within as well as the future of the country. Thank you.
President al-Assad: Thank you for coming to Syria.
ما موقف سورية من استخدام السلاح الكيماوي؟ ولماذا لم توقع على اتفاقية حظر هذه الأسلحة حتى الآن؟
ماذا لو تم العدوان على سورية؟ هل هناك تنسيق سوري مع الحلفاء؟؟ وما شكله؟
تابعوا إجابات الرئيس الأسد على هذه المحاور وغيرها في الجزء الأول من حواره مع تشارلي روز على قناة CBS الأمريكية – 8 أيلول 2013.
#Putin laughs in the face of a reporter about the #anti-missile_system against #Russia.
In this video, the reporter talks about missile defense, and the reaction of Putin has to be seen.
~ Interviewer: “#NATO claims that the missile shield was not built against you but against #Iran”.
~ Putin: “You really makes me laugh. God bless you, because it’s almost time to finish the day, indeed it is already time to go to sleep. At least I get home in good humor”.
Freed after being kidnapped in Syria, Belgian teacher and writer, Pierre Piccinin da Prata, has said that the Syrian government did not use chemical weapons.
Belgian Journalist Pierre Piccinin, freed after being kidnapped by terrorists in Syria: “It is not the Al-Assad government who has used the gas”
Freed after being kidnapped in Syria, Belgian teacher and writer, Pierre Piccinin da Prata, has said that the Syrian government did not use chemical weapons.
~
ENG
~
FRA
~
“This is my moral duty to tell about this,” he said in an interview with the RTL-TV channel.
“This is not Assad’s government who used sarin gas or any other combat gas in the Damascus area. We are sure about this after we accidently heard a conversation between rebels”.
60,00 Syrian/Palestinian refugees are being held hostage by FSA/Al Qaeda terrorists and are now into their 54th day without food or medicine.
These people are terrified that they will be killed by a chemical attack, ordered by Obama to his terrorist foot soldiers, to blame on Assad. Otherwise why is this story suppressed in the western media.
They are keeping it quiet so it can be used as Obama’s trump card.
Footage of #chemical_attack in Syria is fraud
#SIRIA
An image grab taken from a video uploaded on YouTube by the Arbeen unified press office on August 21, 2013 shows a man comforting a Syrian girl in shock as she screams in Arabic “I am alive” following an attack in which Syrian opposition claim the regime used chemical weapons in eastern Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus (AFP Photo)An image grab taken from a video uploaded on YouTube by the Arbeen unified press office on August 21, 2013 shows a man comforting a Syrian girl in shock as she screams in Arabic “I am alive” following an attack in which Syrian opposition claim the regime used chemical weapons in eastern #Ghouta, on the outskirts of Damascus (AFP Photo)
There is proof the footage of the alleged chemical attack in Syria was fabricated, Mother Agnes Mariam el-Salib, mother superior of St. James Monastery in Qara, Syria, told RT. She says she is about to submit her findings to the UN.
Mother Agnes, a catholic nun, who has been living in Syria for 20 years and has been reporting actively on what has been going on in the war-ravaged country, says she carefully studied the video featuring allegedly victims of the chemical weapons attack in the Syrian village of Guta in August and now questions its authenticity.
In her interview with RT, Mother Agnes doubts so much footage could have been taken in so little time, and asks where parents of the supposedly dead children are. She promises to send her report to the UN.
The nun is indignant with the world media for apparently turning a blind eye to the Latakia massacre by rebel extremists, which left 500 civilians including women and children dead.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry has called on the international community to pay attention to revelations made by Mother Agnes Mariam el-Salib.
RT: The United States has used internet photos and video footage of the supposed chemical weapons attack in Eastern Guta to build a case against the Syrian government. Have you been able to look at these files? What do you have to say about them?
Mother Agnes: I have carefully studied the footage, and I will present a written analysis on it a bit later. I maintain that the whole affair was a frame-up. It had been staged and prepared in advance with the goal of framing the Syrian government as the perpetrator.
The key evidence is that Reuters made these files public at 6.05 in the morning. The chemical attack is said to have been launched between 3 and 5 o’clock in the morning in Guta. How is it even possible to collect a dozen different pieces of footage, get more than 200 kids and 300 young people together in one place, give them first aid and interview them on camera, and all that in less than three hours? Is that realistic at all? As someone who works in the news industry, you know how long all of it would take.
The bodies of children and teenagers we see in that footage – who were they? What happened to them? Were they killed for real? And how could that happen ahead of the gas attack? Or, if they were not killed, where did they come from? Where are their parents? How come we don’t see any female bodies among all those supposedly dead children?
I am not saying that no chemical agent was used in the area – it certainly was. But I insist that the footage that is now being peddled as evidence had been fabricated in advance. I have studied it meticulously, and I will submit my report to the UN Human Rights Commission based in Geneva.
RT: Recently you’ve visited Latakia and the adjacent areas, you’ve talked to the eyewitnesses to the massacre of civilians carried out in Latakia by Jabhat al-Nusra. What can you tell us about it?
MA: What I want to ask first of all is how the international community can ignore the brutal killing spree in Latakia on Laylat al-Qadr early in the morning of August 5, an attack that affected more than 500 people, including children, women and the elderly. They were all slaughtered. The atrocities committed exceed any scale. But there was close to nothing about it in the international mass media. There was only one small article in “The Independent”, I believe.
We sent our delegation to these villages, and our people had a look at the situation on-site, talked to the locals, and most importantly – talked to the survivors of the massacre.
I don’t understand why the Western media apply double standards in this case – they talk about mass murder that the use of chemical weapons resulted in non-stop, but they keep quiet about the Latakia massacre.
RT: Do you know anything about the fate of hostages captured in Latakia?
A handout picture released by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) on August 20, 2013 shows soldiers loyal to the regime forces wrapping a decomposed body that was allegedly discovered in a mass grave in northern Latakia, a province on the Mediterranean coast (AFP Photo)A handout picture released by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) on August 20, 2013 shows soldiers loyal to the regime forces wrapping a decomposed body that was allegedly discovered in a mass grave in northern Latakia, a province on the Mediterranean coast (AFP Photo)
MA: In the village of Estreba they massacred all the residents and burnt down their houses. In the village of al-Khratta almost all the 37 locals were killed. Only ten people were able to escape.
A total of twelve Alawite villages were subjected to this horrendous attack. That was a true slaughterhouse. People were mutilated and beheaded. There is even a video that shows a girl being dismembered alive – alive! – by a frame saw. The final death toll exceeded 400, with 150 to 200 people taken hostage. Later some of the hostages were killed, their deaths filmed.
At the moment we are looking for the hostages and negotiating their release with the militants, but so far we haven’t managed to achieve that.
RT: We often hear reports of Christians being persecuted by the militants. Just the day before yesterday there was an attack in the village of Maaloula, where the majority of population is Christian. Are Christians in Syria facing grave danger?
MA: Everyone in Syria is facing grave danger. There was a case of Muslim religious leaders being kidnapped and beheaded. They were humiliated and tortured. Ismailis, the druze, Christians – people from all parts of Syrian society – are being mass murdered. I would like to say that if these butchers didn’t have international support, no one would have dared to cross the line. But today, unfortunately, the violation of human rights and genocide in Syria is covered up on the international level. I demand the international community stops assessing the situation in Syria in accordance with the interests of a certain group of great powers. The Syrian people are being killed. They fall victim to contractors, who are provided with weapons and sent to Syria to kill as many people as possible. The truth is, everywhere in Syria people are being kidnapped, tortured, raped and robbed. These crimes remain unpunished, because the key powers chose international terrorism as a way to destroy sovereign states. They’ve done it to other countries. And they will just keep doing it if the international community doesn’t say “Enough!”
RT: You’ve managed to get hold of some sensitive information. Does this make you fear for your life as someone who keeps documents that may compromise the militants? Has anyone threatened you?
MA: You are right. I do get threatened. They are trying to discredit me. I know there is a book coming out soon in France that labels me as a criminal who kills people. But any believer should first and foremost trust their conscience, their belief in God, and that will help them save innocent lives. I don’t care much about my own life. My life is no more precious than that of any Syrian child, whose body could be used as evidence to justify wrongdoing. This is the biggest crime ever perpetrated in history.
RT: What should the Syrians do to stop the tragedy they are going through?
AFP PhotoAFP Photo
MA: The Syrians themselves can do nothing to stop it. They can only rely on the international community, friendly nations, world powers, such as Russia, China, and India. With a lot of enthusiasm we did welcome the news that the British parliament voted against the participation of their country in the possible war against Syria. There is a terrorist war going on against Syria right now. The international community and Syria’s friends should join forces and say: Enough! And they need to use every opportunity to do that. Otherwise this threat Syria is facing now will turn into a threat to universal peace.
RT: What should the Vatican and other hubs of Christianity do to put an end to this tragedy?
MA: The Pope says he has no planes, no bombs, and no armed forces. Instead, he has the power of the truth, and the truth he has told. There are messages coming from everywhere in the world urging against a military intervention in Syria. Those who want to hear them will. The Pope, the patriarchs, Nobel Prize winners, including women, keep saying the same in unison: Let’s stop fighting. No conflict can be solved by military means. Stop adding fuel to the flame!
All the prominent public figures in the world have risen to speak against the war. Everyone has spoken their mind, but the US prefers to turn a deaf ear. The world public opinion has turned against the US. It’s the first time in history that America is alone. They are claiming that they are backed by ten countries. But I insist they aren’t, because the people of these countries disagree with their governments. Even the American people disagree with their government.
RT: Do you believe that this tragedy will end and Syria will remain a homeland for all Syrians, regardless of their ethnical or religious identity?
MA: I’m not Syrian myself, but I’ve been living in Syria for 20 years. I’d like to remind everyone that Damascus is the most ancient capital in the world. I would like to remind everyone that Syria is the cradle of civilization. I would like to remind everyone that this is the holy land that gave birth to the main world religions. What is happening in Syria should serve as a lesson for everyone. I mean that in existential rather than political sense. I am convinced that with God’s help the Syrian people will be able to remain strong, heal their wounds, reconcile and chase out all the foreign mercenaries and terrorists. I believe there will be peace in #Syria. But for that we need help from the international community.
Cine se poarta ca o sluga,va fi tratat ca atare!Speram ca nu este si cazul #Romaniei!
Iugoslavia 1999- peste 5000 de morţi dintre care 400 copii.Natiunea a fost distrusa,forte sectare si seditioniste continua ceea ce armata regulara a inceput.
