لقد خطّ الأستاذ غسان بن جدو والسيد حسن نصر الله في حوار العام مساراً هاماً للتوثيق الشفوي لا بدّ من متابعته واستكماله ليكون القاسم المشترك بين السياسة والإعلام والتاريخ وثقافة الحاضر والمستقبل.
أن تجلس أمام الشاشة شاخصاً وناصتاً لقرابة أربع ساعات ولا تريد حتى لصوت الرياح أن يزعج خلوتك مع ما يقال، ولا لأحد أن يدب قربك لأي سبب كان؛ فهذا يعني أنك تنصت لما يلامس شغاف قلبك وعصارة عقلك ووجدانك وبأسلوب سلس وهادئ ومريح لا ادعاء فيه ولا محاولة لإبراز حجم مساهمة المتكلم أو المحاور أو تسليط الضوء على ما قد يزيد من مكانة أو مساهمة أي منهما.
بل كان التركيز والتصويب كله على توثيق حقائق ومعطيات أتت بالكثير من الجديد هدفها الأساس إنصاف الناس قادة كانوا أم شهداء أم جنوداً أم مجموعات مغمورة لم يذكرها أحد، والنتيجة الجميلة كانت توثيقاً شفوياً لذاكرة قائد في الميدان يقارع، ولا يزال، تحالف الشر بين أعداء الأمة وبين المستسلمين الخانعين على مدى سنوات وهو يعمل مع الأصدقاء والإخوة والرفاق عملاً أهمّ ما يميّزه الصدق والغيرية وإنكار الذات ووضع مصير الأوطان والشعوب فوق كلّ اعتبار.
شعرتُ وأنا أحضر هذا الحوار أنني لا أريده أن يصل إلى النهاية أبداً بل أتمنى أن يتطرق إلى كلّ الأوضاع في العالم لأستزيد من خبايا خبرة هذا الذي يحمل اسمه إرث الرسالة والذي يدلي باتصالاته ومعلوماته عن القادة والرفاق وسير العمل على أكثر من صعيد وفي أكثر من بلد في هذه الساحة الإقليمية الصعبة والمعقدة والتي يعصف بها أحياناً عاملون في الطابور الخامس ليذرّوا الرماد في العيون ويمنعوا الحقيقة عن المتسائلين والتوّاقين لمعرفة الحقيقة وجوهرها.
استزدنا من السيد نصرالله عن شخصية فارس من فرسان المقاومة تحلّى بكلّ صفات الفارس النبيلة والأخلاقية والإنسانية الراقية الشفافة؛ فكما كان صلباً وعنيداً في مقارعة الأعداء كان مرهفاً في مقاربة آلام الآخرين ومتواضعاً جداً في تعامله مع الناس وفي نظرته إلى نفسه؛ فجسّد بخلقه وعمله الآية الكريمة “وعباد الرحمن يمشون على الأرض هوناً وإذا خاطبهم الجاهلون قالوا سلاماً”.
وكلما أُفرد ملف عن هذا الفارس اكتشفنا زاوية من شخصيته وعمله وخلقه ونبله لَم نكُن لننفذ إليها من قبل لولا حوار السيد هذا.
هذا التوثيق في غاية الأهمية لأنه الإرث الذي نتركه للأجيال، والثقافة التي نغذيهم بها وننشئهم عليها؛ فإذا كان الشهيد قاسم سليماني الرجل الذي لا بديل عنه فإن إرثه العسكري والسياسي والأخلاقي والإنساني حكماً لا بديل عنه ويجب أن يعكف الدارسون على توثيقه وتوصيفه ووضعه في متناول الأجيال القادمة كي يساهم في تشكيل وعيها عن الماضي ويساعدها على اجتراح الوسائل المناسبة لمواجهة أعاصير الحاضر واحتمالات المستقبل. هذا الإرث هو السلاح الأمضى كي نقوّض خطوات الأعداء الذين ظنوا أنهم بتنفيذهم هذا العمل الإرهابي المجرم يستطيعون القضاء على هذا المسار النبيل.
الشهيد قاسم سليماني لم يعد رجلاً عادياً بل أصبح مساراً وثقافة وأسلوباً وقدوة، وعلينا ترسيخ هذا النموذج بكلّ الوسائل الممكنة من توثيق وتوضيح وشروحات كي يشكل عضداً لثقافة المقاومة التي هي الضمانة الوحيدة لاستمرار الأجيال على هذا النهج إلى أن يتحقق تحرير الأرض ويتم بناء الأنموذج الذي يضمن حرية الأرض والإنسان وزرع القيم والتي هي أخشى ما يخشاه العدو لأن الصراع الحقيقي هو على القيم والأخلاق والمسار الإنساني الذي تتبناه الشعوب، والصراع هذا هو صراع بالفعل وهو الصراع القديم الحديث بين الحقّ والباطل والخير والشرّ وبين من يقدّس إنسانية الإنسان ومن يسعى لانتهاكها وظلمها كي يراكم ثرواته.
في هذا التوثيق الحصيف الانسيابي الهام جداً تطرّق السيد إلى ما اعترى سوريا وإلى الأشهر الأولى من الحرب الكونية على الشعب السوري فبدّد الأوهام وكذّب السفهاء والمتاجرين بدماء وحيوات شعوبهم؛ إذ ذكر حقيقة في غاية الأهمية وهي أن السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد ومنذ البداية سأل ما هو المطلوب وأنا جاهز للحوار، وأضاف السيد نصرالله أن الأصدقاء في الجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية استنفروا للاتصال، كلٌّ بأصدقائه ومعارفه، لكي يبدأ النقاش والحوار حول المطلوب وتعقد الطاولات المستديرة حول المهام المطلوبة لإخماد نار الفتنة وإنقاذ البلاد، ولكن الجواب الذي عاد به الجميع هو أن الطرف المدعي يؤمن أن النظام في طريقه إلى الانهيار وأنهم سوف ينتظرون إلى أن ينهار هذا النظام ولا مصلحة لهم في الدخول في مفاوضات أو نقاشات أو حوار معه الآن.
هذا يتقاطع، وهذا للتاريخ أيضاً، مع الدور المتواضع الذي كلفني به سيادة الرئيس مع بعض الشخصيات هنا داخل سوريا لنتحدث مع من يعتبرون أنفسهم ممثلي المعارضة ونرى ما هي طروحاتهم وماذا يريدون أن يبحثوا وما هي في نظرهم النقاط التي ترضي الجميع وتنقذ البلد من أي احتمالات خطرة أو سيناريوهات مغرضة.
وقد قابلنا كل من كان يقود ما أسموه “حراكاً” في المراحل الأولى، وامتدت اللقاءات لساعات وأيام كانوا يركزون خلالها على سرد تاريخي لأي تجاوزات حصلت منذ عشرات السنين حتى من قبل مسؤولين غادروا البلد ولم يعودوا إليه، ونحن نحاول إعادة البوصلة إلى الوقت الراهن ونقول دعونا من كلّ هذا ونركز على ما يتوجب فعله اليوم كي نتعاون أنتم ونحن في وضع الأمور في نصابها الصحيح ولا نعرّض شعبنا وبلدنا لما قد لا تحمد عقباه.
