Dear viewers of Addounia TV… greetings,
We greet you from the People's Palace in the Syrian capital
of Damascus. We are honored to meet President Bashar al-Assad, President of the
Syrian Arab Republic. Mr. President, welcome on Addounia TV.
President al-Assad: Welcome to you and to Addounia
TV.
Question: Mr. President, allow me to discuss
during today's meeting the most important issues occupying the thoughts of
Syrian citizens which they inquire about daily and in which they dwell upon in
all issues, whether it pertains to the situation on the ground or the political
situation… we start with the situation on the ground… of course, Aleppo… they
talked a lot about Aleppo… what is the situation in Aleppo; how do you view
it?
President
al-Assad: We cannot separate the situation in Aleppo from the
situation in Syria. The difference is that Aleppo and Damascus are the two
biggest cities and the two most important cities. One is the political capital
and the other is the economic capital. The normal citizen's evaluation of the
situation in general – including Aleppo – comes through escalation; when he sees
escalation he considers the situation to be worse and when he sees calm he
considers the situation to be better… matters aren't measured like this. When
there are military or security operations then there could be constant
escalation and suddenly the situation ends well or the opposite, a continuing
calm ends with escalation. In the end, the issue is a battle of wills in the
first degree. They have a will to destroy the country. They started with Daraa,
moved to Homs and Damascus and Aleppo and Deir Ezzor and Lattakia; to all
provinces. They try to move from one place to another. The importance is in the
difference in scale or weight of the city in the Syrian context, but if we take
into account the scale of the complex battles waged by the armed forces on the
technical, tactical and strategic levels, then they are among the most complex types of
battles, yet the armed forces achieve great successes in this
regard. Everyone hopes that the achievement or the resolution to be within weeks
or days and hours. This is illogical; we're involved in a regional and global
battle, so time is needed to resolve it. But I can summarize all this
explanation in a sentence: we are moving
forward and the situation is practically better but resolution hasn't been
achieved and this takes time.
Question: Mr. President, regarding areas or
provinces to which problems moved, starting from Daraa to Damascus Countryside,
Homs, Lattakia, Aleppo and Idleb. Of course, there are those who broached the
issue of neighboring countries. In this case, many ask what is the position of
the Syrian state towards neighboring countries, particularly since some
countries facilitate, train, finance and arm in all manners which may constitute
a violation of the Syrian state, the security of Syria and the safety of Syrian
citizens?
President al-Assad: Some neighboring
countries stand by Syria
[IRAQ] but maybe they're not exactly able to
control the smuggling of logistic supplies to terrorists. Some countries
overlook or keep their distance, and some countries participate in this matter,
but we have to distinguish between what we as Syria and as Syrian people and as
a country want from these countries. Do we seek a relation or a dispute with the
country or with the people?
As for Turkey for example; the position of the
Turkish state is known, and it assumes direct responsibility for the blood that
bled and was shed in Syria. But when we began developing our relation with
Turkey, we didn't look for a relation with individuals or a transient
government; rather we looked to a history of tense and turbulent relation for
nearly nine decades approximately.
We wanted to erase it, then do we go backwards
because of the ignorance of some Turkish officials, or do we look at the
relation with the Turkish people, particularly since this people practically stood with us during this
crisis and didn't drift despite the media and financial pressure
to go in the other direction. We must think first of peoples, because
governments are transient and we must preserve relations with the peoples
because these people are the ones who will practically protect us, as logistic
supply will remain weak if the people don’t embrace the issue.
Question: But here we ask about the stances of these
peoples towards their governments. Some Syrians expect a movement on the part of
these people as their governments polices harm neighboring countries and harm
the reputation and dignity of the people.
President al-Assad: Correct, but this
needs time, and we mustn't forget that these peoples themselves are waging
battles against these governments. Political battles, of course, and this needs
time. We need to be objective, but we must account for winning and losing.
Animosity with peoples will not reduce the supply of terrorists; on the
contrary, it will make this supply more available. We must improve relations and
help these peoples by presenting facts; when these peoples discover the reality
of what is happening in Syria and the truth about the position of their
officials, they will become stronger in their political battle and the longevity
of these governments and these officials will be short in political work., we
can withstand this short spell and we can adapt to it while we resolve the
battle in Syria.
Question: Mr. President, many talked about Homs;
Homes which witnessed since the beginnings strong armed activities and high
feelings of all types. Many ask: what is the situation in Homs? Why isn't the
situation over in Homs?
President al-Assad: We cannot separate
the situation of Homs from the situation of the rest of the provinces. As for
the delay of resolving the situation in the city, it's known that when armed
forces wage battles in cities they must take two things into consideration:
first, concern for human life, and second, concern for properties. Apart from
that, if the armed forces wanted to use all their military capabilities
including firepower then they can crush the enemy in a short time, but this is
unacceptable and doesn't achieve the desired results. This type of operations
needs time. On the other hand, we cannot forget that there's constant supply of
gunmen in Homs, specifically because they considered Homs to be the center from
which the victory they hope for will move, in addition to its proximity to the
Lebanese borders.
Question: Can we call it a buffer
zone?