Afganistan 2001 – peste 50 000 morţi, aproape 1 milion de refugiaţi. Războiul încă continuă prin intermediul Al Qaeda. SUA “a declarat un război oficial terorismului”, în care un loc aparte îl are gruparea teroristă Al-Qaeda. Dar se stie că la baza aceste organizaţiei stă aşa numitul Osamma Bin Laden o ,,creatură” a Washingtonului ce apare în perioada Războiului Rece şi anume după anul 1979 (anul invaziei Afganistanului de către sovetici). Tot Bin Laden a fost şi agent CIA, folosit de către guvernul american în lupta cu fosta URSS. Viitoarea organizaţie teroristă Al-Qaeda îl va avea drept conducător şi militant principal pe Bin Laden. Deci în perioada rece fostul terorist Nr 1 a fost parte componentă a marelui joc american. După căderea Uniunii Sovetice, SUA asocierea cu Al Qaeda, gruparea lui Osamma Bin Laden a fost ascunsa opiniei publice,continuand sa serveasca din subteranele geopoliticii si implicit ,intereselor americane.
Iraq 2003- mai mult de 1 milion iraqieni ucişi. Ca şi în Siria, pretextul a fost că regimul lui Saddam Hussein deţinea arme biologice. După 10 ani de căutări americanii aşa şi nu au mai găsit presupusele arme, în schimb l-au spanzurat în public pe preşedintele Iraqului iar după unele informaţii secrete armata americană însăşi a folosit substanţe interzise (fosforul alb).Războiul continuă prin intermediul fortelor proxy:Al Qaeda.
Siria-Situaţia tensionată de acolo este actualmente în vizorul întregii opinii internaţionale.
Coaliţia dintre SUA şi gruparea teroristă Al-Qaeda : “opoziţia siriană” este înarmată şi susţinută de către Occident şi Washington si formată din rebeli islamişti , insurgenţii grupării Al-Qaeda, deci reiese că SUA la scenă deschisă finanţează terorismul şi gruparea teroristă care după spusele guvernului american este răspunzătoare de actele teroriste din 11 septembrie 2011 de la World Trade Center.
Devenit un laitmotiv ,ori de cîte ori americanii intervin militar într-o ţară a lumii, invocă „interesul naţional al SUA”, „instaurarea democraţiei”, „apărarea valorilor democratice” … „instaurarea democraţiei” şi „apărarea valorilor democratice” sunt ajutate de surse proxy ,paramilitare ,sponsorizate ,chiar infiintate de catre americani şi ulterior, prin invazia unor ţări cu tradiţii, culturi şi religii diametral opuse celor occidentale, aşa cum sunt Egiptul, Libia, Irak, si actualmente Siria.Astfel, una dintre marile puteri ale lumii și cea mai mare organizație teroristă își vor coordona eforturile pentru un interes comun. Seful Frontului Jabhat al Nusra, ramura Al Qaeda in Siria, Abou Mohamad al-Joulani, a facut un anunt comun cu liderul al-Qaeda, Sheik Ayman al-Zawahri legat de participarea alaturi de SUA, la indepartarea de la putere a presedintelui sirian Bashar al Assad. Încă o dovadă a apropierii reţelei Al-Qaeda de guvernul american sunt declaraţiile fratelui liderului Al-Qaeda, Mohamed al-Zawahiri care propune un armistiţiu reciproc dintre Occident şi islamişti.
Conjuctura actuală din Siria reaminteşte scenariul din El Salvador. Acolo s-a mers pe cale înlocuirii opoziţiei cu grupările teroriste .Pentru Siria, SUA insistă şi cere partenerilor implicare militară cat mai grabnică,dar Anglia a refuzat deja, Germania este plină campanie electorală si nu se prea găbesc să-şi trimită soldaţii la moarte sigură,iar Franta a anuntat ca va astepta rezultatele investigatiilor efectuate de membrii ONU.
Doar premierul Erdogan s-a grabit sa sustina aceasta invazie,in front comun,asa cum era de asteptat,cu reprezentatii entitatii sioniste,dar acest lucru era de asteptat,tinand cont de trecutul premierului turc si stransele relatii ale acestuia cu AlQaeda si de prezenta sustinere pe care acesta o acorda gruparilor inarmate,facilitandu-le transportul de arme,inclusiv chimice si infiltrarea de insurgenti pe teritoriul sirian.
Dar situatia este mai îngrijorătoare decât atât,datorita fenomenelor de radicalizare. Wahhabismul, un curent islamic fundamentalist care promovează jihadul şi intoleranţa, devine tot mai popular în comunităţile tolerate sau beneficiind de statut de “refugiati” din tarile nou devenite membre ale UE si/sau NATO, iar maniera wahhabiţilor de a se impune prin ameninţări şi forţă pare impozantă şi folosirea de catre acestia a finantarilor cu petrodolarii monarhiilor Golfului devine atractivă pentru o parte din tineri. Ideologia wahhabiţilor este atractivă şi pentru reprezentanţii păturilor social vulnerabile, indiferent de etnia acestora. Pericolul care survine din partea acestui curent extremist este conştientizat de autorităţi însă procesele de radicalizare nu sunt stopate în mod eficient,fapt datorat si anumitor ordonante emise de catre marile puteri occidentale,pentru protejarea membrilor asa zisei “opozitii” din exil-centrul de emitere si coordonare al extremistilor infiltrati in Siria,ordonante ce incalca dreptul independentei statelor membre,fenomen ce ia amploare si in Romania,unde cetatenii nativi ai tarii sunt expusi amenintarilor si multiplelor actiuni de intimidare a libertatii de expresie si opinie personala si unde anumite trusturi de presa functioneaza ca centru de informare a acestor sustinatori ai terorismului international.
Conform acestui drept garantat de constitutia Romaniei,autorul acestui articol isi sustine optiunea de a se opune interventiei militare in Siria si va roaga sa urmariti aceste imagini,ce au determinat consolidarea acestei optiuni:
COPII CE URMAU CURSURILE SCOLARE SUNT ACUM FOLOSITI CA MAINI CRIMINALE CE DECAPITEAZA OAMENI
Libieni -luptatori pentru “democratie”,alaturi de AlQaeda in Siria!!
SIONISTI -ADEVARATUL SUPORT AL ASA NUMITILOR “REBELI”
FURT,DISTRUGERE DE PROPRIETATI PUBICE SAU PRIVATE SI A INFRASTRUCTURII
CRIME COMISE DE TERORISTI PENTRU A ACUZA ARMATA SIRIANA
DEZUMANIZARE
ATACURI INDREPTATE IMPOTRIVA NEVINOVATILOR
În cadrul summitului G20 de la Sankt Petersburg, preşedintele Vladimir Putin a declarat că ţara sa ar putea interveni în ajutorul Siriei în cazul unei agresiuni militare străine.
Privitor la poziţia americană faţă de Siria, Putin a declarat: “În timpul dezbaterilor din cadrul Congresului american privind utilizarea forţei în Siria, „autorităţile SUA mint atunci cînd declară că atacurile americane nu vor conduce la consolidarea poziţiilor Al-Qaeda în această ţară şi cînd afirmă, de asemenea, că în Siria nici nu există membri Al-Qaeda” Preşedintele rus a insistat asupra faptului că Al-Qaeda este una dintre principalele organizaţii care luptă de partea Opoziţiei siriene. „Cea mai importantă formaţiune de luptă este aşa-zisa Al-Nusra, o unitate a Al-Qaeda, iar americanii ştiu acest lucru”, a punctat Putin.
Într-un final cele mai mari motivaţii le au doar SUA si protejatul sau stat sionist şi gruparea teroristă Al-Qaeda. Ironia sorţii sau geopolitica agresiva la fel ca si cazul Republicii Dominicane, Chile, Nicaragua, Panama, Vietnam, Libia, Irak, Egipt,Sudan,Somalia,Afganistan…etc,unde americanii au dat tonul “revoltelor” si ulterior, războaielor?
Am înteles,poate,scuza folosită de către presa din România în urmă cu doi ani,referitor la ceea ce se întîmpla în Siria, având în vedere negura ţesută atent de marile corporaţii media. Cu toate acestea ,până acum ar trebui să fie evident pentru toți aparent activiștii anti-război, dar şi pentru adevăraţii jurnalişti războiul imperialist ,dus prin intermediul forţelor proxy ,sponsorizat împotriva guvernului sirian şi a Domnului Presedinte Dr. Bashar al-Assad, un război alimentat de puteri străine care au externalizat atacul asupra națiunii siriene folosind cele mai rele elemente din regiune, și anume auto-intitulatele “Takfiris” și “Salafiţii”,sub numele de Nusra ,o ramura Al Qaeda, a cărei retorică și viziune de coșmar pentru Siria este intoleranţa,distrugerea mozaicului cultural şi religios armonios .
.
FOTO: MERCENARI LIBIENI,CECENI,SUDANEZI SI MAROCANI LA BAZA AERIANA MENNAGH-ALEP
Iată unele informații importante cu privire la istoria Siriei și a naturii acestui conflict.
Cum a început în Daraa
Protestele inițiale 17-18 martie 2011 ,în Daraa au dus la moartea a patru protestatari și șapte ofițeri de poliție, precum și incendierea sediului partidului Baas și un tribunal , dovadă că au fost elemente armate în rândurile opoziției de la bun început. Este clar că elementele armate au folosit ca scuza proteste pașnice pentru a lansa atacuri , ce apoi au necesitat un răspuns ,destul de previzibil, din partea forțelor de ordine ale statului şi în cele din urmă au ajutat propaganda distorsionată din mass-media. Acest modus operandi nu este nou şi suntem siguri că puteţi recunoaşte elementele scenariului.Au urmat slogane precum”guvernul îi omoara pe cei ce vor să abandoneze sistemul”,slogane ce au fost folosite ca pretext pentru masacrarea a mii de forţe de ordine sau militare .
Homs:poliţişti împuşcaţi de către pacifişti:forţele de ordine nu erau dotate cu muniţie ,pentru evitarea oricăror incidente
Midan,maşină capcană-explozia a provocat zeci de morţi în rândul civililor
MANIPULAREA NUMĂRULUI VICTIMELOR prin:
Tendința combatanților Nusra este de a se referi la civilii pe care i-au masacrat sub numele “Shabiha”,un termen peiorativ folosit pe scară largă de către insurgenţi pentru oricine li se opune şi nu acceptă instaurarea Shariei,denumind civilii masacraţi :”miliție pro-guvern” sau ,aşa cum a fost demonstrat de către o multitudine de jurnalişti străini,prezenţi în Siria,masacrarea civililor ,înainte de întâlnirile ONU,precum ¤Karm el Zeitoun¤sau¤Hatla¤ pe care îi filmează dupa ce îi măcelăresc şi îi prezintă ca :”ucisi de către sistem” ,iar atunci când cei într-adevăr vinovaţi de aceste crime au fost capturaţi şi şi-au recunoscut faptele,nici una din aşa zisele corporaţii media sau asociaţie umanitară nu binevoiesc să specifice aceasta.