ولكن القرار الذي فهمناه من كلّ هؤلاء في ختام كلّ حوار هو أنهم يفضّلون الانتظار وكان واضحاً أنهم كانوا ينتظرون وعداً وعهداً من أعداء سوريا بقلب الطاولة لصالحهم لأن أسيادهم كانوا قد روّجوا عبر وسائل الإعلام أن المسالة مسألة وقت قصير وبذلك شجعوا على الانشقاقات وعلى أن تأخذ هذه المعارضات المواقف المؤدية إلى تدمير مؤسسات البلد ومنشآته أملاً منهم في تحقيق الموعود واعتلائهم سدة الحكم كما وعدهم أسيادهم بذلك وكما جرت الأمور في بلدان أخرى كتونس وليبيا والعراق.
هذا التوضيح من قبل السيد نصرالله ومن قبل من عمل في الداخل في غاية الأهمية، لأنه يؤرّخ لمرحلة قد تبدو ضبابية لأجيال المستقبل، ويجيب عن أسئلة جوهرية شغلت بال الكثيرين هنا في سوريا: هل كان من الممكن تفادي الكارثة؟ وهل كان إبداء مرونة أكبر سيجبر الآخرين على التراجع عن تحالفهم مع أعداء سوريا وعن مخططاتهم والعمل مع دولتهم وشعبهم على احتواء الحراك في بداياته؟
هذه الأسئلة وغيرها كثير مما يطلقه المغرضون تمت الإجابة عليها وبشكل واضح وصريح من قبل شاهد كان على تماس مباشر مع السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد ومن قبل قائد معنيّ بالمقاومة في لبنان وسوريا والعراق وإيران، ومن قبل إنسان يشهد له العدو قبل الصديق بالصدق المطلق في كلّ ما ينطق به لأنه مسؤول أمام الله قبل أن يكون مسؤولاً أمام البشر. والسؤال: كيف يمكن تطوير وتكثيف هذا النوع من الحوارات التوثيقية مع مسؤولين في المنطقة وخارجها بحيث يتم تسجيل هذا التاريخ من أفواه من صنعوه وقادوه وصاغوه، وبعد ذلك ينشغل الكتاب والباحثون والإعلاميون بترتيب وتصنيف هذه المعلومات لتشكل إضافة نوعية لثقافة المقاومة في المنطقة ولتورث الأجيال القادمة تاريخها الحقيقي وتمكنها من التصدّي لكل حملات التشويه والترويج للأعداء والخصوم؟
هذه الحملات التي تعتمد على اختلاق الأكاذيب والمراهنة على سرعة وتيرة الحياة وعدم صبر الكاتب والمتلقي. لقد خطّ الأستاذ غسان بن جدو والسيد حسن نصر الله في حوار العام مساراً هاماً جداً للتوثيق الشفوي لا بدّ من متابعته ووضع الأطر المنهجية والخارطة الشاملة لاستكماله ليكون القاسم المشترك بين السياسة والإعلام والتاريخ وثقافة الحاضر والمستقبل.
It is a dirty war that has been going on in Syria, Libya, and Yemen. Almost nine and a half tragic years have passed. The three countries were subjected to all kinds of terror and brutally destroyed. Actually, what has been going on is a world war! All weapons were used and tested and many countries were involved.
It was a real dirty war, in which the West and the Americans and their allies in the region have used the worst kind of men: a group of collaborators and barbaric terrorists.
The worst kinds of mercenaries from all over the world were sent to Syria. They practices the ugliest inhumane deeds: they decapitated heads, literally ate hearts, and burned people alive to death.
These groups were directly led by generals from the U.S., France, and Turkey. This information was supported by different informed resources that reported capturing French, British, and Turkish officers since 2015, in particular, during the invasion of Idlib. The district was invaded by a tenth of thousands of terrorists from Nusra, especially its group Fateh al-Sham which is directly supported and trained by Turkey, and Ahrar al-Sham which was directly supported by the Americans. The invasion was directly led by the Turkish tank battalions and the NATO alliances.
By December 2015, the northeast of Syria was also invaded by another terrorist group, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria [ISIS]. ISIS was created with the utmost attention of Hilary Clinton, during Barak Obama’s administration. This was revealed by Donald Trump during his election campaign in 2016. ISIS swept over the al-Jazeera region and extended to Palmira through the Syrian Desert and occupied Homos, the biggest Syrian district. It was directly protected by the American extending military bases in northern Syria and the eastern base in al-Tanf. ISIS attacked both the Syrian government forces and the opposition factions.
The plan was to allow ISIS invasion of northern-eastern Syria territories and western-northern Iraqi territories in order to terminate the opposition factions in the region. It was carefully planned by Obama’s administration and in particular his vice president Joe Biden, the new president of the United States of America.
Under the pretense of fighting terrorism, the Americans were back in Iraq and restored bases in Iraq, built new ones in Syria and reestablished new militia groups in the area of the northeast, mainly Kurdish groups. They were trained and equipped by the Americans. For the U.S., it was a necessary step to launch a Kurdish federalism on the Syrian territories.
Nonetheless, the U.S. had set the return plan before withdrawing from Iraq in 2010. Upon its departure, the American administration empowered the al-Qaeda group in Iraq, and supported its existence, as Trump declared and accused Hillary Clinton of being the mastermind behind it. ISIS was basically the American approach to siege Syria, and eventually, apply the plan of division in the region and establish a Kurdish state.
Saying that may seem to be naive and simple. However, executing the plan required initiating “revolutions” in other Arab countries, recruiting media specialists, recruiting special personnel to initiate eruptions by social media, and consuming billions of dollars in the process, of which the Saudi kingdom and Qatar were the main contributors.
In 1992, I was on a visit to al-Hassaka and al-Qamishli. I was just a young beginner in journalism. I was conducting an investigation report about the Yazidis. At that stage, a large number of Yazidis and Kurds were immigrating to Syria. They escaped the biased and brutal treatment of Saddam Hussein and the fanatic Turks. These Kurds were building a wide network in Europe. They bought sympathy and support to establish a federation in Iraq in 1996. The process was facilitated by the Americans after the second Persian Gulf War in 1991 as Saddam’s power was fading.
The idea of having a similar kind of federation in Syria became appealing to both the Americans and Israelis. The size of Israeli foreign intelligence service Mossad’s presence in the Iraqi Kurdistan is not a secret anymore. It is an established fact. The Americans also facilitated the Israeli presence in northeast Syria, especially those who came with American nationality to work in the oil fields.
The Turkish president Erdogan was one of the supporters of the American plan to dismantle Syria. Erdogan was able to recruit Qatar to the best interest of Turkey. Both countries were discontent with the Syrian government’s refusal to allow building the Qatari gas pipeline to Turkey through its territories. Syria saw that a move that would discomfort its allies in Russia and Iran. However, Erdogan had bigger plans in Syria. In the northwest region, Erdogan mainly saw the Idlib and Aleppo districts as the extent of Turkey, and a head starts to initiate the Ottoman dream.
This dream vanished to thin air when Syria started liberating the area occupied by ISIS in West Euphrates, and al-Gab plain after cleaning the Damascus area, Homos, and the center of Syria from terrorism with unlimited support from Russia. The second shock Erdogan received when the Americans started supporting the establishment of the Kurdish federation in al-Hassaka.
The Kurdish militia was founded in October 2015 under the name Syrian Democratic Forces [SDF]. SDF in its formation includes Kurds from Syria and others who came mainly from Turkey and other countries, most of them do not speak Arabic, unlike the Syrian Kurds. 60% of the militia includes Arab Syrians, according to the Pentagon. There are other nationalities included among the formation of SDF, who are Turkmens, Armenians, Circassians, and Chechens, who came from all over Asia.