President al-Assad: Most Syrian provinces
are border provinces; Deir Ezzor, Hasaka, Raqqa, Idleb, Lattakia, Daraa, Sweida,
and even Homs partly borders Iraq too. This maybe a reason (why some use buffer
zones) but I can't analyze on behalf of the planners. This issue isn't important
for us, whether they consider them buffer zones or not. A buffer zone is a zone
established with the state's approval through specific agreements between two
countries, and we as a state never in any day decided to assume that there's an
area outside Syrian control. When the army wants to enter an area then it can do
that. They considered many areas to be outside the state's control and the army
entered most of these areas with ease, which means that they weren't able to
create this zone. Therefore, I believe that talking about buffer zones is
firstly nonexistent, and secondly unrealistic, even for countries playing a
hostile role.
Question: Mr. President,
as the Commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Force and with your knowledge of
the situation on the ground and its details; there are those among the
opposition who talk and ask why the Syrian forces and the Syrian army are inside
Syrian cities, while not a single bullet has been fired in the Golan for nearly
forty years. They ask in this regard if tanks' natural place is inside Syrian
cities and not on the Golan front.
President
al-Assad: The task of the army and armed forces in all countries
of the world is to protect the homeland. Protecting the homeland doesn't only
mean protecting it from outside, but from within as well; any enemy that comes
from any place. You have to defend your country through relevant institutions,
primarily the army and armed forces. This time, the enemy moved from within, not
from without, and you may tell me that they're Syrians and I tell you that any
Syrian who carries out a foreign and hostile plan becomes an enemy and is no
longer Syrian. The proof being that if a Syrian commits espionage then he is
sentenced to death by law is execution. In fact, those who implement an enemy's
plan are considered an enemy. The enemy moved from within, so the armed forces
moved.
Question: So this doesn't contradict the concept
of resistance and that Syria adopts the ideas of resistance.
President
al-Assad: Not at all, on the contrary, Syria adopts the ideas of
resistance. But the other idea is that if Syria adopts resistance, then why
there isn't resistance towards the Golan – this may be the idea you mean – then
resistance is emerges when a state abandons its responsibility in reclaiming its
land, which didn't happen in Syria like in Lebanon, maybe because of the civil
war at the time, and like in Palestine when there's no state in the first place
to reclaim rights, so the resistance had to exist. When we abandon, as a creed,
policy and armed forces our primary goal of reclaiming land, then there will be
a Syrian resistance.
Question: Mr. President, regarding the military
operations taking place inside Syria now; there is talk on the Syrian street
that Syria received a green light, a Russian green light and Chinese green
light, with some going as far as to even say an American green light maybe or a
western green light. Does Syria need a green light to carry out what it's doing
now?
President
al-Assad: In various stages there was talk of a green light. For
example, when Syria entered Lebanon in 1976 there was such talk and it was
repeated at other stages. In fact, Syria doesn't need a green light in sovereign
issues, in local issues neither and in national issues, from friends nor from
enemies nor from opponents. If we didn't
possess the green light then there's no need for our existence as a homeland and
as a state.
Question: Mr. President, there are those who say
that the popular movement in Syria remained peaceful for four or five months and
became armed after it was oppressed by the state. Some quote or distort a speech
by Your Excellency, the speech before the last in which you said that in Ramadan
it became an armed movement and all activities that were out peaceful became
armed.
President al-Assad: No, this explanation
is inaccurate for a simple reason; if they were unarmed then what explains that
in the first week of turbulence and events there were a number of martyrs among
security and police forces? Then how did these people die? Did they die from
screams? From the sound waves of protestors?
This is
illogical. The truth is they died by weapons, but the type of arming and the
goal of arming were different. At that time, the main goal was
rallying the people by shooting protesters, security men and the police so that
the police and security respond and kill more civilians; thereby spreading a
state of hostility towards the state.
After the failure of this project, they shifted
since the last Ramadan to armed action through which they reached rebellious
areas that the state cannot enter like Baba Amr and other areas, and of course
these areas were entered so the gunmen's tactic changed. Now, after Baba Amr was
entered and after the fall of their sites in various other provinces that they
had considered to be fortified, they switched to another method that involved
more assassinations and more terrorism against citizens and more of punishing
citizens by blocking roads, preventing the arrival of flour for bread, and fuel
like diesel, gas oil and gas, and other daily necessities. In fact, the gunmen
appeared since the first days. The images broadcast by Syrian TV on what
happened in Daraa, the shootings by gunmen which they said at the time were
fabricated, were real.
Question: It is said on the street that the state
delayed the resolution, meaning that after people saw the progress of military
operations they said that the state was capable of doing the sort of military
and security operations now which are in the framework of resolution, so why did
it delay in this regard, which implied to many who thought that the state is
weak so they acquired more weapons, were misled more, and moved forward with
this project on a larger scale?
President
al-Assad: The state did not delay, and the proof is that when
the armed forces sensed a major escalation in Daraa during the beginning of the
events in the first months, the army entered Daraa. We never hesitated for a
second for the resolution. But with every step the state took, there was a
development in their modus operandi, so in turn the state needed more counter
steps. Some want us to handle that stage as we handle the stage today.
This is illogical. The stage is
different, their modus operandi was different, even the public understanding of what is happening was
different. Many people were misled in the beginning, thinking
that what is happening is a state of excitement a wave of The Arab spring that
will affect Syria, that these youths are excitable, that there are no gunmen,
that the state is fabricating, all the these things we used to hear.
For us as a state, the lack of public
understanding was a problem. What helped the state in the
resolution in recent months was the clarity of the picture for the larger part
of the Syrian population as there's a change in political conditions and in the
security in the security conditions themselves.