FOTO_SUDANEZ “LUPTĂTOR PENTRU LIBERTATEA ŞI DEMOCRAŢIA SIRIENILOR”
În al doilea rând, insurgenţii morţi sunt adesea menționaţi ca civili, dar naţionalitatea ,precum şi cauza morții lor sau faptul că folosesc non-combatanţi pe post de scut uman:inclusiv femei,bătrâni şi copii ,este ascunsă și sunt descrişi în rapoarte părtinitoare ca :civili nevinovați uciși de forțele de securitate şi nu ţin cont de conotația de civil ,adică: “non-combatant,” ,o victimă a conflictului, care nu lua parte activ . De fapt, această conotație este cinic exploatată în furnizarea de date statistice oamenilor, în scopul de a ajuta scenariul “sacrificarea fără discriminare a propriului popor”,o minciună ,pe care, deşi evidentă,mulţi o perpetuează intenţionat. Mai mult, ura sectară și violența îndreptată împotriva minoritătilor religioase , așa cum se vede în zeci de clipuri video online, explică de ce, din totalul victimelor ,majoritatea sunt enumerate în acest cadru.În ultimele zile,am asistat la repetarea acestor crime în zona Latakya,unde zeci de copii au fost efectiv măcelăriţi şi unde femei şi copii sunt încă prizonierii teroriştilor sau în zonele locuite de comunităţile kurde ce au refuzat să se alature aşa zisei noi forţe islamiste:Nusra
FOTO:FEMEI ŞI COPII RAPIŢI DIN LATAKIA DE CARE GRUPĂRILE AL QAEDA
COPIL UCIS PENTRU O CEASCA DE CAFEA IN ALEP
FOTO:PURIFICARE ETNICA:INGERI KURZI EXECUTATI
FOTO:COPIL VIOLAT SI UCIS APOI DE ARMATA LIBERA A CECENILOR DIN SIRIA
CIVILI UCISI DE AL NUSRA::VÂRSTA NU CONTEAZĂ :COPII SAU VÂRSTNICI
FOTO:SARI AL SAOUD_:UCIS LA COMANDĂ PENTRU UN SHOW AL JAZEERA
FOTO”COPII KURZI UCIŞI PE CRITERII ETNICE ÎN TAL ABYAD DE AL QAEDA”
FOTO”COPII RĂNITI DE BOMBELE AL QAEDA IN SIRIA”
Concluzia:insurgenţii sunt responsabili pentru uciderea în masă ,mai mult decât orice altă parte în acest conflict şi dacă armata siriană nu ar fi încercat în permanenţă să evacueze civilii şi asigurarea în condiții de siguranță a părăsirii locurilor de conflict orașele ar fi fost acum efectiv inexistente,chiar in cazul folosirii pietrelor pe post de muniţie! Cei ce întotdeauna s-au opus vehement la salvarea de vieți civile sunt “rebelii” în sine, pentru care evacuarea civililor Înseamnă pierderea scutului uman,pierderea ţintelor decapitărilor înspăimântătoare, lauda pe internet despre atrocitățile lor, și sursa pentru încurajarea altor falşi “jihadişti” să li se alăture în masacre sectare şi inducerea în eroare a publicului conștient.
A cui “revoluție” este?
Finanțarea unui flux constant de luptători străini, arme și bani, mimând apoi indignarea morală a acestor state care au intervenit direct cu propriile lor soldați constituie metoda ipocrită a unor state precum Arabia Saudită, Qatar și alte state din Golf pentru a manipularea” revoluției siriene”, fiind flagrant evident faptul că teroriştii depind de binefăcătorii lor străini pentru a susține insurgența lor. Până în prezent, Qatar a cheltuit miliarde dolari pentru finanțarea rebeliunii și acum se află într-o competiție acerbă cu Arabia Saudită pentru influență în rândul miliţiilor numite Armata Liberă. Ajutorul Qatarului a inclus, oferta de 50.000 de dolari pentru dezertori și plata salariilor insurgenţilor ceea ce îi face astfel angajații de facto a familiei regale din Qatar.
Influența Frăției Musulmane asupra insurgenților nu poate fi subliniată îndeajuns şi nu doar prin fondurile pe care le primește de la Qatar. Idris, de asemenea, a recunoscut că 50 la sută dintre rebeli sunt islamiști, care este probabil o subestimare , deoarece încercările anterioare de a marginaliza Al-Qaeda prin afiliata Jabhat al-Nusra au fost demolate cu o declarație despre 29 de grupări(liwa) ale Armatei libere, care au declarat “noi suntem toate Al-Nusra! “, demonstrând astfel popularitatea extremiștilor și ideologia lor , nicidecum o forță de luptă seculară .
Turcia a găzduit până la zece mii de insurgenţi înca din octombrie 2011, și din primele zile au folosit provincia Hatay ca bază de operațiuni pentru luptători și arme care intră Siria. Mai recent, a fost raportat ca între aprilie 2012 și luna martie a acestui an, 70 de avioane cargo încărcate cu arme au fost expediate de Qatar în Turcia pentru a fi distribuite în rândul grupurilor teroriste. Între timp, Israelul a făcut clar faptul că răsturnarea guvernului sirian ar servi intereselor lor, fostul ministru al Apărării Ehud Barak, și un comandant din Ministerului Apărării Amos Gilad au spus că răsturnarea guvernului sirian ar izola Iranul și strategic ar beneficia Israelul. În acest scop, Israelul a atacat direct Siria de două ori, și a permis rebelilor să opereze din Jolanul ocupat.
Deși Qatar și Arabia Saudită au finanțat insurgenții, factorii de decizie din SUA au plănuit acest război proxy cu cel puțin un deceniu înainte.
În 2002 Siria a fost inclusă în “Axa Răului”, al doilea nivel sau “Dincolo de Axa Raului”, așa cum a fost descrisă de atunci subsecretarul de stat John Bolton. În 2004, Statele Unite au impus sancțiuni asupra Siriei pentru a restricționa exporturile americane, urmate de sancțiuni financiare în anul 2006. De asemenea, n generalul Wesley Clark, în perioada imediat următoare atacurilor 9/11, spunea că au existat planuri la cel mai înalt nivel de la Washington, care implicau răsturnarea guvernelor a o serie de țări, inclusiv Siria. În afară de aceasta, faptul că Uniunea Europeană a ridicat embargoul asupra petrolului privind Siria, permițând astfel rebelilor sa vânda petrol sirian din zonele pe care le controleaza, efectiv indică finanțarea rebelilor prin furtul de resurse naturale din Siria dar şi politica agresivă a Uniunii ,politică a căror victime directe sunt cetaţenii sirieni .De aceea vă rugăm ,pledaţi pentru ridicarea acestor sancţiuni!
Războiul proxy împotriva Siriei urmează o politică consecventă a Statelelor Unite ale Americii de a domina energia bogată a Orientului Mijlociu, prin capacitatea SUA de a aplica presiuni asupra statelor producătoare de petrol să-l vândă în dolari SUA sprijinind astfel moneda lor, de care,în mare măsură, depinde de capacitatea lor pentru a proiecta puterea militară, după cum reiese din concentrația mare de baze militare în regiune.Guverne, cum ar fi Iranul și Siria, care refuză să se alinieze modelelor americane şi de a permite instalarea de baze militare americane pe teritoriul lor, sunt amenințate, sancționate, destabilizate, sau chiar invadate. Rasturnarea guvernului sirian, adesea menționat ca cel mai apropiat aliat al Iranului, pare a fi motivația principală pentru Statele Unite, a căror aliați Arabia Saudită și Qatar au, de asemenea, propriile lor rațiuni competitive pentru care doresc să slăbească Iranul şi să ajute noua lor alianţă servilă, cu Israelul .
Deși Siria nu este un producator major de petrol, o explicație în special, merită o analiză atentă :descoperirea în 2007 a celor mai mari rezerve din lume de gaze naturale din Golful Persic, care au fost ulterior împărțite între Iran și Qatar,precum şi in zona coastei mediteraneene a Sirieiîn 2010. Iranul a lansat apoi proiectul gazoductului PARS, care a implicat construirea unei conducte de la Golful Persic, prin Irak, și se încheie pe coasta mediteraneană a Siriei. Până în prezent, conducta a ajuns la marginea Damascului și este de așteptat să fie finalizată până anul viitor. Între timp, în ultimii ani, UE a fost nerăbdătoare să-și diversifice sursele de energie, și în acest scop a început proiectul conductei Nambucco în 2009, surse de gaze naturale de la Marea Caspică prin Caucaz, Turcia și Balcani reducând astfel dependența UE de gazul rusesc. Cu toate acestea, proiectul Nambucco a căzut , în timp ce conducta rivala South Stream,-rusă, care traversează Marea Neagră pe ruta spre Europa a fost un succes. După ce ambele proiecte vor fi pe deplin operaționale, va însemna că în UE, care în prezent primește un sfert din cantitatea de gaz natural din Rusia, va depinde , în viitorul apropiat de Iran și Rusia, la pana la 50 la suta din rezervele sale de gaze naturale. Ca rezultat Qatarul, cu partea sa de gaze naturale din Golful Persic, pierde însăși competiția pentru furnizarea direct către UE. Aceasta constituie o motivație majoră care explică interesul specific al Qatarului în răsturnarea guvernului sirian ,ca un mijloc de sabotarea conductei PARS. Firește, perspectiva de dependență a UE de gazul iranian consolidează rolul Iranului ca o putere regională – un motiv pentru ostilitatea Israelului faţă de Siria.
Mitul “REBELI democratici”
NU ARMAŢI ACESTE MILIŢII!!!!!!!!!!!EI SUNT ADEVĂRATE MAŞINI DE UCIS!
Ar trebui să fie clar pentru toți cititorii informaţi că milițiile islamiste extremiste domină și controlează insurgența armată, dar asistăm la inventarea de prieteni imaginari ai ţărilor occidentale: “rebelii democratici” și “adversarii democratici”,ce işi închipuie,de pe meleaguri vestice că reprezintă masele siriene. Desigur, propagarea acestei afirmații nefondate necesită ignorarea tuturor dovezilor ce indică faptul că majoritatea sirienilor susțin de fapt guvernul lor şi pe preşedintele Bashar al Assad. Într-adevăr, în noiembrie 2012, revista Time a subliniat lipsa de popularitate a rebelilor în Siria şi în cel mai mare oras :Alep citând un rebel _comandant Abu Saadek (sa nom de guerre), spunând că” marea majoritate a cetăţenilor Alepului sunt loiali lui Bashar …”. Mai recent, potrivit datelor publicate în luna mai de NATO, care, de asemenea, nu poate fi acuzat de favorizarea guvernului de la Damasc, 70 la suta dintre sirieni îl susţin pe președintele Assad, în timp ce doar 10 la suta sprijină rebelii, restul fiind indeciși..Poporul sirian are nemulțumiri legitime împotriva guvernului lor, însă a omite realitateaevidentă că președintele Bashar al-Assad se bucură de sprijin popular, este completnecinstit.