In 2016, SDF updated its constitution from a separate federal state into an Autonomous Administration of Northern and East Syria [NES] and declared SDF as its official defense force, which complicated the Syrian political scene, furthermore. Now NES or SDF are cooperating with the official American forces in east-north of Syria and serve as “the Southern Lebanese Army, [SLA]” in South Lebanon during the Israeli occupation in South Lebanon. As SLA has tried to establish an independent state in South Lebanon, SDF or NES is trying to acquire the same course.
Since 2018 the Syrian army, with the help of allies – Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah- has been able to liberate most of the occupied lands. However, the liberation coincided with the rise of economic pressure on Syria. The price of the Syrian lira if compared to the American dollar dropped and its purchasing value decreased. It was due to the economic sanctions that were imposed on Syria, and lately “Caesar Law” which was activated in the mid of June 2020.
In 2018, the American troops withdrew from the north of Syria and were redeployed in the al-Hassaka district around the Syrian richest oil fields. The American companies, in particular ARAMCO, are now draining the Syria oil to the interest of NES and financing the American troops stationed in the northern-eastern area of the Euphrates in Syria. Actually, Syria is facing an internal problem with the lack of petroleum resources. The hard winter is coming and the lines for buying the diesel needed for heating the houses will be crowded as much as the lines for gasoline.
After burning and stealing the wheat plains in the al-Jazeera district by the Americans and the Turks, the bread prices went 25% higher. Shortage in bread supplies was triggered by the government’s decision to set the bread rations. The Americans were literally applying Kissinger’s policy which states that nations are ruled by bread, not by arms. The shortage of bread and petroleum products is new to the Syrian population; therefore, the successive Syrian governments are facing major challenges since the beginning of 2019.
Caesar Law added additional pressure on the countries that may establish economic and commercial deals with Syria. The law was imposed at a time in which the world is suffering from COVID-19 epidemic, which spread in Syria as well. In addition, Syria needs to deal with the issue of the Syrian refugees. It is a dilemma that needs to be dealt with appropriately. The refugees’ dilemma is used as a political card to force the Syrians to submit to the American political demands, which are set on two levels: national and international.
On the national level, the international community wants to pressure the Syrian government into implementing a new constitution based on the sectarian division of power, just like Lebanon, which would diminish the presidential authority and redistribute it, as it happened in Tunisia and Sudan, which would divide the power of the head of the state. The second issue is related to the question of the forcibly disappeared people, who were kidnapped or killed by the rebel groups, and treating the killers and kidnappers as political opponents without subjecting them to trials. This issue will be a matter of conflict, and will not be accepted by those whose families and friends were kidnapped or killed. This fact was revealed a few days ago by the new Syrian Foreign Minister, Mr. Feisal Muqdad.
On the international level, the requirements of the international community, i.e. the U.S., have become common knowledge. Since 2003, after the invasion of Iraq, the U.S. secretary of state, Colin Powell, came to Syria and laid down the U.S. demands: dismantling Hezbollah arms, ending Syrian support to the resistance groups in Lebanon, Palestine, and Iraq, and ending cooperation with Iran in the region. The end means, as usually explained, is ensuring the security of Israel.
Naturally, the Syrians refused American demands. Therefore, we should make no mistake and assume that what had happened in the Arab region under the pretense of “Arab Spring” was meant for the destruction of Syria in order to dismantle it into minor sectarian states that can be easily controlled to the best interest of “Israel” and America.
Hence, Syria requires two essential needs to start its reconstruction process: the first is lifting the sanctions imposed on it; and the second is to end the American occupation in the northeast area. However, the West insists on linking lifting the sanctions to the political process. But when it comes to the achievement of the liberation from the Americans this process cannot be realized unless the national resistance would be highly activated in the northeast of Syria. It is America that we all know. It did not end its occupation of Vietnam, Korea, and eventually Iraq in 2010 until the number of causalities becomes unbearable in the American community.
Syria’s essential needs were clearly stated by its president Bashar Al-Assad on two occasions, the first was during a video call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the 10th of November. The second time was in his speech at the opening of the International Conference on the Return of the Refugee in Damascus [ICRRD] on the 11th of November.
During his visit on the 5th of November to the exhibition “Producers 2020” in “Tekia Sulaymaniyah” in the capital, Damascus. It was attended by producers from the Aleppo governorate whose facilities, workshops, and shops were damaged during the war. President al-Assad talked about the economic impact of the issue of shortage of oil supplies and burning the wheat fields in northeastern regions.
He also explained that the economic problem was clearly becoming worse when the banks in Lebanon blocked the Syrian deposits. President al-Assad said that there is vagueness about the Syrian deposit’s estimations. Its assessment ranges from 20 billion dollars to 42 billion dollars. The blockade has been going on for years. He added the crisis began years before the Caesar Law and began years after the siege. It coincided with the money disappearance in the Lebanese banks. Furthermore, al-Assad declared that we do not know what the real number is, and this figure for an economy like the Syrian one is a frightening number.
Al-Assad’s declaration became one week before ICRRD to which Lebanon was invited. Was this a message to Lebanon? It could be, although many observers have denied it. The denial is basically based on Syria’s previous special treatment of Lebanon. Lebanon in the Syrian considerations are two contradictory facts: the first, Lebanon is an opening to the western world with bipolar swings. The first swing expressed in the historical Arab and regional ideology.
And the second swing is expressed in the lining towards a Western ideology, with the tendency to sign normalization agreements with “Israel”. The second group was of great concern to the Syrians since the creation of Lebanon. It is known as the right-wing groups, who allied with the Americans and the Israelis.
The second fact, Lebanon as a state is based on providing services and tourism. It is considered to be the lung that Syria needs to breathe with. However, this lung health became worse since 2011, when the United States accused the Lebanese Canadian Bank of laundering terrorism money. And then again in 2016, since many banks faced the same accusations and were prohibited to deal with customers that the U.S. listed them as Hezbollah members.
Accordingly, the Lebanese banks froze several balances for many customers and in particular the Syrian customers that were importing goods to Syria through Lebanon after imposing an embargo on Syria. It is clear for the Syrians, regardless of the unique relationship with Hezbollah, it is about time that Lebanon should release these balances, and pay its debts to Syria, especially the debts that have been accumulating since 1990, which are the revenues from selling electricity.
Syria, as President al-Assad explained, will need its money in the process of rebuilding the country’s main infrastructure and vital installations, which were destroyed during the liberation war against the terrorist groups. It is a call for Lebanon to join forces with Syria to demand lifting the embargo and to be excluded from Cesar Law consequences because Lebanon needs to open up to Syria for commercial trades towards the east, in particular, to Arab countries, or Lebanon will be demanded to pay back its debts.
The Americans were pushing Syria and the region since 1973 towards peace and normalization treaties with “Israel”. However, Syria has proven that such an agreement would be difficult to execute unless it was a “peace for land” agreement, which would ensure the right of return of the Palestinian people. An equation, nor the Israeli, neither the Americans are willing to sign for. In addition, Syria’s main condition, during the negotiations held in Oslo in 1992, was the return of all occupied Arab territories. However, the series of recognitions Trump has approved throughout his reign made the return to the negotiation table almost impossible. It also pushed into more complications with the relation between Syria and Lebanon since the assassination of Rafiq al-Hariri in 2005. The need to separate the Syrian-Lebanese course in the peace process is becoming a must for the Americans. A need until today could not be achieved.