There's a change in the public
mood towards what is happening and towards the gunmen as they discovered that
what is happening isn't a revolution nor a spring; they are rather it is
terrorist acts in the full meaning of the word, and the clarification of the
external factor which wasn't clear at the beginning. When I delivered
my
first speech at the People's Assembly and
talked about a conspiracy and confrontation, many
wondered what conspiracy and what confrontation, accusing us of
saying that everything is a conspiracy and considering what was happening to be
a mere case of excitement as I mentioned before, and that if the President had
said a few kind and sentimental words then the problem would have been solved. I
told them that the problem didn't begin with sentiments and won't end with
sentiments; there's a plan and there are internal tools, so from the beginning
we took a decision for resolution because the picture was clear, but the method
of resolution differs depending on the different stages of the crisis.
Question: Mr. President, this crisis included and was
exacerbated by the presence of some personalities who partook in corruption at
this stage and exploited the crisis among officials, whether they were in the
army security forces or in the state or businessmen and merchants and many
activities who exploited the crisis and even contributed to increase it. What
about those?
President
al-Assad: I wish to distinguish between crisis traders who
appear in every crisis in any country, whether they are merchants in the
economic or material sense or other people who want to exploit the crisis for
other private interests, and they could be inside the state or outside the
state, and on the other hand, the mistakes that occur within the crisis and have
no relation to prolonging the crisis. There were mistakes that happened, there
were transgressions that happened, there were violations, thefts, some of which
was uncovered but in a limited number and those were referred to the judiciary
many months ago. Everyone who made a mistake or wanted to prolong the crisis for
different reasons must be held accountable. This issue is final and isn't up for
discussion or debate, but the Question is how to identify them. You hold
accountable the known not the anonymous; and most lawsuits filed and complaints
that come in are against anonymous sides, and in the cases in which the
individuals were identified and held accountable the wronged party brought the
name and there was scrutiny and investigation and the misdemeanor or crime was
proven and referred to the judiciary. The main challenge is how to find out who
these people are, particularly since that in the conditions of security work and
during chaotic circumstances investigation becomes harder than before. As a
matter of principle, these individuals must be held accountable even if it were
after overcoming these conditions and restoring calm.
Question: Meaning that if they were in positions of
power, then dismissal isn't enough, but also trial?
President
al-Assad: When you don't have proof but rather inconclusive
indicators, then you may dismiss that individual for lack of confidence in their
performance, but when you have conclusive evidence that this individual did
something then he must be referred to the judiciary immediately regardless of
the position he occupies.
Question: There are those who say that after
nearly a year and a half of the crisis there's still a problem with the matter
of appointments, with some wondering why appoint someone who isn't qualified,
who doesn't have the ability and qualification needed and who might later cause
us problems leading to dismissing and trying them for example. Mr. President, is
there a flaw in the appointment mechanism, particularly since the crisis didn't
influence in or maybe didn't motivate instruments in a bigger way in this
regard?
President
al-Assad: There's an objective side to this proposition and a
subjective side. The objective sides is that we don't have in Syria so far human
resources management in the scientific sense, and this is a standalone science,
and this is what we're doing by putting the final touches on a project related
to public employment, which evaluates the person since entering the government
employment and until leaving it with a full course that specifies the
development of their work. Someone good may come along and the evaluation is
correct but after a while they deviate. The mechanism of entry alone isn't
enough. As for saying that this person came and didn't prove to be good in the
current mechanism in the absence of human resources management then you can only
try as you don't know if this person will fail. You must try to know that they
will fail, and as long as they failed and you can replace them then where's the
problem? Of course, this takes time, but you don't have other options. There are
cases where a person is successful in a place and we assume that his success in
this place will lead to his success elsewhere, only to discover that this isn't
true after trying. In fact, with the absence of human resources in their
scientific form, then you have no option except to try, and the important thing
in this case is not to keep quiet over someone who makes mistakes or fails, nor
keep them in place, and in turn there's someone who fails in a place not because
they're bad, but because this place doesn't suit them, when you transfer them
elsewhere they might succeed.
Question: Mr. President, many people link
everything to the President, saying the President appointed this minister or
issued that or discussed this, confusing a presidential decree with a mistake or
something the government is in charge of. Your Excellency talked on more than
one occasion about a true supervision that the media should perform on
government performance. How can the media have the bigger role in
supervision?
President
al-Assad: Officials must be monitored from above and monitored
form below, which means the public base, but demands so far are to monitor
officials from above only, and this isn't enough. It might be enough for certain
levels of responsibility; a minister, a general director and the like, but there
are lower levels like employees who need popular oversight in which the media
plays a main role. The media tried in various stages to play this role, but this
isn't only through articles highlighting general issues, as the media's role is
to prepare a full case like, in countries that are advanced in what happens this
field; the journalist presents a full case containing evidence, and in this case
there's no choice for officials but to refer this case as it is to investigation
and later to the judiciary. This is what the media lacks. Of course, for the
media to succeed in this, we also need more transparency by the state, as those
affected will attempt to shut all doors in the face of the media, but the media
must remain persistent and determined in this framework. Of course, for the
President's role, he's responsible for the entire state and cannot evade or say
I'm not responsible for a certain aspect of the state, but there's a certain
reality: no-one can see all corners of the country.
Question: From this comes the emphasis on the role of
institutions which Your Excellency talked about since the oath speech, that in a
state of establishment each point must assume its true role?