Există o obsesie în lumea occidentală legată de fluxul de arme şi care susține că achiziționarea de arme de către guvernul sirian este din punct de vedere moral echivalentă cu furnizarea de arme pentru terorişti dar asistăm doar la condamnarea achiziționării de arme de către guvernul sirian, sprijinind în același timp achiziționarea acestora de către rebeli sau blamarea sprijinului acordat de Rusia, Iran, China și Hezbollah unui stat de drept ( membru al axei rezistenţei împotriva ocupaţiei sioniste) dar nu şi rolul Arabiei Saudite, a Qatarului și altor state din Golf pentru a manipula insurgenţa, prin promovarea forțelor islamiste reacționare în rândurile sale,deşi să știe că în conformitate cu dreptul internațional, fluxul de arme ce alimentează insurgența pe teritoriul sirian e ilegal, în timp ce guvernul sirian are tot dreptul de a achiziționa arme străine.Această poziție stabilește un precedent periculos în ceea ce privește războaiele imperialiste proxy , deoarece cele mai multe dintre aceste națiuni,cum ar fi Siria, importa aproape toate echipamentele lor militare. Acest lucru înseamnă că acestor ţări le este negată posibilitatea de apărare a teritoriului şi afluxul de arme străine pentru a alimenta o insurgență vor fi tratate din punct de vedere moral pe picior de egalitate cu armamentul importat de armata națiunii.
Toate dovezile reale sugerează că majoritatea victimelor sunt combatanți înarmați, că forțele guvernamentale desfășoară acest război cu prudență și că rebelii sunt responsabili pentru cele mai grave atrocități. Cei ce vor să perpetueze mitul “rebeli democratici” o fac,cel mai probabil ,pentru a distrage atenția de la criminalii adevăraţi,monştri cu chip uman creaţi in scoli de îndoctrinare sau centre numite “cultural-islamiste” în SUA sau UE,Libia sau Afganistan şi Pakistan.Cum pot pretinde unii occidentali sau,mai nou,”personalitaţi” de pe la noi, că îi susţin pentru”democrație deplină” în ciuda faptului că modelele extremiste ,nou instaurate de către falsa “Primăvară Arabă” au dovedit ceea ce ar însemna acest lucru: patronajul entuziast din Arabia Saudită și Qatar, națiuni în care lucrătorii au salarii mici și sunt tratați ca sclavi, “deplina egalitate pentru femei, religii și grupuri etnice”,doar în cazul in care cele menţionate fac obiectul sinucigaşilor cu bombă,jihadul sexual cerut femeilor sau raporturi odioase cu copii deoarece fatwa (legi date de şeici nebuni prin intermediul televiziunilor dar care nu le-ar aplica propriei familii) .
Se încearcă distrugerea unei naţiuni suverane şi pentru a motiva acest odios plan ,complotiştii omoară civili sirieni,când forurile internationale precum ONU are trebui să ceara expulzarea si condamnarea Monarhiilor Golfului .Au încercat sa însceneze folosirea armelor chimice,deşi specialiştii acestui for se aflau in Siria la acel moment.Pentru a-şi susţine minciuna au prezentat poze ale copiilor sirieni ,copii ce au fost recunoscuţi ulterior ca fiind parte a celor răpiţi din Latakia.Miercuri, 21/08/2013 la câteva ore după presupusul masacru ,Ministrul Apararii Entitatii Sioniste, Moshe Yaalon afirma că știe cine a făcut-o: Guvernul sirian. Mulți experți, inclusiv Frank Gardner, de la BBC sau fostul inspector inspector ONU pentru arme chimice,Rolf Ekeus, precum şi expertul suedez în arme chimice, Ake Sellstrom, au ridiculizat sau au pus la îndoială ideea că președintele sirian Assad ar putea lansa un atac chimic, exact în momentul în care inspectorii au ajuns în Siria . Ministrul Rus de Externe a numit presupusul atac chimic “o provocare planificată în avans.”
Planificată de către cine? Cum ar putea entitatea sionistă ști imediat cine a fost în spatele presupusului atac chimic ?
Liderii israelieni au puteri uimitoare de clarviziune. Ori de câte ori un atac terorist s-a întâmplat, in istoria recentă Israelul a știut imediat cine a făcut-o şi a explicat lumii folosind exact mijloacele proprii de acţiune – oferind un scenariu pentru modul în care doresc ca lumea să reacționeze prin răspândirea fotografiilor de copii morți, o specialitate sionistă .Este oare această furie exprimată şi pentru moartea de care sunt responsabili takfirii Al-Nusra-tăietorii de capete și canibalii ce mănâncă organe umane? Există vreo anchetă ce vizează statele din Golful Persic ,pentru încălcarea legilor internaționale asupra terorismului, care le-ar lista ,de fapt, le ca tinte pentru atacuri preventive? Exista vreun risc pentru ei să fie daţi afară din ONU sau să fie acuzati de legile internaționale de drept privind terorismul , de crime de război?
Un depozit de arme chimicea fost descoperit într-un tunel săpat de terorişti în Joubar .. Cine are cel mai mare depozit de arme de distrugere în masă, inclusiv arme chimice și biologice în Orientul Mijlociu ar putea furniza aceste resurse insurgenţilordin Siria? Este Israelul iar Washingtonuleste pe deplin conștient și aprobă, desigur.
Înca de la începutul conflictului, si cu frecvenţă începând cu 2012 ,numeroase operaţiuni “PRETEXT FALS”=“false flag” au fost hranite presei si opiniei internaţionale,,tactică ce dovedea care sunt obiectivele Washingtonului.
De ce este diferit acesta
Pentru că a fost lansat în momentul disperăriii maxime a teroristilor ce au pierdut atât logistică şi membri importanţi cât şi parte din zonele controlate.Un scenariu diabolic ce urma să se declanşeze odată cu declaraţia ministrului iordanian al aparării cum că ei sunt pregatiţi să gestioneze o eventuală criză şi care presupunea atacarea oraşului Damasc de către sinucigaşi cu bombă,purtând o cantitate mare de explosibil,acompaniaţi de alte zeci purtătoare de cantităţi mici,ce a fost dejucat la timp de către armata siriană.Răspunsul celor ce plănuiesc această interventie,folosind un fals pretext,ca şi în cazul Irakului,si contopind războiul psihologic împotriva Siriei:oricare ar fi verdictul comisiei ONU despre partea care ar folosi arme chimice,sionistii cer atacarea acesteia.Armata siriană continuă sa descopere dovezi ce incriminează teroriştii de posesie de arme de distrugere in masă!Dar folosirea lor efectiva in Ghouta este inca analizata de comisia ONU!Au aşteptat marile puteri aliate rezultatul acestor cercetări?…NU,EI FAC DECLARAŢII DE INCEPERE A UNEI NOI INVAZII!
Syria: ‘I saw rebels execute my boy for no more than a joke’
Nadia Umm Fuad watched her son being shot by Islamist rebels in Syria after the 14-year-old referred to the Prophet Mohammed as he joked with a customer at his coffee stall in Aleppo. She speaks to Richard Spencer.
Nadia Umm Fuad who watched her son being shot by Islamist rebels in Syria after the 14-year-old referred to the Prophet Mohammed as he joked with a customer at his coffee
Mohammed Katta’s mother witnessed the execution of her son in three stages.
She was upstairs at home when she first heard the shouting. The people of the neighbourhood were yelling that “they have brought back the kid”, so she rushed out of her apartment.
“I went out on my balcony,” Nadia Umm Fuad said. “I said to his father, they are going to shoot your son! Come! Come! Come! I was on the stairs when I heard the first shot. I was at the door when I heard the second shot.
“I saw the third shot. I was shouting, ‘That’s haram, forbidden! Stop! Stop! You are killing a child.’ But they just gave me a dirty look and got into their car. As they went, they drove over my son’s arm, as he lay there dying.”
Al-Qaeda linked terrorists in Syria have beheaded all 24 Syrian passengers traveling from Tartus to Ras al-Ain in northeast of Syria, among them a mother and a 40-days old infant.
Gunmen from the terrorist Islamic State of Iraq and Levant stopped the bus on the road in Talkalakh and killed everyone before setting the bus on fire.
According to media reports, the attack was carried out because the passengers who were from three different villages in Ras al-Ain, supported anti-terrorist Kurdish groups which were formed recently to defend Kurdish population against anti-Syria terrorists.
Bodies of a mother and her 40-days infant were also seen among the dead, which were recognized by their relatives.
Syrian Kurdish leader Saleh Muslim warned on Friday that the Kurd minority is facing an ethnic cleansing by al-Qaeda terrorists.
While there is no end in sight to the bloody foreign-fueled conflict in Syria, another front has been formed…
A massive US and allied naval deployment is occurring in the Eastern Mediterranean off Syria’s coastline as well as in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf.
While this display of military might may not be part of an immediate attack plan on Syria, it is creating an atmosphere of fear and panic within Syria.
The US Navy has deployed the USS San Antonio, an amphibious transport ship to the Eastern Mediterranean. The San Antonio is joining five US destroyers which “are already in place for possible missile strikes on Syria, a defense official said Sunday.”
Russia’s early warning radars detected the launch of two ballistic rockets in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, Russia’s Defense Ministry stated. Israel later claimed responsibility for firing the target test rockets.
The launch took place at 06:16 GMT Tuesday, according to Russia’s Ministry of Defense.
The trajectory of the missiles is reported to have been from the central part of the Mediterranean Sea towards the eastern landmass. Both rockets have allegedly fallen into the sea, RIA Novosti news agency reported.
Russia’s President Putin has already been informed about the incident by Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu.
The Syrian embassy in Moscow currently has no information on the incident.
There were no rocket attack signals or blasts in Damascus, the Russian embassy in Syria noted.
Syria’s missile warning system has not detected any rockets landing on their territory, a Syrian security source told Lebanese channel al-Manar TV.
Initially, the Israeli military apparently had no data on the launch either. However, later Israel claimed a joint missile launch with the US in the Mediterranean Sea.