Syria now is subjected to American pressure that requires its approval to initiate peace and normalization agreements with Israel. This goal so far was difficult to achieve, especially after Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights as part of Israel. Even Syria’s allies, in particular Russia, cannot force the Syrians to give up part of their land. Syria’s war on terror has spared all its allies the tragedy of dragging this war into their own territories.
Hence, Syria prepaid in blood for the security of its “friends” now. History will, sooner or later, reveal this fact. Syria’s insistence on the unity of its land, and its refusal to have any divided authority is now a fact. The Syrians cannot compromise it, and the allies cannot go against it. The course of negotiations the allies led in Astana and Sochi has affirmed it. However, this fact has complicated the Syrian scene furthermore. It might even force the Americans to lead directly the war in the region, whether in arms or diplomacy, since the proxies have proven their disabilities.
BEIRUT, LEBANON (2:20 P.M.) – The permanent representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the United Nations, Ambassador Abdullah bin Yahya Al-Muallami, stressed on Wednesday, the need for Syria to return to the Arab League.
Al-Muallami said in an interview with RT Arabic that the relations between Riyadh and Damascus can be restored simply any day and any moment if the Syrian crisis ends and the factions of the Syrian people agree on the future directions in the country.
On the possibility of opening the Kingdom’s embassy in Damascus along the similar lines of the United Arab Emirates, Al-Muallami said that “there is currently no similar step in the near future because the time has not come yet.”
A delegation from Syria visited the Emirates after the UAE reopened its embassy in Damascus last year.
The Syrian-UAE private sector forum was held in Abu Dhabi with the participation of Syrian businessmen, according to the Syrian Arab News Agency.
“The forum comes within the framework of developing a positive relationship between the two private sectors in Syria and the UAE to establish joint investments,” said Mohammed Thani Murshid Al-Rumaithi, Chairman of the Federation of the UAE Chambers of Commerce and Industry.
President Bashar al Assad told Russia-24 TV that Erdogan’s Muslim Brotherhood ideology, not Turkish national interests, is the cause of his sending troops illegally into Syria, to fight for al Qaeda in Idlib.
Syria News provides the full transcript of the recent interview by Yevgeny Primokov, courtesy of SANA.
Journalist: Hello! This is “International Review” with Yevgeny Primakov. Today, we are in Damascus, in our temporary studio. His Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad, is not our guest in the studio; rather, we are his guests. Mr. President, thank you very much for receiving us and giving us the time to conduct this interview. We are happy to be with you and to see that you are in good health in these difficult circumstances.
President Assad: You are welcome. I am very happy to receive a Russian national television station.
Question 1: Thank you very much Mr. President. Clearly, the most important topic now, besides the war on terrorism that your country is waging, are the events in the Idlib governorate, and the danger of confrontation between the Syrian Arab Republic and Turkey. The Turkish forces are directly supporting what is called “the opposition,” although we see in their ranks elements which belong to terrorist organizations, which are affiliated to Al Qaeda and other organizations. Turkish troops are also taking part in attacks against Syrian forces. The question is: what has changed in the relations between you and Erdogan, between Syria and Turkey? Before 2011, Erdogan used to call you “brother,” and your two families were friends. What has changed and pushed things to where they are now?
President Assad: The core of the issue is American policy. At a point in time, the United States decided that secular governments in the region were no longer able to implement the plans and roles designated to them; of course, I am referring to the countries which were allies of the United States and not those like Syria which are not. They decided to replace these regimes with Muslim Brotherhood regimes that use religion to lead the public.
In doing this, things would become easier for American plans and Western plans in general. This process of “replacement” started with the so-called Arab Spring. Of course, at the time, the only Muslim Brotherhood-led country in the region was Turkey, through Erdogan himself and his Brotherhood affiliation. Prior to this, our relations with them were good in both the political and economic fields; we even had security and military cooperation. There were no problems at all between Syria and Turkey. We didn’t do anything against them and we didn’t support any forces hostile to them. We believed them to be neighbours and brothers. But Erdogan’s Muslim Brotherhood affiliation is much stronger than all of this and he returned to his original identity and built his policies with Syria according to this ideology.
It is well-known that the Muslim Brotherhood were the first organisation to endorse violence and use religion to gain power. Now, if we ask ourselves, why are Turkish soldiers being killed in Syria? What is the cause they are fighting for? What is the dispute? There is no cause, even Erdogan himself is unable to tell the Turks why he is sending his army to fight in Syria. The single reason is the Muslim Brotherhood and it has nothing to do with Turkish national interests. It is related to Erdogan’s ideology and consequently the Turkish people have to die for this ideology. That’s why he is unable to explain to the Turkish people why his soldiers are being killed in Syria.
Question 2: Is there any hope of establishing any kind of communication between Turkey and Syria gradually, at least between the military and the intelligence, and in the future, maybe, diplomatic relations?
President Assad: During the past two years, numerous intensive meetings took place between Russian and Turkish officials, and despite the Turkish aggression a few meetings were held between Syrian and Turkish security officials. Our shared objective with the Russians was to move Turkey away from supporting terrorists and bring it back to its natural place. For Syria, and for you also, Turkey is a neighbouring country. It is natural to have sound relations with a neighboring country; it is unnatural under any pretext or any circumstance to have bad relations. So, as to your question, is it possible? Of course it is, but we can’t achieve this outcome while Erdogan continues to support the terrorists. He has to stop supporting terrorism, at which point things can return to normal because there is no hostility between the two peoples. The hostility is caused by political actions or policies based on vested interests. On the level of the Syrian nation and the Turkish nation, there are neither differences nor conflicts of interests. So, yes, these relations should return to normal.
Question 3: Is this your message to the Turkish people, that there is no hostility against them? Have I understood you correctly?
President Assad: Of course, we used to describe them as brotherly people, even now, I ask the Turkish people: what is your issue with Syria? What is the issue for which a Turkish citizen deserves to die? What is the hostile act, small or large, carried out by Syria against Turkey during or before the war? There is none. There are mixed marriages and families, and daily interactions and interests between Syria and Turkey. In Turkey, there are groups of Syrian Arab origin and there are groups in Syria of Turkish origin. These interactions have existed throughout history; it is not logical that there is a dispute between us.
Question 4: Mr. President, I realize that I am talking to a head of state; nevertheless, I can’t but ask about the human dimension. This person [Erdogan] shook your hand, was your guest, you received him, and he called you a brother and a friend, etc.. Now, he allows himself to say all these things. How does that affect you emotionally?
President Assad: I have met people who belong to the Muslim Brotherhood from different countries. He is one of them from Turkey, there were some from Egypt, Palestine and others; they have all done the same thing.
They used to say nice things about Syria or about their personal relationship with me, but when things change, they turn against the person. That’s how the Muslim Brotherhood are: they have no political, social, or religious ethics. For them, religion is not a form of good, it is violence; this is their principle. Erdogan is a member of the opportunistic Muslim Brotherhood and so it is normal for him to do what he has done. The lack of clarity and endless lying are part of their nature.
Question 5: The war in your country has been going on for nine years. It is twice as long as the World War II, the Great Patriotic War, and soon we will mark the 75th anniversary of our victory in it, which is a very important event for Russia. What strength does the Syrian people store that enables them to survive and triumph and avoid despair? What is the secret? Is it an internal strength, or something else? Or is it simply that you have better weapons?