President
al-Assad: Exactly. As long as establishments aren't mature, any
official's role including the President's will remain a lacking role. The
President supervises in a general manner the policies of establishments and
intervenes in some cases, but here we're dealing with thousands of cases each
day, cases that relate to citizens who cannot be supervised daily unless there
are institutions of establishments or participation on the part of citizens in
managing the state's affairs.
Question: You Excellency said that the media
should persist, but is there a mechanism that organizes work more effectively
and thus gives - we don't want to say authority in the literal sense but rather
a bigger role for the media? Are we allowed to intervene more in affairs which
may be related to oversight?
President
al-Assad: It's more than a question of being allowed or not. For
me as an official, when you do your duty, I succeed, and your role is a success
for me, and it's in my personal interest that the media succeeds in this regard,
and there's national interest too as the homeland succeeds, institutions succeed
and citizens succeed and become comfortable. In these matters, we all win when
you play your role. The media playing its role isn't a matter of allowing or
not, but rather a matter of knowing exactly how to play the role objectively,
and for the media not to exploit their role for personal interest. The media, in
the end, is one of the authorities that can exploit authority for personal
interest, and this relies on the profession's professional ethics of those
working in the field.
Question: Meaning that if the issue is within the
supervision framework oversight and the framework of serving the country, then
the media, as Your Excellency said, has the green light.
President
al-Assad: Exactly, but by overcoming the educational role and
playing a more investigative role, and by having the media's role become
investigating cases and finding evidence in addition to solutions, thereby
assisting the judiciary and the investigating authorities, and at the same time
proposing solutions to officials that we can benefit from in our decisions in
the future.
Question: Mr. President, the
media is being targeted now in Syria, and Your Excellency highlighted this on
more than one occasion. In a previous stage we faced a media war from abroad,
then it shifted to targeting the Syrian media politically. We saw the decision
of the Arab foreign ministers when they decided to block Syrian channels from
satellites which is also a precedent, and bloody targeting that manifested
itself in al-Ikhbariya bombing, the bombing of the General Establishment of
Radio and Television, and the targeting of Addounia TV and journalists with
kidnapping and murder. Where do you place the media in this
context?
President
al-Assad: The answer lies in the question, and it takes us to an
important point which is that we must stop self flagellation, despite the
presence of shortcomings in all fields including the media, and we wish things
had been better. But if this tool has been a failure, as some claim, then it
wouldn't have been targeted. If it were bad, harmful and a failure then they
would have provided you, as national media whether public or private, free
satellite channels. This affirms that Syrian media managed to expose them and
undermine true media empires behind which is not just money but also political
decisions in major capitals of the world. This in itself is proof of the success
of Syrian media. Of course, we can be stronger and more successful, and this is
natural. We haven’t reached our aspirations and you haven't reached your
aspirations as media, and this is the course of life. But to those who say that
the media is a failure, this is our answer.
Question: Mr.
President, the issue of defections is one of the things that concerned Syrian
society lately as well. There were those who promoted the defection of figures
like Riyad Hijab, Manaf Tlas, some diplomats and some officers of various ranks,
and they said that if these people hadn't seen something dark in Syria's future
and that the state isn't stable and isn't strong, then they wouldn't have
abandoned fortune, power and positions to the unknown.
President
al-Assad: Regardless of the names, and assuming that the future
is dark, is this a reason to leave the country? What is this limited
proposition, it is an accusation of being unpatriotic. But let us examine the
term.
First, defection is when one
establishment separates from a bigger establishment that presides over it or the
defection of a part of an establishment from the main establishment, and at the
top of this establishment is an individual or individuals who rebel against the
higher levels or the main establishment. This didn't happen. What happened
was that individuals who were occupied certain positions fled the country, which is a process of desertion and escape, not defection. The
defection is internal, not external. It's a rebellion against the state within
the country, which didn't happen. Therefore, these are desertions outside the
country, and those who desert or flee are either people who were presented with money and left, and are
therefore corrupt and accept bribes, or
cowards who were threatened by terrorists or the other side or, as you
said, had no hope of a bright future, so they got scared of this future and fled
abroad, or maybe it was someone with ambition who believed that he should have
gotten gains or benefits or specific ranks but didn't and decided to
flee. Of course, there other reasons.
In the end,
those who flee are practically either weak or bad, because a patriotic and good
person doesn't runaway and doesn't flee abroad.
Practically, this process is positive and a process of self-cleansing of
the state first and the country in general, so we mustn't be upset by this
process because it's positive.
Many people we didn't know had these qualities and
they exposed their truth themselves, which is positive. Add to that that more
than one person was said to want to defect before, and what did we do?
We told those who proposed that let's
facilitate it for him and let him go. It's a positive process. Of
course, we weren't sure in all cases, and in return in some cases we were very
sure yet we didn't mind, and despite that many people were discussed before and
lately and were allegedly to flee Syria under the slogan of defection,
did you hear that the state arrested any of
those? Of course not, because we view this positively.
Question: Despite knowing and being aware of
this.
President
al-Assad: In some cases, we have information and high
suspicions. We don't say fully aware. But the question put by relevant authority
was what to do, how to act, should we prevent them? There was a call to
prevent them but we told them no, prevention isn't right, these people's
departure is the right thing.
First, they're exposed before the
Syrian people. Second, every person who leaves the country is finished. If they
have political ambition or goals then they're over for the simple reason which
is that the Syrian people don't respect those who run away, and that Syrian
people cannot be led by remote control with wireless devices, and they cannot
lead them from abroad. This issue has been resolved historically, so I
can say that if there's a Syrian citizen who knows that about someone who is
hesitant and wants to flee, then they should encourage them.