No American ships or planes stationed in the Mediterranean have launched any missiles, US officials told CBS News.
The UK has stressed that they “have nothing to do” with the launch.
A NATO spokesman said the alliance was trying to verify the reports. Until then, the bloc will not comment on the incident.
Armavir, an early warning system against missile attack, is situated in southern Russia. It is run by the Russian Aerospace Defense Forces. They provide radar coverage of the Middle East. There are two radars there, with one of them facing southwest and the other southeast. http://rt.com/news/ballistic-launch-eastern-mediterranean-343/
President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to Le Figaro. Following is the full text:
Malbrunot: Mr. President, the Americans and the French have accused you of perpetrating a chemical attack on the 21st of August in Ghouta, which led to the death of hundreds. Do you have evidence to suggest that your army did not launch the attack?
President al-Assad: First of all, anyone making such an accusation is also responsible for providing the evidence to substantiate the allegation. We have challenged them to present a shred of legitimate evidence, which they have not been able to do. Since their foreign policy should be tailored to suit the interests of their own people, we have challenged them to present legitimate evidence to their own public opinion to substantiate their claims; again they have not done so.
Secondly, where is the logic in us carrying out an attack of this nature: two years into the crisis I can confidently state that the situation on the ground is much better now than it was a year ago; how is it conceivable then that an army making significant advancements on the ground through conventional armament would resort to using weapons of mass destruction?
I am neither confirming nor denying that we possess such weapons – this is not a matter for discussion. For the sake of argument, if the army had such weapons and decided to use them, is it conceivable that it would use them in areas where its own troops are deployed? Where is the logic in that? Additionally is it really plausible that the use of these weapons in a heavily populated area in the suburbs of the capital did not kill tens of thousands; these substances travel in the air.
Malbrunot: Were soldiers from the Syrian Army injured by the weapons? President al-Assad: Yes, in the ‘Baharia’ area, in the suburbs of Damascus; the inspectors from the UN team met with them in hospital.
Malbrunot: Some do acknowledge that there has been some advancement by the army on the ground; however in other areas the rebels have also advanced and you are looking to wipe them out.
President al-Assad: Again, the areas in question are residential areas. The use of chemical weapons in these areas would result in the deaths of tens of thousands. All the accusations are based on unsubstantiated claims made by the terrorists and random pictures and videos posted on the Internet.
Malbrunot: The Americans have stated that they have intercepted a telephone conversation between an executive in you inner circle and officers in the Army giving the order to use these weapons.
President al-Assad: If the Americans, the French or the British had a single shred of evidence they would have disclosed it from day one. We will not contest rumours and dubious allegations; we will only discuss substantiated truths – if they have any, they should present them.
Malbrunot: Is it possible that someone from your inner circle or officers in the Syrian Army took the decision without your knowledge?
President al-Assad: Again – regardless of whether we do or do not possess such weapons, in any country that does posses these weapons, the decision to deploy is usually centralized. Either way, this is classified military information.
Malbrunot: But this is what Jihad Makdissi stated.
President al-Assad: No, at the time, Jihad said that should we possess these weapons, we would not use them. Whether we do or do not possess them is an entirely Syrian affair.
Malbrunot: President Obama has postponed a military strike on Syria, how do you explain this?
President al-Assad: Some have seen Obama as weak because of his decision to withdraw or delay a possible strike by days or weeks; by waging a war on Syria, others have seen him as a strong leader of a powerful country.
From my perspective, power lies in your ability to prevent wars not in igniting them. Power comes from ones ability to stand up and acknowledge their mistakes; if Obama was strong, he would have stood up and said that there is no evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons, he would have stood up and said that the right way forward is to wait for the results of the UN investigations and work through the UN Security Council. However, as I see it, he is weak because he succumbed to internal pressure from small groups and threatened military action. As I said strong leaders are those who prevent wars not those who inflame them.
Malbrunot: What do you say to members of congress whose vote will determine whether or not there will be any military action?
President Assad: Before they vote, they should ask themselves a simple question: What have previous wars achieved for America, or even for Europe? What has the world achieved from the war in Libya and the spread of terrorism in its aftermath? What has the world achieved from the wars in Iraq and other places? What will the world achieve from supporting terrorism in Syria?
Members of congress are entrusted to serve in the best interests of their country. Before they vote, they need to weigh up their decision in the interests of their own country. It is not in the interests of the US to perpetuate instability and extremism in the Middle East. It is not in their interests to continue – what George Bush started – spreading wars in the world.
If they think logically and in the interests of their country, they will not find any benefits to these wars. However many of them they have not mastered the art of logic in their political decision-making.
Malbrunot: How will you respond to these strikes, should they happen?
President al-Assad: If we think of the Middle East as a barrel of explosives close to a fire that is coming ever closer, then it becomes clear that the issue is no longer contained to a Syrian response, but rather what will happen after the first strike. The architects of the war can define the first strike – in other words they can determine what they will do, but beyond that it is impossible for anyone to predict what will follow. Once the barrel explodes, everyone loses control; nobody can determine the outcome, however what is certain is the spread of chaos, wars and extremism in all its forms everywhere.
Malbrunot: Is there a danger that it will spill into a regional conflict?
President al-Assad: Of course, this is the first and most dangerous risk. The issue today is no longer just about Syria, but about a whole region that is interlinked, socially, politically and militarily; the resulting challenges are regional, not just Syrian.
Malbrunot: So is it likely that Israel would be one of your targets?
President al-Assad: You don’t really expect me to announce how we will respond?! It is not realistic that we would announce our plans, but as I said there are many players involved and narrowing the conversation to just one player diminishes the significance of what will happen.
Malbrunot: What do you say to Jordan who is known to be training the rebels on the ground? What is at risk for Jordan should the strike occur in favour of the rebels and terrorists?
President al-Assad: Our policy has always been to not export our problems to neighbouring countries. We have been striking the thousands of terrorists that have entered Syria via Jordan, and Jordan has announced that it would not provide a base for any military strikes against Syria. However, should we not succeed in fighting terrorism in Syria, we can only expect that it will spread to other countries along with the ensuing chaos and extremism.
Malbrunot: So are you warning Jordan and Turkey?
President al-Assad: We have said this before and we have communicated this to them directly and indirectly. I believe Jordan is fully aware of the situation, despite the pressure on it to continue to be a route for this terrorism. As for Erdogan, I don’t think he has a clue of what he is doing. Our priority is to fight terrorism within Syria.
Malbrunot: How will your allies – Hezbollah and Iran – respond to any strike? Are you counting on their support should you be attacked?
President al-Assad: I do not wish to speak on their behalf, their statements have been very clear. We are all aware that this is a regional issue and as such it is impossible to separate the interests of Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and other countries that are supporting us.
Today, stability in the region depends on the situation in Syria; Russia fully fathoms this. Russia is neither defending the President nor Syria, but rather it is defending stability in this region knowing all too well that otherwise it will also be affected. To assess the situation through the narrow lens of a Syrian-Iranian alliance is a naïve and over simplistic view; we are dealing with a situation of far greater significance.
Malbrunot: Have the Russians reassured you that they will reach out to the Americans to try to attenuate the strike?
President al-Assad: I don’t think anyone can trust the Americans; I don’t think there is a country in the world that can guarantee that the Americans will or will not take any form of action towards another country, so it is pointless to look for such reassurances. The Americans adopt one position in the morning, only to endorse the complete opposite in the evening. As long as the US does not comply with or listen to the UN, we should not be reassured.
Malbrunot: How can we stop the war, the crisis in Syria has been on going for more than two-and-half years? You have suggested a National Unity government, the international community has suggested Geneva II, how can we stop the blood bath in Syria?
20130903-053522.jpg
President al-Assad: Discussing a solution at the beginning of the crisis is very different to discussing it today. From the beginning I have emphasised that a resolution can only be achieved through dialogue, which would lead to solutions that can be implemented through political measures.
The situation today is different; today we are fighting terrorists, 80-90% of them affiliated to Al-Qaeda. These terrorists are not interested in reform, or politics, or legislations. The only way to deal with the terrorists is to strike them; only then can we talk about political steps. So in response to your question, the solution today lies in stopping the influx of terrorists into Syria and stopping the financial, military or any other support they receive.
Malbrunot: Who is supporting them?
President al-Assad: Primarily Saudi Arabia, followed by Turkey and Jordan by streaming the militants into Syria, as well as France, America and Britain.
Malbrunot: Do you have proof that France has provided arms to the terrorists?
President al-Assad: It is evident enough through France’s political stance and its provocative role in the situation as dictated to it by Qatar and other countries.
Malbrunot: Mr. President, are you willing to invite the opposition to come to Syria, to guarantee their safety in order for you all to sit around a table and find a solution?
President al-Assad: In January of this year we launched an initiative that addresses the points you raised and others in order to move forward with a political solution. However, this opposition that you refer to was manufactured abroad – manufactured by Qatar, France and others – it is not a Syrian opposition, and as such it takes orders from its masters who have forbidden it from engaging with this initiative. In addition to the fact that since they were manufactured abroad they lack local public support. Despite all their shortfalls, we did invite them but they did not respond.
Malbrunot: However some did not respond for fear of their security, they fear being imprisoned like Abdul Aziz al-Khayer. Can you provide them with guarantees?
President al-Assad: We have provided guarantees and I have spoken of these political points including guarantees of security to any member of the opposition wanting to come to Syria for the purpose of dialogue. However, they were either not willing to come or maybe they weren’t given permission to come. We have not killed or captured any member of the opposition. Abdul Aziz al-Khayer’s friends are all in Syria – you can see for yourself. Why would we target one of them and ignore the rest? Where is the logic in that?
Malbrunot: How do you explain the French position towards you today, you were once friends with Sarkozy and you enjoyed a friendly relationship with France and visited several times? How do you explain this U-turn?
President al-Assad: It wasn’t a friendly relationship. It was clear from the beginning that France, at the request of the Americans, was trying to manipulate Syrian policy. Even the positive shift towards Syria in 2008 was due to Qatari influence, and so was the negative U-turn in 2011. It is very clear that French policy towards Syria is entirely based on American and Qatari desires.
Malbrunot: French Parliamentarians will meet on Wednesday. There is a big debate in France now, with some believing that Hollande has gone too far on this issue. What is your message to the French Parliamentarians before they convene and vote on the strike?
President al-Assad: A few days ago the French Interior Minister was quoted as saying that “France’s participation is dependent on the US congress,” with no mention to the French Parliament. Allow me then to pose this question to you: To whom does the French government answer to – the French parliament or the US congress? Since 2003, on the back of the invasion of Iraq and its earlier position before the war, France has relinquished its independence and has become a part of American foreign policy. This applies to Chirac after the war on Iraq, to Sarkozy, and today to Hollande.