President Assad: There are several factors which should be considered. The fact that we are a small country, means these factors make us a strong country in this war. First and foremost, national awareness and public opinion. Without the widespread awareness of the Syrian people that what is happening is the result of a Western conspiracy against their country, Syria might have perished or been destroyed very quickly. This popular realization produced a national unity despite different political leanings or different cultural and social affiliations – ethnic, religious or sectarian groups. This awareness created unity with the state in confronting terrorism; this is a very important factor.
The second factor is the Syrian people’s legendary capacity for sacrifice, which we have witnessed primarily through the Syrian Arab Army. Under normal circumstances, one would believe that these sacrifices can only be found in movies or novels, while in fact they were apparent in every battle and this is what protected the country.
In addition to the sacrifices of the army, the people themselves sacrificed. They have been living in extremely difficult circumstances: continuous shelling, sanctions and bad economic conditions. Nevertheless, the people remained steadfast with their country.
The third factor is the public sector, which has played an important role in keeping the state together. In the worst of circumstances, salaries continued to be paid, schools kept running and daily essential services were provided to citizens. Bottom line services continued to be provided so that life continues.
In addition to these factors, there is the fact that our friends have supported us, particularly Russia and Iran. They have supported us politically, militarily, and economically. All these factors together have helped Syria remain steadfast up until now.
Question 6: If you don’t mind, I’ll dwell on these factors for more details, and we will start with the Syrian society and what you have said about its diverse culture and tolerance among its different ethnic, cultural and religious groups. The extremist terrorists have struck a severe blow to this Syrian characteristic by promoting extremist demands and an extremist ideology. Yesterday, we were in the Old City of Damascus, and we couldn’t imagine what the situation would be like if the black flag of the caliphate appeared in Damascus, something which can only be imagined with horror. To what extent is Syria ready to rebuild itself as a multicultural state, tolerant, secular, etc.?
President Assad: What I’m about to say may sound exaggerated, but by nature I speak in real terms and do not like exaggeration. In actual fact, Syrian society today in terms of coherence and the social integration of its different segments, is better than it was before the war. This is for a simple reason: war is a very important lesson to any society, a lesson that extremism is destructive and that not accepting the other is dangerous. As a result, these segments within our society came together.
If you go to the Old City or to any area under government control, you will not see this problem at all. On the contrary, as I mentioned, things are better than before. The problem is in the areas which were outside government control. That’s why I’m not concerned at all in this regard, despite the attempted Western narrative to show that the war in Syria is between sects, which is not true. A war between sects means that you come today to this area and find one colour, and in another area you find another colour, and in another place a third and a fourth colour; this is not the case. You will see all the colours of Syria, without exception, in the state-controlled areas. Whereas in the terrorist-controlled areas, they are not looking for a colour, but for parts of one colour, which is the extremist colour. This is because only extremists at the far end of extremism could live with them and that is why a large number of people fled the terrorist-controlled areas to state-controlled areas. That is why I’m not concerned at all in this regard. The challenge, however, will be in the areas which were occupied by the terrorists.
Question 7: This raises the question of the possibility of granting an amnesty. There are many people who were misled by the propaganda of the terrorists and extremists. Some of them committed crimes. Others were members of armed groups which committed terrorist acts. But there are those who did not carry weapons, or carried them without killing people. What are the grounds on which the government can reach out to them? And can there be compromises through which such people can be forgiven? This is a very important moral question. And in addition to the moral dimension, there are legal aspects as to resolving their status and integrating them in society, and maybe in the army as well.
President Assad: In this type of war, amnesty must be a core element of domestic policy. We cannot restore stability if we do not grant amnesty for the mistakes that have been made. From the very beginning of the war, we have regularly enacted amnesty decrees pardoning all those who acted against the national interest. In the areas which were controlled by the militants, we have conducted what we call local reconciliations that have resulted in the state legally pardoning individuals; all those who hand in
their weapons, receive amnesty provided that they return to their normal civil life under the authority of the state and the rule of law. This process has been very successful and restored stability to a large number of areas, and we are continuing to implement this policy.
There are very limited cases which cannot be granted amnesty, for example those who committed criminal acts and premeditatedly killed large numbers of people; most of these are terrorist leaders. However, in terms of the broader situation, I believe that most people want to return to the state, because a large number of them who carried weapons were actually forced to do so. They had no choice: either you carry weapons or you are killed. These people are not necessarily extremists. They do not have a terrorist past. They are ordinary people who were forced to carry weapons.
Similarly, there are those who had to take political or public positions in the media in favour of the terrorists for the same reasons, we know this for a fact. That’s why I believe that most of these people do support the state and were cooperating and communicating with us throughout. So, I fully agree with you, we must continue providing amnesty and we must continue with this process in the new areas we liberate, especially since we want most Syrians inside and outside Syria to return to their country.
Question 8: Now, we will talk about rebuilding the state, but the state always consists of people. When we talk about terrorists, we either force them to drop their weapons or persuade them to drop them and go back to their senses. Conversely, there are those who have their perceptions of justice; and you certainly meet state officials, whether in the security or police agencies, who have to reach out and resolve the status of those who became terrorists on the other side. These officials might resent that and find it difficult to accept. For instance, if I see this individual who used to aim his weapon at me living with me now on the same street and buying bread from the same bakery as I do, how should I behave? What do you say to state supporters who are not always prepared to accept such an amnesty or such an act of forgiveness?
President Assad: At the beginning of the war we used to see such cases. I recall when I passed the first amnesty decree, many Syrians resented it not only within the government, but also the broader public because some may have lost a family member from the terrorism. In the beginning, it was not easy to tell them that we will grant amnesty in order to restore stability. However, this was the case for the first few months only. Today, if you ask anybody or at least those who support the state, regardless of whether they work in the government or not, this is now accepted because they have seen the results. In fact, in many cases they are the ones pushing for an amnesty and a settlement, which helps greatly. So, there are no longer different viewpoints, because the facts on the ground have shown that this is the right thing to do and that it is good for Syria.
Question 9: As to the situation on the ground, I’ll not talk about who controls this or that area, because the situation on the ground is fluid and ever-changing and should be left to the military. But it is clear now that the state has restored large areas in southern Idlib governorate. Here, peaceful life will return, as happened in other areas, in Eastern Ghouta, Deir Ezzor, and the other areas liberated previously. What will the state do when it goes into the liberated areas? Where will it start its work? And what is the most important aspect to restoring peaceful life?
President Assad: In many of the areas we have liberated, there are no civilians since most had left when the terrorists arrived. The first thing we do is to restore the infrastructure in order to enable the local population to return. The first thing they need is electricity, water, roads, police, municipalities, and other services. They need all these service providers; this is the first challenge. The second, which is equally important, is rebuilding schools so that they are able to receive students. If the infrastructure is available and I can’t send my children to school, what’s the point, it means I can’t go back to this area. So, schools and health services are fundamental after the exit of terrorists and the restoration of security. Later, of course, we engage with the local community to identify who was involved with the terrorists through various actions. As I mentioned earlier, this is an important step towards reconciliation and resolving the status of these people in order to restore normal life to the city.
Question 10: What are the difficulties which emerge during this process? And are there sleeper cells which undermine the process of reconstruction? What are the problems facing you?