Question: Within the major campaign targeting
Syria, can we expect more desertion? Do you have a problem in this
regard?
President
al-Assad: If desertion is by this kind of people then it's a
positive case, and it's natural for this sort of people come to the surface
during crises, and this a positive thing that we must anticipate and be
optimistic about, not pessimistic.
Question: Your Excellency indicated on all
occasions the scale of the conspiracy and pressure against Syria and the many
things for which all available methods and means have been rallied politically
and non-politically, morally and immorally. The Syrians ask: why us? Why are we
being targeted with this enormous amount of resources aimed at
Syria?
President
al-Assad: this is the history of Syria, conflict on Syria took
place even when we were part of the Ottoman Empire, because the Levant is a strategic
region, following independence and the French evacuation all the
coups were funded from outside and aimed at controlling Syria and the Syrian
policy as well as dragging it into axes which were present at that time when
Syria started to adopt an independent policy, practically after March 8th
Revolution and consolidated after the Corrective Movement when the attack on
Syria became more powerful than before.
Now, we are paying the price of different stances, some
of them related to the principled polices linked to the Syrian rights, our
stance on the resistance and our relation with Iran which means with this axes
that is not liked by the West.
Some of those are linked to our
latest stances, a lot of people aren’t aware that our stance on the shelling of
Libya was a lonely stance at the Arab League against the no-fly
zone.
We objected, and not merely
abstained. As we fully understood that the no-fly zone means the
start of aggression on Libya and this is what has happened. We pay the price of
these stances and the price of the west’s openness towards us in 2008, 2009 and
2010 during which time some have mistakenly believed that it was a real openness
stage, but it was a stage through which they aimed to change the way of dealing
with Syria , and to reach the needed goals, conspiring against resistance,
particularly in Lebanon and targeting relations between Syria and Iran which
stands by us and the Arab right, and when they failed during that stage, the
Arab Spring was the new justification for them in front of their peoples to
conspire once again against Syria. For all these reasons we pay the price.
Question: Mr. President, Was anything were demanded
to be done by your side, and you refused to do so during the openness and
interest stage which was practiced on Syria between 2008 and 2010, so the ways
and means have changed?
President al-Assad: Yes, they clearly and continuously asked
us to move away from Iran, and our answer was clear as much as Iran stands by
us, supports us and stands by our rights without any hesitation and even without
discussions of the details just as it is a Syrian right or a Syrian opinion.
So how could we move away from it. In principle,
rejecting or inverting on a side or faithful country, this is unacceptable .In
terms of interest, a country which changed the Israeli Embassy into a
Palestinian one and stood with the Palestinian right. As Arab states, we don’t
talk but with the Palestinian right, do we come and turn the table on this
country ?? on the other side, the attempts which were made during that time were
related to conspiring on the Iranian nuclear file though we are not part of this
file, and Iran didn’t ask assistance in this issue, the issue is proposed on the
international arena, not on the regional one, what was needed from Syria was to
convince Iran with matters against its interest, we saw that issue as an issue
which relates to our future interest, our national security in the future,
because what is applied to Iran as a state which seeks to get peaceful nuclear
energy will be applied to us in future, particularly as this energy is basic in
the future, and the West wanted to monopolize the knowledge and prevent it from
the developing countries.
There is another side related
to the resistance,
they also wanted us to
conspire against the resistance in Palestine, the resistance in
Lebanon through some measures which might be happening in
Lebanon to prevent it, we rejected all these issues, they relied on the
principle of openness and that the Arabs like honoring, and appreciation, and
flattery, this openness and the repeated visits and drumming by the western
media against Syria whose president was a criminal a few years ago
according to their media in 2005 after al-Hariri
issue, and suddenly became a peace maker, this gives you an idea
of western hypocrisy, and when they failed during that stage, the Arab spring
was the opportunity to terminate the Syrian policy.
Question: Syria has and still encounters all forms of
sanctions that targeted some Ministers, companies, among them medical, food
ones, so the Syrian people was the target. Those sanctions were seemingly
imposed on a number of personalities, but the reality is that they impacted the
people as a whole, who could Syria avoid all these sanctions, particularly as
they say that through economic pressure, or through making Syria collapse
economically they might achieve their political goals?
President
al-Assad: This kind of sanctions will undoubtedly affect Syria,
but it will affect with specific degrees. This depends on how we could we adapt
with these conditions. Look to Iran, it progresses forwards in light of severe
sanctions throughout many decades. We are a nation that has intelligence
throughout history, we have a great ability to adapt, we have lived the crises
throughout our history. The stages which were calm were limited stages in the
Syrian history, undoubtedly we have capability to adapt with them as we are a
productive state, we are not an importer country in principle, we are productive
state from agriculture, crafts into small industries, but we have to reformulate
our economy in a way that suits with this new condition, in this case we can
make achievement. The Syrian industry has developed in light of the eighties
siege, you remember at that time we had not even the basic materials, that
condition was more difficult than this stage, we had no minimum reserve in our
banks, even though we could develop industry, today we have bigger capabilities
but they need some thinking, a number of practical plans, not theorization, I
believe that we will get benefit, these outcomes will occur after the crisis
though self-dependence and keeping away from some unimportant consumer- habits
which we have adopted mainly because we live years of welfare, so we have the
ability to remain and develop, and what we need is to specify what the best
formula for our economy.