So the question really is: will the meeting of the French parliamentarians return the independence of France’s decisions back to the French? We hope that this would be the case. Since they will be working in the interests of France, will the representatives of the French people take the side of extremism and terrorism? Will they support those who perpetrated the September 11 attacks in New York, or those who bombed the Metro in Spain? Will the representatives of the French people support those who killed the innocents in France?
How is it possible for them to stand against individuals like Mohammed Merah in France and yet support others like him in Syria? How can France fight terrorism in Mali and support it in Syria? Will France adopt the American model of double standards? How can the parliamentarians convince the French public that their country is secular, yet at the same time it supports extremism and sectarianism in other parts of the world? How can France advocate for democracy but yet one of its closest allies – Saudi Arabia – is still living in medieval times?
My message to the French Parliamentarians is: go back to the principles of the French Revolution that the whole world is proud of: Liberty, Justice, Equality.
Malbrunot: You cited French national interests; if France intervened militarily, would their interests in Syria or the region be targeted?
President al-Assad: I do not know if your interests will be targeted or not, this will depend on the consequences of the war. But most certainly, France will lose its interests. There is hatred and contempt towards French policy, which would inevitably directly affect French interests in the region. In addition, unlike previous times, significant countries in the region have started to look away from Europe towards the East for alternative partnerships where there is mutual respect between countries.
Malbrunot: So you are calling out for rationality and reason?
President al-Assad: For rationality and ethics.
Malbrunot: Are you planning to run for office in the next presidential elections?
President al-Assad: This really depends on the will of the Syrian people at the time. If I feel that there is a strong public desire for to me to run, I will not hesitate and vice versa. We may not have accurate measures at the moment, but we do have strong indications. The strongest indicator is that when you are fighting terrorists from over 80 countries who are supported by Western and Arab states, if your people do not embrace you, you simply cannot carry on. Syria has been resilient for two-and-a-half years this is an important indication of strong public support.
Malbrunot: Mr. President how much are you prepared to fight in this crisis?
President al-Assad: We have two options: we either defend our country against terrorism or we surrender. The history in this region has never known surrender; it has seen many wars, yet it has never and will never surrender.
Malbrunot: So will fight and sacrifice your life for Syria?
President al-Assad: When it becomes a matter of patriotism, we will all fight to defend our country – whether we are citizens or the president, it is not about the individual but rather about the whole nation. What is the point in living if your country is dead?
Malbrunot: Mr. President, do you take responsibility for the mistakes that have been committed including those by the army and the security forces? Do you accept that mistakes have been made?
20130903-053615.jpg
President al-Assad: Any human being makes mistakes in their work. If you do not make mistakes you are either not human or you do not work. I am a human being and I work. However, when you want to evaluate your mistakes you need to do so in hindsight when the events are behind you and you are able to see the results of your actions. We are currently in the heart of the battle; when it is over, we can assess the results and determine whether we were right or wrong on particular matters.
Malbrunot: Are you confident of winning the battle?
President al-Assad: The history of our region teaches us that when our people defend themselves, they inevitably win. This is not a war against the President or the Government alone, it is a war against the entire country, and we shall be victorious.
Malbrunot: Having said this, your army has lost control over certain areas in the North, East and South. Do you believe that you can regain these areas?
President al-Assad: The issue is not about labeling areas as being under our control or under the control of the militants; there isn’t a single area that the army has planned to enter and not been able to do so. The real challenge is the continuous influx of terrorists from across the borders and the acts they have perpetrated at a social level in the areas they have infiltrated.
Malbrunot: Moratinos, a previous friend of yours, told me few days ago that he cannot understand what is in Bashar al-Assad’s mind, how could he possibly commit such violence in his country.
President al-Assad: There is an analogy that can also be asked here: how could France allow the killing of the terrorists who terrified French citizens? How did the British deal with the riots in Britain last year? Why was the army deployed in Los Angeles in the nineties? Why are other countries allowed to fight terrorism and Syria isn’t? Why is it forbidden for Mohammed Merah to stay alive in France and to kill civilians and yet terrorists are allowed to remain alive in Syria and kill innocent people?
Malbrunot: Mr. President, how has your daily routine changed in terms of leading the country since the beginning of the crisis? Some suggest that after two-and-a-half years Bashar al-Assad is leading the country alone.
President al-Assad: This is what I meant earlier, if the West is against me and so were the Syrian people, if I was alone, how could I conceivably be leading the country? This is illogical. I can continue to lead because of the strength of public support and the strength of the Syrian state. Unfortunately, those in the West do not view this reality objectively.
Malbrunot: Mr. President, a number of French journalists have been held in Syria. Do you have any idea of their situation? Are the Syrian authorities holding them? President al-Assad: Do you mean that we are holding them?
Malbrunot: They were taken hostage in the North of Syria; do you have information on their fate? President al-Assad: If they were taken hostage by the terrorists, you will have to ask them. If anyone is arrested by the government for entering the country illegally, they will be taken to court rather than being held in jail. They would face charges according to Syrian law and this would be public knowledge.
Malbrunot: Are you looking to cooperate with France on security issues? This was an area that went well in the past.
President al-Assad: Any cooperation, be it security, military or economic requires political consensus. You cannot maintain security cooperation with any country when there is a conflict of interests.
Malbrunot: When your father passed away, you visited France and were received by President Chirac. Everyone viewed you as a youthful and promising president and a successful ophthalmologist. Today, since the crisis, this image has changed. To what extent have you as a person changed?
President al-Assad: The more imperative question is: has the nature of this person changed? The media can manipulate a person’s image at a whim, yet my reality remains the same. I belong to the Syrian people; I defend their interests and independence and will not succumb to external pressure. I cooperate with others in a way that promotes my country’s interests. This is what was never properly understood; they assumed that they could easily influence a young president, that if I had studied in the West I would lose my original culture. This is such a naïve and shallow attitude. I have not changed; they are the ones who wished to identify me differently at the beginning. They need to accept the image of a Syrian president who embraces his country’s independence.
Malbrunot: Has France become an enemy of Syria?
President al-Assad: All those who support the terrorists financially or militarily are enemies of the Syrian people. Anyone who facilitates the killing of a Syrian soldier, or works against the interests of Syria and her people is an enemy of Syria. I am not referring to the French people since I believe that the French government is working against the interests and will of its people. There is a difference between the concepts of adverse government and adverse nation. The French people are not our enemy but the policy of their government is one that is adverse to the Syrian people.
Malbrunot: Is the French government an enemy of Syria?
President al-Assad: The more adverse the policies of the French government are to the Syrian people, the more the government is an enemy to the Syrian people. The current policies, that we mentioned earlier, adopted by the French leadership are hostile towards Syria. This hostility can only end when the French government readdresses its policies.
ماذا يقول الرئيس الأسد عن الاتهامات الأمريكية والغربية لسورية باستخدام الكيماوي؟..وما تفسيره لتأجيل أوباما للعدوان العسكري؟..
لماذا انقلبت المواقف الفرنسية تجاه سورية.. وهل ستخسر فرنسا مصالحها بالمنطقة في حال تدخلت عسكرياً؟..
تابعوا إجابات الرئيس الأسد على هذه النقاط وغيرها في حواره مع صحيفة “لوفيغارو” الفرنسية، على الرابط:
Le président al-Assad : La stabilité dans la région dépend de la situation en Syrie
02 Sept 2013
Damas / Le président, Bachar al-Assad, a accordé une interview au journal français le Figaro, au cours de laquelle il a affirmé que la stabilité dans la région dépend de la situation en Syrie.
Voici l’interview intégrale :
– Le Figaro : Les américains et les français vous ont accusé d’avoir déclenché une attaque à l’arme chimique le 21 août dans la région de Ghouta ce qui a fait des centaines de morts. Pouvez-vous nous fournir une preuve que votre armée n’a pas commis cette attaque.
M. Prés : premièrement, quiconque accuse doit donner la preuve. Nous les avons défiés d’avancer une seule preuve ; ils en ont été incapables. Nous les avons défiés de donner une seule preuve à leurs peuples. Puisque les politiques extérieures se décident au nom des peuples et de leurs intérêts. Mais, ils n’ont pas pu le faire.
Deuxièmement, parlons de la logique de cette accusation, si elle est raisonnable ou pas. A présent, je vous pose la question suivante : nous combattons depuis deux ans, et je peux dire que notre situation sur le terrain est aujourd’hui bien meilleure qu’elle ne l’était l’année dernière par exemple. Comment une armée, dans n’importe quel Etat, peut-elle utiliser des armes de destruction massives, au moment même où elle réalise un progrès moyennant des armes conventionnelles ? Soyons très précis : Je ne dis nullement que l’armée syrienne possède ou non de telles armes. C’est une question qu’on ne discute pas. Mais supposons que cette armée souhaite utiliser des armes de destruction massive, si elle en possède; est-il possible qu’elle le fasse dans une zone où elle se trouve elle-même ?!! Où en est la logique ?
En plus, est-il possible d’utiliser des armes de destruction massive dans la banlieue de la capitale sans tuer des dizaines de milliers de personnes, car ces matières se transportent par le vent ?
– Des éléments de l’armée syrienne ont-ils été atteints par de telles armes ?
M. Prés : Oui dans la région d’al Baharieh dans la banlieue de Damas. Le comité d’enquête a rencontré les soldats hospitalisés.
– Certains disent que l’armée a sans doute réalisé certains progrès. Mais vous vouliez aussi, en fin de compte, en finir définitivement avec cette opposition, qui progresse dans d’autres endroits.
M. Prés : Encore une fois, les zones dont on parle sont des zones peuplées. Y utiliser des armes de destruction massive signifie des dizaines de milliers de morts. Toutes les accusations se fondent sur les allégations des terroristes et sur des images vidéo arbitraires diffusées sur internet.
– Les américains disent avoir capté un entretien téléphonique entre un de vos responsables et un élément de l’armée, lui donnant l’ordre d’utiliser ces armes…
M. Prés : si les américains, les français ou les britanniques disposaient d’une seule preuve, ils l’auraient annoncée dès le premier jour. Nous ne discutons pas des rumeurs, ni des allégations. Nous ne discutons que les faits. Si ce qu’ils disent est vrai, qu’ils en donnent la preuve.
– Serait-il possible que certains responsables, ou certains éléments de l’armée syrienne, aient pris cette décision sans votre aval.
M. Prés : Encore une fois… j’affirme que nous n’avons jamais dit posséder de telles armes. Votre question insinue des choses que je n’ai pas dites, et que nous n’avons ni confirmées ni niées en tant qu’Etat… mais normalement, dans les pays qui possèdent une telle arme, la décision est centrale.