President Assad: When I mentioned that the pardons and reconciliations have been successful, this doesn’t mean that the success was a hundred percent; nothing is perfect. Some of these people still have terrorist leanings and extremist ideology, and are still cooperating with extremist groups in other areas and carrying out terrorist acts. In the past few weeks, there have been a number of explosive devices planted in different places or under cars. These terrorist acts have claimed the lives of many victims. However, this doesn’t mean that we stop the process of reconciliations, but rather we need to hunt down these sleeper cells. We have been able to arrest a large number of them, but there are others that are still active. One sleeper cell might carry out a number of acts giving the impression that a full organisation exists. Whereas in fact it is one cell made up of a group of individuals and by arresting them you are able to restore safety and security. However, this challenge will remain, because terrorism still exists in Syria and outside support in the form of weapons and money is still at large. Therefore, we do not expect to eliminate these sleeper cells in the foreseeable future. We will continue to eliminate cells and others will appear, until things return to normal in Syria.
Question 11: Mr. President, in two months’ time, if I’m not mistaken, the country will hold parliamentary elections, in these difficult circumstances. How difficult will that be? Or, would they proceed according to plan, and nothing will stop or obstruct them?
President Assad: There is a constitution and we are governed by it. We do not give in to Western threats or Western wishes, and we do not consider any factor other than the constitution. The issue of postponing constitutional deadlines, whether for presidential or parliamentary elections, was raised with us several times and we refused to do so during the war. Parliamentary elections will be held in a few months’ and we will proceed according to the constitutional agenda regardless of anything else.
Question 12: We talked about the domestic situation, let’s now talk about the outer environment. The Syrian Arab Republic has been subjected since 2011 to tightly-enforced isolation, not only by the Americans and the Europeans, which was expected, but also by the Arab League and its member states, including the Arab Gulf states. We know that the UAE embassy was reopened, and that Oman did not close its embassy and continued to work as usual. Do you see a positive change on the part of the Arab world, or is the situation still as it was, and that isolation persists? And what are the prospects of your contacts with the European Union? I’ll not ask about the Americans, for everything regarding them is unfortunately clear.
President Assad: Most Arab countries have maintained their relations with Syria, but not publicly for fear of pressure. These countries have expressed their support for Syria and their wishes for us to defeat terrorism. However, Western pressure and American in particular, was severe on these countries to remain distant and not to open their embassies in Syria, particularly the Gulf states. Europe however, is completely different. In fact, for us, Europe for more than two decades and even before this war, has been absent on the global political arena. Europe has ceased to exist since 2003, after the American invasion of Iraq. Europe surrendered completely to the United States and its role was limited to implementing what it was charged with by the American administration.
So, whether they communicate with us or not, the result is the same. Whether they open embassies or not, there is no value. We have met with a number of security officials from most European countries and they have been reasonable but they are unable to change course. Some have frankly said, “we are unable to change, our politicians cannot change their policies because the European policy is linked to the American policy.” They climbed the tree and are simply unable to come down. That’s why we do not waste our time talking about a European role and European policy. The master is the American. We can talk about the Americans and this automatically includes the Europeans.
But in answer to your question, yes, there is a change. There are clear convictions that this war has not achieved what those countries, or some of the colonialist countries wanted, that the Syrian people have paid the price, that stability has paid the price and now the Europeans are paying the price. The problem of refugees in Europe is huge, but they will not change in the near future. This is my conviction.
Question 13: Now, Turkey is blackmailing Europe by using the migrants. And this is what Erdogan is doing right now.
President Assad: Turkey started sending the second wave of refugees to Europe as a form of blackmail. Erdogan had threatened that he would send refugees. Yesterday, there were videos on various media outlets about the beginning of a migrant movement towards Europe.
Question 14: In one of your answers, you touched on the relation with Russia. We consider it a relation of partnership. But this relation went through difficult years when Russia limited its presence in the Middle East and other parts of the world. Many people saw that as a betrayal, and that Russia turned its back on its old allies and partners. Now, how do you describe these relations which have been strengthened naturally during nine years of war? Since our aforementioned opponents, including the Europeans and the Americans, who are “evil tongues” as we say in Russia, claim that Syria is under Russian control. Is that true in reality. For our part, we look at this relation as a partnership and an alliance.
President Assad: Our relations with you span more than six decades; this is not a short period of time and it covers several generations. We know each other very well and this relationship has been through various experiences. Through the different circumstances, including the 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union, our relations with Russia have always been based on mutual respect, a peer-to-peer relationship. We have never felt at any time, even during this war, that Russia is trying to impose its views on us. They have always treated us with respect; even when we differed, they respected the views of the Syrian government. This is a general rule that has governed the past decades and hasn’t changed because it is based on Russian customs, traditions, and perspectives. So, on a bilateral level the relationship between Syria and Russia is clearly a partnership, particularly now after the war, this partnership has become stronger and more reliable.
However, if we wanted to view our relationship with Russia from a different perspective, which is Russia’s international role, the issue is different. Today, many small countries and even countries of medium strength around the world, look towards Russia and rely to a large extent on its role, because it is Russia’s duty today to restore international balance to the global arena. The presence of the Russian military base in Syria is not only aimed at fighting terrorism but also at creating an international political balance in the Security Council, as well as a military balance in different areas with a view of restoring the Russian role. Restoring this role is in the interest of all states, including Syria and other small and medium-sized countries as I mentioned. Therefore, we view this relationship from two perspectives: a partnership on the bilateral level and a relationship based on this international role, which we hope will continue to increase as has been the case since President Putin came to power in 2000 and restored Russia’s position.
Question 15: Now we are talking about military and political support. What about the economy? Going back to rebuilding Syria, are there large Russian – or non-Russian – projects which help in reconstruction? Is there a state or a company which is prepared to come and invest in the Syrian economy without fear of sanctions or political problems caused by the United States and Europe? For instance, there used to be a flourishing pharmaceutical industry in Aleppo, which used to export its products throughout the Middle East, and you, as a doctor, know that. Are there any ideas to restore industrial production in the pharmaceutical field or other fields? And to what extent the lack of resources will affect these economic projects, considering that oil is now outside state control and is controlled by a power, which came from beyond the Atlantic and built its bases there under the pretext of protecting oil?
President Assad: When we built our infrastructure in Syria in the 1970s and the 1980s, we did not have oil at that time. It was built with Syrian money and with Syrian capabilities. So, we know we have the capabilities and can provide the resources. There is a lot of Syrian capital within Syria and mostly abroad and should most certainly take part in this process.
Since 2018, there has been a great interest from big companies outside of Syria – Arab and non-Arab, to participate in the reconstruction. However, what’s happening is that the Americans are applying huge pressure and threatening individuals and companies alike; this has no doubt frightened some of these companies. This is happening even with regard to Russian companies. There are several Russian companies which want to invest in Syria but fear taking any step. Chinese companies have the same problem.
However, every problem has a solution. Most recently, a number of large international companies have started to come to Syria using different methods which enable them to evade the sanctions. So, there is a possibility now for these companies to work in Syria without facing sanctions. Of course, I cannot discuss these methods, but we have started to see a return of foreign investment. It is true that the movement is slow, but I believe it is a good start – a promising start, to support the reconstruction process which we have started. We did not wait; we have begun in some areas and in order to expand there must be a larger number of companies and investments.
Question 16: What are the areas which you consider priorities or most attractive to investors?
President Assad: Of course, the most important is rebuilding the destroyed suburbs. I think this will be of high interest for investment companies and several have already expressed interest; this is certainly a profitable area. Another sector is oil and gas, which is also profitable. There are already a number of Russian companies that have started operating in Syria during the past few years and are now planning to increase production. The biggest obstacle preventing expansion in this sector is the terrorist and American occupation of the most important sites of oil wells in Syria. The Americans know this of course, and that’s why they continue to occupy the oil wells and obstruct the reconstruction process. In short, these are the most important sectors. Of course, there are many other areas which any society needs, but are less important for international companies.