Question: Mr. President, You called for dialogue,
and the state calls for dialogue, some opposition parties talk now about
dialogue, they were rejecting dialogue, but now they accept, some reject, other
accept, how the State deals with the call for dialogue since the convening of
the conference last year?
President
al-Assad: This is a very long story though it lasted a year and
a half, but it was very rich and a lot of people don’t know what things were
happening and what was the reality of the dialogue, what was the stance of the
state and the opposition's.
At the beginning of the crisis, we asked to
conduct dialogue with all the forces and personalities even those who were
novice in politics, we went beyond all the political forces reaching social and
cultural personalities, etc, we considered the issue as not a political issue,
but a national issue, each person in Syria is engaged in resolving this crisis,
at that time, the issue of dialogue was proposed on all levels by different
sides, and by the states which came to advise us, with good or bad faith, the
same thing by the powers existing in Syria which wanted to exploit the crisis,
or those who wanted to take a national and real position.
We said that the notion of
dialogue
is good and we
started to work for that purpose, here the sorting out began, particularly
regarding the forces of opposition. There was a national opposition which wanted
to put aside all its interests and visions which we differ on to put the
interest of the Homeland first. Subsequently in the political process, some of
them entered elections, others participated in the People's Assembly and the
government.
On the other side, there was the non-national opposition
whom we didn't talk about directly, without specifying who was this opposition,
the people will later know who they are, but we have to specify what is
happening.
In the beginning, that opposition presented a reform process,
reforming, amending, changing laws or amending the constitution. It believed
that we would reject this logic, of course, this is what has been proposed by it
publically, At the same time, it was bargaining with us through hidden channels
that it had no interest in all this and that this speech was for the media or
popular consumption, but it wanted to take part in the government.
Of
course, in principle we said we have no problem in the issue of participation in
the government. The government is not restricted to one side, the government is
for all people. We have always let independent people participate. Other forces
could come, we have no problem,
but we don’t accept blackmail.
The basis in dealing with any side is the moral and principled dealing. We
reached dialogue.
Those forces were calling for dialogue, we were
surprised that they didn’t come, I stress that I talk about part of the
opposition, why did those forces refuse to come to dialogue? Because, before
dialogue starts, they supposed it to be restricted to the State and those
groups, to sit at the dialogue table in the absence of other sides.
Interposition: which means monopolization.
President
al-Assad: Yes, for a simple reason: they wanted to pretend to be
defenders of the people and representatives for them, and that we are against
the people.
They had no popular base, but
they tried to achieve a political position for them in as opportunists in order
to negotiate with the State, so we rejected this speech and called on all
different powers, on the dialogue table there was more than 100 personalities.
They represent different Syrian spectrums, this is from one side.
Another side was that some of these powers were
continuously contacting the western embassies which were actively working in
Syria at that time, they were told not to go for dialogue because the life span
of the state, or what they call "regime"- and this word is rejected-, the life
span of this state is in weeks or a number of months, so you don’t have to talk
to a collapsed side. There were other sides which went to Egypt, received money
from Gulf countries at the Arab League or through officials at the Arab League
in order not to go to the dialogue. There was another reason, they proposed the
issue of reform, I met some groups of them, they talked about the constitution
and the 8th Article, before a month of the dialogue, I addressed the people at
Damascus University, during which I announced reforms.
According to them, what was needed from this
dialogue was to propose reforms and put us in front of two options; if we
accepted, they would say to the people that they brought the reform through
negotiations with the state, and if we rejected, they would say that the State
was against reform, so let us fight it. So they monopolize the popular base as
defenders of the people's rights. This was clear for us, they are opportunists
to a great deal, so we disregarded them, and moved to another stage after
dialogue. Of course, they continued their stance through betting on the
embassies and the Gulf powers existed at the Arab League and contacted them till
they lost hope. Lately, we heard that they started to talk about dialogue.
Let us put aside all this opportunism, and suppose
good well, let us say to come late is better than not to come, but if you wanted
to come late, you have to be true, not to come once more as an opportunist to
get on a wave that you see this ship didn't sink, so let us ensure a place in
it. You are talking now about rejecting violence and arming from all sides. This
is the word which some are ruminating from time to time, if you admitted of the
weapon or arming, why did you reject it a year ago? Would you come and say
clearly that you were mistaken or in maximum that you have lied to the people.
We don’t expect the second, in minimum, the first. Let him say that he didn’t
know, let him say that he made a mistake in evaluation. But to come as if
nothing has happened, this speech is rejected, this opportunism is rejected,
when they believe that they didn't find a place for them on the other ship and
that it drowned through councils abroad or through the outside's discovering
that the opportunist opposition has no real position in Syria, has no role.
Through betting on the military terrorist act and the failure
of this armed terrorist work in Syria to achieve important outcomes, on the
contrary it was a retreat and contraction. At that time they began to shift.
This speech is unacceptable for us. This is on one side, but on the other, there
are other initiatives at work.
Question: Initiatives of the opposition like
Rome's. Here we discussed the three stages of dialogue that first they demanded
it, second they refrained from it, and now they demand it again, and with the
belief that the ship hasn't sunk. The number may expand and new spectrums may
come to join them.
President
al-Assad: In addition to what I said in my previous answer on
rejecting dealing with opportunism, we have a principled policy and what we said
at the beginning of the crisis we say today. We didn't change our positions at
all towards the events and all the circumstances surrounding it. We say that our
dealing with initiatives is also based on what side is making the initiative?