De toute manière, vous évoquez une question que nous ne discutons avec personne en tant qu’Etat, car c’est une question purement militaire.
– Mais Jihad MAKDISSI l’a bien dit ?
M. Prés : Non… à l’époque, Jihad a dit : « si nous possédons une telle arme, nous ne l’utiliserons pas ». Le faite de la posséder ou non est une affaire purement syrienne et ne concerne que nous.
– Le président Obama a reporté les frappes militaires sur votre pays. Comment expliquez-vous cette décision ?
M. Prés : Certains estiment que le président Obama a fait preuve de faiblesse en temporisant l’agression, ou en la reportant pour quelques jours ou quelques semaines… Certains ont vu en lui le chef fort d’une grande puissance, parce ce qu’il a menacé de déclencher la guerre contre la Syrie. Quant à nous, nous estimons que l’homme fort est celui qui empêche la guerre, et non celui qui l’enflamme…
L’homme puissant est celui qui reconnait ses erreurs. Si Obama était fort, il aurait dit publiquement : « Nous ne disposons pas de preuves sur l’usage de l’arme chimique par l’Etat syrien ». Il aurait dit publiquement: « La seule voie est celle des enquêtes onusiennes. Par conséquent, revenons tous au conseil de sécurité ». Mais à mon avis, il était faible parce qu’il a subi les pressions intérieures et a menacé de déclencher la guerre. C’est notre opinion. Je vous ai dit que par la force des choses le fort est celui qui empêche la guerre et non celui qui la déclenche et l’attise.
– Que diriez-vous aux membres du Congrès américain qui doivent voter pour ou contre cette frappe ?
M. Prés : Quiconque souhaite prendre cette décision doit, avant de voter, se poser la question évidente suivante : les guerres qu’ont-elles apportées aux Etats-Unis ou même à l’Europe ? Le monde qu’a-t-il gagné de la guerre contre la Libye ? Qu’a-t-il gagné du support apporté au terrorisme en Libye ? Qu’a-t-il gagné de la guerre en Irak et ailleurs ? Que gagnera-t-il du renforcement du terrorisme en Syrie ?
La tache de tout membre du congrès consiste à servir l’intérêt de son pays. Avant de voter, il doit agir en fonction de l’intérêt de son pays… Quel serait l’intérêt des États-Unis dans la croissance de la perturbation et de l’extrémisme au Moyen Orient ? Quel serait leur intérêt à poursuivre ce que Georges Bush avait commencé, à savoir répandre les guerres dans le monde…
S’ils raisonnent logiquement et en fonction de l’intérêt de leur propre pays, ils ne verront aucun intérêt dans de telles guerres. Mais vous savez que, dans beaucoup de cas, leurs positions politiques n’émanent pas toujours du bon sens.
20130902-222534.jpg
– Comment entendez-vous riposter à cette attaque, au cas où elle aura lieu ?
M. Prés : Aujourd’hui, vous parlez d’un tonneau de poudre qui est le Moyen Orient.
Le feu s’approche énormément de ce tonneau. Il ne s’agit pas seulement de la riposte syrienne, mais bien de ce qui pourrait se produire après la première frappe…
Celui qui élabore aujourd’hui le plan de la guerre peut vous répondre en ce qui concerne le premier pas seulement, c’est-à-dire sur ce qu’il va faire lui-même. Mais après… Personne ne peut savoir ce qui se passera. Tout le monde perdra le contrôle lorsque le baril de poudre explosera… Personne ne dispose d’une réponse sur ce qui se passera en fin de compte. Ce qui est certain c’est qu’il y aura partout le chao, la guerre, l’extrémisme et ses répercussions.
– Le danger d’une guerre régionale se pose t-il ?
M. Prés : Bien sûr. Ce risque vient même au premier plan. La question ne relève pas seulement de la Syrie, mais de toute une région intégrée, étroitement liée sur le plan social, politique et militaire. Il est dons normal que les défis soient régionaux et non seulement syriens.
– Par exemple, Israël serait-il un de vos objectifs ?
M. Prés : Vous ne vous attendez quand même pas que je révèle quelle sera notre riposte ?!! Il n’est pas logique d’annoncer notre plan, mais comme je viens de le dire, puisque les acteurs sont nombreux, parler d’un seul acteur minimise l’importance de ce qui se produira.
– Que diriez-vous à la Jordanie où des hommes armés se sont entrainés. Au cas où les extrémistes réalisent une avancée, quel sera, à votre avis, le danger qui menace la Jordanie ?
M. Prés : Notre politique consiste à ne pas exporter nos problèmes aux pays voisins. Nous traitions donc avec des milliers de terroristes déjà venus de la Jordanie, et nous les frappions à l’intérieur même de la Syrie … La Jordanie, par ailleurs, a déjà annoncé qu’elle ne servira de base à aucune opération militaire contre la Syrie.
Mais si nous ne parvenons pas à frapper le terrorisme en Syrie, il passera tout naturellement dans d’autres pays. L’extrémisme et le chao se répandront davantage.
– Vous mettez donc en garde la Jordanie et la Turquie ?
M. Prés : Nous l’avons dit à plusieurs reprises, et nous leur avons envoyé des messages directs et indirects. Je pense que la Jordanie en est consciente, malgré les pressions qui s’y exercent pour qu’elle devienne un lieu de passage pour le terrorisme. Quant à Erdogan, je ne pense pas du tout qu’il est conscient de ce qu’il fait…
L’important aujourd’hui pour la Syrie est de frapper le terrorisme sur son territoire.
– Quelle sera la réaction de vos alliés… Hezbollah et l’Iran, au cas où une attaque est perpétrée contre la Syrie ? comptez-vous le cas échéant sur leur soutien ?
M. Prés : Je ne veux pas parler à leur place. Cependant, leurs déclarations étaient claires. Puisque nous avons dit que la question était régionale, personne ne saurait dissocier les intérêts de la Syrie de ceux de l’Iran ; ni les intérêts de la Syrie, de l’Iran et du Hezbollah de ceux d’autres pays qui nous soutiennent.
Aujourd’hui la stabilité de la région dépend de la situation en Syrie. La Russie en est consciente, aussi ne défend-elle pas le président ni l’Etat syrien mais bien la stabilité dans la région… car cela aura aussi des effets sur la Russie. Voir les choses sou l’angle d’une coalition entre la Syrie et l’Iran serait superficiel et limité.La question en est beaucoup plus grande.
– Les Russes vous ont-ils rassuré qu’ils maintiennent des contacts avec les américains pour atténuer la frappe ?
M. Prés : Je ne pense pas qu’on fait confiance aux américains. Aucun Etat au monde ne peut garantir à quiconque que les américains engageront ou non une action contre tel ou tel pays. Aussi nous ne cherchons pas de telles rassurances…Les américains disent une chose le matin, et le contredisent complètement le soir … Tant que les Etats-Unis ne suivent pas et n’écoutent pas les Nations Unies, nous ne devons pas être rassurés.
– Comment peut-on arrêter la guerre et la crise qui dure depuis deux ans et demi en Syrie ? vous avez proposé un gouvernement d’union nationale, la communauté internationale a proposé Genève2… Comment peut-on arrêter le bain de sang ?
M. Prés : Lorsque la crise est à ces débuts et que vous parlez de solution, c’est totalement différent que lorsque vous parlez de solution à l’heure actuelle… J’ai dit dès le début que la solution devait avoir lieu par le dialogue… Le dialogue entraine des solutions et engendre des idées qui s’appliqueront à travers des mesures politiques.
Aujourd’hui la situation est différente. Nous combattons des terroristes. 80 – 90 % de ceux que nous combattons appartiennent à al Qaeda. Ceux là ne s’intéressent pas à la réforme, ni à la politique, ni aux lois. Ceux là, le seul moyen de leur faire face est de les liquider. C’est alors que nous pourrions parler de mesures politiques. Pour répondre donc à votre question, la solution aujourd’hui consiste à arrêter de faire venir les terroristes en Syrie, de leur fournir des armes, et de leur apporter un soutien financier et autre…..
– Qui leur apporte ce soutien ?
M. Prés : L’Arabie Saoudite en premier lieu, la Turquie, la Jordanie (à travers l’infiltration des personnes armées), la France, le Royaume Uni et les Etats-Unis.
– Avez-vous des preuves que la France a livré des armes aux terroristes ?
M. Prés : Les positions politiques de la France, sa provocation qui met en exécution les politiques d’autres pays comme le Qatar et autres, en est la preuve pour nous.
– Etes-vous prêt, M. le président, à inviter les responsables de l’opposition à venir en Syrie, à se réunir avec eux, à leur présenter des garanties sécuritaires, et à leur dire asseyons- nous ensemble pour trouver une solution ?
M. Prés : En janvier dernier, nous avons lancé une initiative qui comprenait tout ce que vous venez de dire, et même plus. Cependant, l’opposition dont vous parlez a été fabriquée à l’étranger. Elle est made in France, Qatar… mais certainement pas made in Syria. Elle suit donc forcement les ordres de ceux qui l’ont fabriquée. Il n’était pas permis aux membres de cette opposition de répondre favorablement à cet appel, ni donc aux solutions politiques. Par ailleurs, ils ne disposent d’aucune base populaire. Malgré tout, nous les avons invités mais ils n’ont pas répondu à cette invitation.
– Mais certains n’ont pas répondu parce qu’ils craignaient pour leurs vies. Ils craignent qu’ils ne soient emprisonnés comme ce fut le cas avec Abdelaziz Al Khayer. Pouvez-vous leur donner des garanties ?
M. Prés : Nous leur avons donné ses garanties, et moi-même j’ai évoqué ces points politiques y compris des garanties sécuritaires à toute personne qui vient en Syrie pour le dialogue. Mais ils ne sont pas venus, ou on ne leur a pas permis de venir. Dire qu’ils craignent être tués ou arrêtés, nous n’avons ni tué ni arrêté personne de l’opposition. Ils se trouvent en Syrie, les amis et les collègues d Abdelaziz Al Khayer … Vous pouvez les rencontrer ici même, en Syrie. Pourquoi agresser ou arrêter quelqu’un et laisser les autres ?! Où en est la logique ? Cela est insensé.
– Comment expliquez-vous la position de la France aujourd’hui à votre égard ? Vous êtes venu plusieurs fois en France…………………
M. Prés : Ce n’était pas une relation d’amitié… C’était une tentative de la part de la France de revirer (changer l’orientation de) la politique syrienne, et ce à la demande des Etats-Unis. C’était une chose tout à fait claire pour nous. Même le virement positif vis à vis de la Syrie en 2008, s’est fait sous l’influence du Qatar… pour être clair, la politique de la France vis-à-vis de la Syrie dépendait totalement du Qatar et des Etats-Unis.