Question 17: As we know, there is a big problem caused by freezing Syrian funds in foreign banks. Is it difficult to finance some contracts because of that?
President Assad: That’s true. This is robbery in every sense of the word; but if the money is stolen it doesn’t mean that as a state and as a society we should stop creating wealth. We have many capabilities and this is one of the reasons why we have survived nine years of war. They are well aware that if the war stopped completely, Syrian society is capable of rising in a strong manner and that we will be stronger economically than we were before the war. This is why they have resorted to threatening Syrian and foreign companies. In other words, if a Syrian citizen wants to invest in Syria, they will likely be sanctioned, or oil revenues are prevented from returning to Syria. The more important factor is the ongoing war, which discourages companies and prevents them from coming to Syria. If these three factors are eliminated, we have no problem in rebuilding the country. We have strong human and material resources in Syria and we also have faithful friends like Russia and Iran who will help us.
Question 18: Mr. President, we talked about Idlib in general, and touched on the oil fields east of the Euphrates river controlled by the Americans, and we know that there is a power outage every four hours, and we know that power plants are mostly fueled by oil products. This factor – controlling oil and oil products – is crucial for Syrian economy. Do you have any plans to restore control over the areas east of the Euphrates? How are you going to proceed in that direction?
President Assad: Militarily the priority now is Idlib, this is why we see Erdogan using all his force and no doubt under American directives. This is because by liberating Idlib we will be able to move towards liberating the eastern regions. As I have said on several occasions, for them, Idlib militarily is an advanced post. They have used all their power to obstruct the liberation of Idlib, so that we do not move eastward. However, despite not yet advancing towards the eastern region, we are still in direct communication with the population there. There is a great deal of anger and resentment on their part against the American occupation and against the groups acting on behalf of the Americans.
I believe that this anger will build up gradually and there will be resistance operations against the occupiers. It is the national and constitutional duty of the state to support any act against an occupying power. As time goes by, the Americans will not have a population supporting them but a population standing against the American occupation. They will not be able to stay, neither for the oil nor to support terrorists like ISIS and al-Nusra or any other reason. The same of course, applies to the Turks who are occupying the northern part of Syrian territories. If they do not leave through political negotiations, they must leave by force. This is what we will do. This is also our patriotic duty as Syrians.
Question 19: It’s good that we have arrived at this difficult issue. If we talk about the Kurds who live in the east and northeast of the country, and who might not be happy with the Americans and the Turks, particularly the Turks, with whom they have a longstanding enmity. Their relationship with Damascus is difficult because they are separatists and supported the United States at one point and became its allies. The question here is about reunifying the Syrian Arab Republic and reintegrating its territories within its legal borders. How are you going to build your policy regarding the Kurds, taking into account that Damascus has almost accused them of treason because they signed an agreement with the Americans. Do you have a plan in that regard? What’s the price for integrating them? What can you give the Kurds? And what are the things which you cannot give them?
President Assad: We are in contact with the Kurdish political groups in northern Syria, the problem is that some of these groups, not all of them, operate under American authority. We do not say “the Kurds” because the larger part of the Kurds are patriotic groups or tribes which support the state; however, these groups have no voice. Those who control the area are small groups acting with the Americans.
As to what is sometimes referred to as the “Kurdish cause,” there is no such cause in Syria for a simple reason. Historically, there are Kurds who live in Syria; these groups which came to the north did so during the last century and only as a result of the Turkish oppression. We have hosted them in Syria. Kurds, Armenians and other groups came to Syria and we had no problem with that. For example, there is no Syrian-Armenian issue. There is a great diversity in Syria and we do not have an issue with that diversity, so why would we have a problem with the Kurds?! The problem is with the groups that started to promote separatist propositions a few decades ago, mainly in the early 1980s. Yet despite this, when the Turkish state during various periods oppressed and killed the Kurds in Turkey, we supported them. We haven’t stood against their cause, if they call it a cause. In Syria, they were given a nationality, even though they were not Syrian. We have always been positive regarding the Kurdish issue. Therefore, what is called “the Kurdish cause” is an incorrect title, a false title.
The problem right now is dealing with the Americans. The Americans are occupiers; they occupied our lands. The Americans are thieves stealing our oil. You cannot play both sides: between those who protect the law and those who break it. You cannot stand with the police and the thief at the same time, this is impossible. You are either with the police or the thief. So, we cannot reach results in any dialogue with them, even if we were to meet thousands of times, unless they take a clear position, a patriotic position: to be against the Americans, against occupation and against the Turks because they too are occupiers.
Quite simply, this is our demand. This is a national position and as a government we are responsible for the constitution and for our national interests. The whole Syrian people accept nothing less than them taking a stand against the occupation. As for anything else, if they have other demands, the Syrian people have demands too. How do we achieve results? We engage in discussions and then we can decide: do we change the constitution? Do we change the law? Or any other measure, this is all possible. This is a Syrian-Syrian dialogue. However, the government in Syria does not own the constitution; the people own the constitution and therefore they are the ones who can change the constitution.
Question 20: If we take into account what is happening in Idlib, which we talked about at the beginning of the interview, and that Turkey is one of the main opponents of the Kurds, does the idea of reaching a reconciliation with the Kurds tempt you on these grounds? You can choose not to answer this question if you like.
President Assad: On the contrary, this is a logical question. These Kurdish groups which claim to be against Turkish occupation and issue statements that they will fight, did not fire a single bullet when the Turks invaded. Why? Because the Americans identified which area the Turks would enter and the boundaries that they should reach, as well as the areas that these groups should leave. So, do we agree on statements or on actions? We want to agree on the actions. In their statements, they have said that they are against the Turks, but they are not doing anything against them at all. They are neutral. They are moving in line with the Americans and the Turks. Only the Syrian government and other segments of Syrian society are fighting the Turks and losing martyrs every day. Other than that, I agree with you. If they were to say “we will agree with you against the Turks,” my response would be, we are ready, send your fighters so that together we can defend our land.
Question 21: In this region, there is also a very old enemy of the Syrian Arab Republic, which always reminds people of itself, Israel, or the Zionist entity as you call it. How do you see the “great” Deal of the Century, the gift given to us by American President Donald Trump? Where might it take us? I don’t mean to influence your answer in any way. I’m only recalling what is being discussed in Russia, that the deal as a solution for the Palestinian cause is simply a dead end.
President Assad: Our relations with the United States were restored during the Nixon administration in 1974. Since that time, we have met with numerous American officials in the administration, with presidents and members of Congress, and we have learned one thing only: anything an American politician does, is first and foremost to serve his personal interests in relation to the next elections. They do not think of higher national American interests. They do not think of world stability, or of international law, or the rights of peoples. This doesn’t exist in their policies. They only think of their elections and nothing else.
As to the ‘deal of the century,’ this proposition was made at this particular time only for the next American elections. The presidential elections will be held at the end of this year. So, the idea is meaningless, an empty shell. The idea, if applied, is not harmful, but rather destructive to the Middle East and the peace process which started in the early 1990s. However, when would their idea succeed and when would it fail? It succeeds if the people of this region agree that it should succeed. If you review all political and official statements, as well as public opinion on social media, you will find a total rejection of this plan, including from states and governments allied with America and those that have relations with Israel. So, it’s safe to say that it is a stillborn plan. Trump might be able to use it in his next elections in order to please the Israeli lobby in the United States. But after that, we will probably not hear about the ‘deal of the century’ until the next elections. At which point there will be another and worse plan presented for the next elections.