What tools do they possess? What is their weight in Syria?
If they're
countries like what is happening now when we hear about an initiative to be
carried out by Iran and we supported it, first due to Iran's role in the region
and its importance and principled nature and other reasons, and because it will
be with a group of other countries that aren't necessarily as principled and of
the same weight, but they can play a role in one way or another. We ask each
side that makes an initiative: what is the weight of this side?
Many
initiatives came from various sides, some from foreign organizations like the
one that sponsored the recent Rome initiative, and I'm surprised that foreign
organizations are sponsoring Syrian initiatives by Syrian people. This is
disgraceful for us on the national level. We disregarded many of these
initiatives that have no value and no weight, as the crisis isn't a place for
some people to seek positions. This is part of trading in the crisis.
Question: Those who watched the issue of the ship
whether it will sink or not, bet on a time frame. We're talking now about a year
and a half. The ship is still strong and it seems that with the determination of
this country's people it will remain strong. We ask: who made Syria so far
strong and steadfast in the face of all it went through?
President
al-Assad: First, some made a mistake in believing that the ship
is the ship of the state or, once again in quotes, a "regime." The ship is the
homeland either Syria drowns or Syria makes it. We must be clear on this point;
the state cannot sink and the homeland persists for simple reason which is that
despite the many mistakes that exist, there's a deep bond between this state's
policies and this people's creed. But if we said who made this country
steadfast, the fact is it's the people in general, and the popular base not its
elite. To be clear for history: the wide base which maybe isn't usually
interested in politics.
Interposition: The common people.
President
al-Assad: Yes, the common people who maybe aren't interested in
politics, maybe they don't have degrees, maybe they don't live in these
atmospheres, but they have a deep natural feeling about the truth of the crisis
and its substance and essence. This isn't the first time I discover this or see
this scene; we saw it in 2003 after the war on Iraq and its results when some
jumped to criticize the Syrian position for opposing major countries and siding
with Iraq at the time, and it showed clearly after 2005 when the west conspired
against it on the background of the assassination of al-Hariri in Lebanon, and
now we see it clearer; it's the same image.
This wide base of the people
is the one that protects the country, not the elite, to be clear whether this
satisfies some or upsets them. Doubtless the most important element of this
people which made this country steadfast is the armed forces. This army and
armed forces, with their security and police, carry out heroic acts in the full
sense of the word. They have readiness for sacrifice which we heard of before
and believed to be individual cases, and they're present in any army in the
world, individual cases of heroism. But the surprising thing was the general
state of readiness for sacrifices, cases of which we saw directly and live on
Addounia TV and on the Syrian TV during the battles that showed their bravery
and the successes they achieved.
Without the successes of the Syrian
Arab Army during these complicated circumstances, the country's situation would
doubtless be in danger, and the people's embracing of this army is essential. We
say the people's army, as this army is part of this people. If we look at
society as sectors of doctors, intellectuals, university graduates, vocational
workers, farmers, workers, etc., and if we go back to the beginning of the
crisis, the crisis began or relied on sectarian propositions. They wanted in the
beginning to create a sectarian divide among the Syrian people to open a large
hole in Syria in which this plan can pass very easily and quickly. The sectarian
proposition is a departure from religion and deviation from religion, because
religions, and Islam in particular, cannot be sectarian and separatist. There
are many tools for confronting sectarianism, but the most important tool for
this is proper religion, and no-one can play this role like religious figures or
scholars. Truth is, for history, the role of religious figures in this crisis
was very important and vital, and many people don't know that a number of
respectable religious figures were tortured and imprisoned in basements and some
were assassinated and paid with their lives not for standing by the state, but
for saying a word of truth or for speaking of the true principles of religion.
The essence of the crisis was primarily creating sectarian strife and religious
figures had a primary role in combating it. Here we also talk about the media as
we said before; if the role of the media in Syria wasn't important then
journalists wouldn't have paid the price with their lives. There are many
groups, there are people in various points. I don't exclude groups; all groups
have patriotic people and people who paid the price with their lives, but there
was a focus by the opponents and enemies on specific direction, and these groups
or sectors of the people had to fulfill their duty and they carried out their
duty. On the other hand, there were of course deviant religious figures who
played a negative role either due to ignorance in creed or due to hidden
political reasons for which they exploited religion, but those were encircled by
the religious figures of Syria. Therefore, I believe this stage is one that
should be recorded for all these groups that protected the homeland.
Question: Of course, we remember the
assassination of many activities; doctors, engineers, university professors,
scientists in all fields.
President
al-Assad: This is correct. But maybe what was wanted from each
individual in these groups was limited compared to the big slogans that were
posed at the beginning of the crisis, yet I go back and say that everyone
belongs to this people, and when I started by saying that the people were the
ones who protected this country, then this encompasses all groups.
Question: Your Excellency, the Syrians want to
know where they are heading, Where are we going? What next? What do you say to
the Syrians, Your Excellency?
President
al-Assad: We take Syria to the destination we want to as Syrian
People and not to any other place. The external factor has an effect as it can
speed up a certain process or slow it down or divert the direction, but we can
correct the direction. All that is taking place in Syria was never to take place
if we had not certain groups: specific groups, but they are influential in pace
with the foreign scheme politically or criminally. In the absence of such
groups, be sure that a conspiracy led by the entire world against Syria, and in
which all the world takes part against Syria is unable to affect the future
which we want to draw for ourselves. In short, the fate of Syria is in the hands
of the Syrians, NOT in the hands of anybody else; and once we eliminate
terrorism, we will have no problem, even the conspirator would return and
change.