– Les parlementaires français se réuniront mercredi. Aujourd’hui, il y a un grand débat en France. Certains pensent que Hollande est allé trop loin dans cette affaire. Quel discours adressez-vous aujourd’hui aux parlementaires français avant qu’ils se réunissent et votent ?
M. Prés : Il y a quelques jours, le Ministre français des affaires étrangères aurait déclaré : la participation de la France attend le congrès américain. Il n’a pas dit qu’il attendait la décision du parlement français. Je vous demande donc de qui dépend le Gouvernement français dans ses prises de décisions, du parlement français ou du congrès ?!!
20130902-222600.jpg
Depuis 2003, suite à l’invasion de l’Irak, la France a décidé de renoncer à son indépendance et est devenue la subalterne de la politique américaine. C’était vrai pour Chirac après la guerre, mais aussi pour Sarkozy, et aujourd’hui pour Hollande.
La question est de savoir si la réunion du parlement français signifiera que les français retrouveront l’indépendance de la décision de la France. Nous souhaitons que la réponse soit positive. Je dirais à ce moment-là aux parlementaires français : que chacun décide en fonction de l’intérêt de la France. Les représentants du peuple français soutiendront-ils l’extrémisme et le terrorisme ? Se mettront-ils du côté de ceux qui ont perpétré les attaques du 11 septembre à New York, ou l’attentat du métro en Espagne ? Les députés du peuple français se mettront-ils du côté de ceux qui ont tué les innocents en France ??? Comment pourront-ils s’opposer à des gens comme Mohammad Marah en France, et les soutenir en Syrie !!! Comment la France peut-elle combattre le terrorisme au Mali et le renforcer en Syrie ? La France deviendra-t-elle un exemple de la politique des deux poids deux mesures promues par les Etats-Unis ? !!
Comment les parlementaires français pourront-ils convaincre leurs concitoyens que la France est un état laïc, et en même temps appuyer ailleurs l’extrémisme et le confessionnalisme ; un Etat qui appelle à la démocratie mais dont l’allier principal c’est des Etats qui appartiennent au moyen âge comme l’Arabie Saoudite. Je dis aux parlementaires français : revenez aux principes de la révolution française dont le monde entier s’en est orgueilli : liberté, égalité, fraternité.
– Si la France intervient militairement, les intérêts nationaux de la France seront-ils affectés en Syrie ou dans la région ?
M. Prés : Cela dépend des répercussions de la guerre. Mais la France perdra certainement ses intérêts. Il y a une sorte de mépris vis-à-vis la politique de la France, cela est devenu clair et se reflète directement sur les intérêts. Il aura des répercussions, négatives bien entendu, sur les intérêts de la France. Surtout que des pays importants dans la région commencent à s’orienter vers l’Est, et non plus vers l’Europe comme auparavant. Les alternatives sont disponibles, ainsi que le respect mutuel entre nous et ces pays.
– Donc vous appelez à la raison et à la sagesse.
M. Prés : A la raison et à la morale.
– Entendez-vous présenter votre candidature l’année prochaine aux élections présidentielles.
M. Prés : Ca dépend, à ce moment là de la volonté du peuple syrien. Si je sens que le peuple le souhaite, je n’hésiterai pas à le faire, bien au contraire. A présent, nous n’avons pas de statistiques à ce sujet, mais nous avons des indices. L’indice principal c’est que lorsque vous combattez des terroristes qui viennent de plus de 80 pays et qui sont appuyés par l’Occident et par certains Etats Arabes, et que le peuple ne veut pas de vous, vous ne pouvez pas continuer. Puisque la Syrie a résisté pendant 2 ans et demi, c’est là un indice important quant à l’existence d’un soutien populaire.
– Dans cette crise, M. le Président, jusqu’où vous êtes prêt à combattre ?
M. Prés : Ce n’est pas nous qui a choisi de combattre. Nous avons deux choix : se battre et défendre notre pays contre le terrorisme, ou capituler. L’histoire de notre région ne nous indique pas que nous avons capitulé auparavant. Cette région a toujours vécu des guerres. Elle n’a jamais capitulé, et ne capitulera jamais.
– Donc vous allez vous battre jusqu’à sacrifier votre vie pour la Syrie ?
M. Prés : Lorsqu’il s’agit d’une question patriotique tout le monde se bat, et tout le monde se sacrifie pour sa patrie…. Aucune différence entre président et citoyen… ce n’est pas une affaire personnelle. En quoi c’est utile si vous vous restez en vie alors que votre patrie est mourante ?
– Est-ce que vous assumez, M. le président ; toutes les erreurs commises et tout ce qu’a fait votre armée et les forces de sécurité ? pensez-vous qu’il y a eu des erreurs commises ?
M. Prés : Tout être humain risque de se tromper. Si vous ne vous trompez pas c’est que soit vous n’êtes pas humain, soit vous ne travaillez pas. Moi, je suis humain et je travaille… Mais lorsque vous voulez évaluez une erreur quelconque, vous devez prendre du recul. L’évaluation doit se faire après et non pendant la production de l’événement. Il faut bien attendre les conséquences de l’action. A présent, nous sommes au cœur de la bataille. Lorsqu’elle prendra fin, nous seront en mesure d’évaluer les résultats et nous dirons qu’on avait raison ici, ou qu’on s’est trompé là.
– Etes-vous sûr que vous allez gagner la bataille ?
M. Prés : L’histoire de notre région nous dit que lorsque les peuples se défendent, ils vaincront. Cette guerre n’est pas celle du président, ni celle de l’Etat. C’est la guerre de toute la patrie, et nous remporterons la victoire.
– Malgré tout, votre armée a perdu certaines régions au Nord, à l’Est, au Sud… pensez-vous que vous allez récupérer ces zones militaires ?
M. Prés. : Notre problème n’est pas d’avoir la terre sous notre contrôle ou sous celui des groupes armés. Il n’y a pas un endroit où l’armée a voulu entrer sans pouvoir y pénétrer. Le vrai problème réside dans la poursuite du pompage des terroristes à travers les frontières. Il réside aussi dans le changement que les terroristes ont pu introduire sur le plan social dans les zones où ils ont pénétré.
– Votre ancien ami Moratinos m’a dit il y a quelques jours : Qu’est ce qui se passe dans la tête de Bachar el-Assad ? Comment peut-il commettre de tels actes de violence dans son propre pays ?
M. Prés : Il faut plutôt se poser la question de savoir comment la France a permis de tuer des terroristes qui ont terrorisé les citoyens français chez eux ? Comment a-t-on fait face au désordre au Royaume Uni l’année dernière ? Pourquoi l’armée américaine est-elle descendue à Los Angeles dans les années 90 ? Pourquoi est-il permis aux autres pays de lutter contre le terrorisme, alors que cela n’est permis en Syrie ? Pourquoi n’est-il pas permis que Mohamad Marah se trouve en France pour tuer, alors qu’il est permis aux terroristes de se trouver en Syrie pour tuer ?
– Depuis le début de la crise, quels changements y-a-t-il eu sur votre quotidien en tant que dirigeant de l’Etat ? Après 2 ans et demi de la crise, certains disent que Bachar el-Assad dirige seul le pays.
M. Prés : C’est bien ce que je vous ai répondu tout à l’heure. Si l’Occident était contre moi, mon peuple aussi, et que j’étais seul, comment pourrai-je alors être en mesure de diriger le pays ? C’est illogique. Je continue grâce à l’appui du peuple et à la puissance de l’Etat. Malheureusement, lorsqu’on nous regarde de l’occident, on ne voit pas les choses d’une manière réaliste.
– Plusieurs journalistes français sont retenus en Syrie. Avez-vous de leurs nouvelles ? Est-ce le pouvoir qui les détient ?
M. Prés : Détenus chez nous ?
– Ils ont été pris en otages au Nord.
M. Prés : S’ils sont des otages chez les terroristes, c’est aux terroristes qu’il faut demander de leurs nouvelles. Si par contre l’Etat arrête quiconque pour être entré dans le pays de manière irrégulière, il sera traduit en justice. Il ne sera pas gardé en prison. Il sera jugé selon les lois syriennes, et tout le monde le saura.
– Souhaitez-vous élaborer une collaboration sécuritaire avec la France, ce qui se produisait d’ailleurs dans le passé.
M. Prés : Toute sorte de coopération, qu’elle soit sécuritaire, militaire ou même économique a besoin d’un accord politique. Nous ne pouvons pas avoir une collaboration sécuritaire avec n’importe quel Etat quand les intérêts politiques sont en contradiction.
– Lorsque votre père est décédé et que vous êtes allé en France, le président Chirac vous a reçu……….votre image a complètement changé….
M. Prés : La question est de savoir plutôt si la réalité de la personne a changée. L’image est modifiée par les médias à leur manière. Ma réalité n’a pas changé. Je suis quelqu’un qui appartient au peuple syrien. Je défends ses intérêts. Je suis indépendant, non soumis aux pressions extérieures. Je coopère avec les autres de manière à sauvegarder les intérêts de mon pays.
Ils ont mal compris ces choses là. Ils ont pensé qu’un jeune président c’est quelqu’un à qui on peut dicter ce qu’il doit faire et ce qu’il ne doit pas faire. Ils ont pensé que si j’avais fait mes études en Occident, ça veut dire que j’ai perdu ma culture authentique… C’est une manière naïve et superficielle de voir les choses. Je n’ai pas changé. Mais dès le début ils m’ont vu autrement. Ils doivent accepter l’image du syrien attaché à l’indépendance de son pays.
– La France est-elle devenue un pays ennemi de la Syrie ?
M. Prés : Quiconque contribue au renforcement financier et militaire des terroristes est l’ennemi du peuple syrien. Quiconque contribue à tuer un soldat arabe syrien est l’ennemi de la Syrie. Quiconque œuvre contre les intérêts de la Syrie et de ses citoyens est un ennemi.
Je ne parle pas du peuple, car je vois que le gouvernement français va à l’encontre de l’intérêt et de la volonté de son peuple. Il faut faire la distinction entre peuple ennemi et Etat ennemi. Le peuple français n’est pas un ennemi, mais la politique de son Etat est hostile au peuple syrien.
– Donc l’Etat français est-il aujourd’hui un ennemi de la Syrie ?
M. Prés : Dans la mesure où la politique de l’Etat français est hostile au peuple syrien, cet Etat sera son ennemi. Cette hostilité prendra fin lorsque l’Etat français changera de politique.
sabinachiaburu 