The Syrians who took part in these events are responsible
for encouraging the conspirators to persist in their conspiracies. This is the
truth. That is why we need to address the internal situation. The conspiracy is
big; but as I said in every speech and every interview, the foundation lies in
Syria. When we get rid of those terrorists and return to search later for the
causes behind the presence of such criminality which we did not believe existed
in our country, then we will be assured. This is the responsibility of society
and the entire homeland to eliminate terrorists and search for the real causes
and deal with them. Then we should be assured; and then Syria will return as we
know it before the crisis and I am certainly confident of this thing.
Question: On more than one occasion, Your
Excellency said that Syria is the mother of all her children; and consequently
when the state grants an amnesty for those who have been involved in the events,
there are those who say that such amnesties might be granted when the state is
strong. Some people also empty the amnesty of its significance. The same applies
to calls for the armed men to lay down their weapons. Those people say that the
state is not in a position which enables it to grant such amnesties.
President
al-Assad: The answer is implied in the Question. You show mercy
when you are strong, not when you are weak. It is a sign of strength and
self-confidence. It is confidence in ourselves and in the people, because the
state represents the people and is part of it. Many people have been misled and
misguided. Put aside mistakes: some times, in security work, some people get
arrested by mistake and are released individually or collectively. But there are
cases which are identified by law as offences, and which we might show some
tolerance towards. This approach has produced positive results during the past
eighteen months. If amnesty achieves positive results, why shouldn't we pursue
it. Solving the crisis is not only through the elimination of terrorism, or
through force. We have to use all possible means including tolerance. That is
why we continue to embrace this policy.
Question: Part of the Syrian people say – and let
us put this between quotation marks – that they no longer believe in
pan-Arabism. They say we should put “Syria first” and abandon pan-Arabism after
the stances taken by the Arab League and suspending Syria’s membership and the
role played by some Arab regimes. Does His Excellency President Bashar al-Assad
still believe in pan-Arabism and what is called “Arab action”?
President
al-Assad: First, I repeat what I said in one of my speeches,
that “Syria first” is self-evident. Every homeland, every village to which a
human being belongs is “first”. But this does not contradict with what comes
second, which is the city, the larger homeland and the Arab world to which we
belong. This talk is reductive and comes as a reaction. When we say “Syria
first”, or that we don’t want to belong to the Arab nation, it means that we are
handing the Arab nation over to those conspiring against us. On the contrary, I
say that today I am more committed to pan-Arabism, more convinced of it and more
comfortable with it. After more than a decade of working with some – not all -
of those Arab officials at different levels – some of them heads of state – I
know that they don’t belong to the Arab nation and it doesn’t belong to them.
This assures one that the Arab nation is pure despite some people’s endeavours
to make it murky with their existence. As to the Arab league, it is not a
standard of a criterion for pan-Arabism. Pan-Arabism is not an organization, it
is a state of civilization. This region is based on a number of pillars, the
biggest among them are pan-Arabism and Islam. Without both of them as two big
bases, the region can never exist in its present form. Without believing in
these two main pillars, we show that we do not believe in something which exists
in reality whether we like it or not. This is a fact. If you don’t believe in
it, you need to change it. Can we cancel away pan-Arabism? This is a different
issue.
As to the Arab League, let’s be realistic: in the past 10
years, since the outbreak of the Intifada – In the 1990s it only met once, since
there was only one Arab summit. Since the year 2000, what are the achievements
of the Arab League in the interest of the Arab nation? In fact, through my
presence in all Arab Summits, Syria had no ambition to achieve anything. Our
utmost ambition was to decrease losses. We always knew that there were traps and
landmines which we needed to dismantle. We never believed that in the Arab
League there was real work in the interest of the Arab nation. One of his most
difficult political activities was to attend an Arab Summit as to dismantle and
deter the set-off of traps and mines, citing the lack of a belief in the
presence of a genuine work in the League in the interest of the Arab
Nation.
Question: A number of Foreign media outlets said
they want President Assad to appear on TV screens every day to dispel rumors
about him. They wonder where you are: in Lattakia, in Tehran, in Moscow? Even
his wife and children: where are they, inside Syria, outside Syria. Mr.
President, where are you now?
President
al-Assad: I am with you in the Republican Palace in Damascus.
Anyway, such rumors are not entirely negative, as we do not in most cases
respond to the rumors which are like 'bubbles' exposing their lies and
falsifications, though such rumors might confuse the citizen a little, but they
confuse them more and confuse their fighters. They try to improve the morale of
their fighters through such rumors, and by so doing offer illusions to their
tools. This is a good thing and should not annoy us. This means that these tools
will soon fail. We should not pay heed nor get upset by such rumors. I am here
on the ground, in reality. They are incapable of making fear creep to my heart
or into the hearts of the majority of Syrians. They will never achieve
this.
Question: Thank you very much Mr.
President.
.jpg)
With no clear border procedure
yet defined by Egyptian authorities, Palestinians in Gaza are wondering whether
the border crossing will remain less restrictive, as it became after Mohammed
Mursi was elected Egypt’s new president, or whether it will devolve to the
Mubarak days of heavy restrictions and constant closures.