Question 22: Thank you very much Mr. President. I have one final question, maybe a more emotional question. To what extent have these past nine years been difficult psychologically for you? To what extent have they been difficult to your family? Your wife has founded and manages one of the biggest charities in Syria which provides a great deal to children, to the wounded, and to restoration of normal life. I realize that I might be asking embarrassing questions, and I apologize for that, but to what extent have you suffered from what is happening within your family? And when you look back at what you have done during the past nine years, do you say to yourself that you haven’t done what you should have done on certain issues, or that a mistake was made in this regard and the right thing was done on another issue, and more should have been done?
President Assad: There are two sides to this question: one is the formal, when I think about this war in my official capacity within the state and the other is the personal.
As an official, the first thing you think of in this situation is protecting the country; this is your duty as a head of state. Here we can take as an example something that lives on as a tradition, which is the Great Patriotic War in Russia. Your relations with Germany, like any other country, were good. You had normal relations: agreements, engagements, meetings and you had not done anything against Germany. Nevertheless, the Nazis attacked Russia and you lost 26 million martyrs, maybe more. Was there any other choice but to defend your country? No, that was the only choice. The decision taken by the Russian leadership at the time was the right decision supported by the Russian people who defended their country. Were there mistakes? Of course, there are mistakes in every action. Are there political or military decisions which could have been better? Certainly, for everything has flaws and errors. The same applies to us in Syria. The decisions which we took from day one, were to preserve the sovereignty of Syria and to fight terrorists until the end, and we are still doing that. After nine years, I believe that had we taken a different direction, we would have lost our country from day one. That’s why this decision was the right one. As to the mistakes made in daily matters, they are always there, of course. Every time there is a mistake, we should correct it and change the decision. This is the normal thing to do.
On a personal level, here I am like any other citizen; every individual has ambitions for his country. Especially that before the war, we were advancing and achieving significant growth, and the country was developing at a fast pace. It is true that we had many problems because when the reform process moves quickly, it has negative aspects, maybe in the form of corruption or policy mistakes. But by and large, our national capabilities were improving and developing. After nine years, when you see how far behind you are economically, technologically, culturally and educationally, of course there is a sense of frustration at times at a personal level. Certainly, in the end, any war regardless of its causes or outcomes, is a very bad thing. You cannot have a positive feeling towards any war. You will always feel pain and frustration. On a daily basis, you are losing good people and draining your resources. So, there is certainly a kind of pain that you feel on a daily basis on a personal level. However, at the same time, this pain should be the motivation and the incentive for you to do more and to have confidence and hope that you are capable of becoming stronger and better than before.
Journalist: You have confirmed once again that a person like you can only have one position, the position of the statesman, because the views you have expressed are the views and the position of a statesman.
Mr. President, thank you very much for agreeing to give us this interview. Today we have been with President of the Syrian Arab Republic, Bashar al-Assad, and this was “International Review.” I am Yevgeny Primakov, wishing you all the best.
في الظاهر يبدو انتصار الجيش السوري في أرياف حلب، واحداً من الانتصارات المتدحرجة التي بدأها الجيش السوري منذ تحرير أغلب أجزاء مدينة حلب قبل ثلاثة أعوام وبضعة شهور، لكن التدقيق سيكشف أهمية هذا الانتصار وتميّزه وتأثيره على المناخات السياسية والمعطيات العسكرية وتثبيته قواعدَ ستحكم كثيراً ما بعده.
–
انتصر أمن حلب أولاً وقد عانت العاصمة السورية الثانية لسنوات ما بعد التحرير الأول من القصف والاعتداءات اليومية، ونظراً للعمق التركي وراء مناطق سيطرة الجماعات الإرهابية كان التجرؤ أكبر مما كانت تفعله هذه الجماعات في استهداف أمن دمشق من الغوطة قبل تحريرها، ورد الاعتبار لأمن العاصمة الاقتصادية سيكون له مردود كبير على حياة الناس أولاً وعلى النشاط الاقتصادي ثانياً، وبالتالي على مجمل الوضعين الأمني والاقتصادي.
–
النصر الثاني هو بفتح الطريق الدولي الذي يشكل شرياناً حيوياً بين العاصمة دمشق وكل من مدينتي حماة وحلب، وبالتالي بين نصف سورية ونصفها الآخر تقريباً، وهذا الربط الذي يختصر الوقت والمخاطرات المرافقين للطريق المؤقت البديل، يعني عودة للحياة الطبيعية سكانياً واقتصادياً وأمنياً، وخصوصاً بعودة نسبة كبيرة من النازحين من أبناء المناطق التي شملها التحرير أو وفّر لها الأمن أو سهل الانتقال إليها، وهي عودة مرتقبة بعشرات الآلاف من أكثر من وجهة نزوح.
–
النصر الثالث هو بسقوط آخر واجهات الاحتلال التركي من الميليشيات التي ترفع علماً مزيفاً باسم “الثورة السورية”. والمعلوم أن أرياف حلب كانت المنطقة الجغرافية التي تتمركز فيها هذه الجماعات ضمن تقسيم أدوار بينها وبين جبهة النصرة التي تتولى منطقة إدلب، وفقاً لترتيبات القيادة التركية، وسقوط آخر معاقل هذه الواجهات التي كانت تستعمل العلم السوري وتسعى لتغطية الاحتلال التركي بواجهة سورية، لا يعني فقط أن الاحتلال صار عارياً فقط، بل أيضاً سيكون له تأثير على مسار العملية السياسية وعمل اللجنة الدستورية، حيث كان بعض رموز ما يُسمّى بالمعارضة يستند لهذا الوجود في رفع السقوف وممارسة التعطيل.
–
النصر الرابع هو في كون ما تبقى من معاقل للجماعات الإرهابية بات تحت وطأة مفاعيل النصر السريع للجيش السوري، في حال انهزام وتفكك وضياع، وسيكون لهذا النصر تأثيره في رسم إيقاع المواجهات اللاحقة بعدما تم تفكيك وإنهاء بنى وهياكل تحتل مناطق تقارب بحجمها المناطق المتبقية تحت سيطرة جماعات النصرة، وتضم بين صفوفها أعداداً من المسلحين تقارب عدد من بقوا في المناطق التي يستهدفها التحرير اللاحق.
–
النصر الخامس هو بتثبيت معادلة العلاقة بروسيا وإيران، كحليفين لسورية، لحقت بالعلاقة بينهما وبين سورية حملات تشكيك ومحاولات نيل من المصداقية، وكانت أصعبها هذه المرة لخصوصية المناطق التي تدور فيها المعارك وموقعها المصيري بالنسبة للدور التركي، وما قالته توقعات أصحاب حملات التشكيك بأن ما كان يصحّ في التزام روسيا وإيران قبل إدلب وريفها وريف حلب لا يصحّ الآن، وقد بدأت أم المعارك. وجاءت النتائج لتقول إن ما يصحّ في فهم الحلف المبني على المصداقية هو قانون لا استثناءات فيه.
–
النصر السادس هو بالرسالة التي وجّهتها العملية للقيادات الكردية، التي كان بعضها يراهن على ثبات كانتون تفرضه تركيا لجماعاتها في ريفي حلب الغربي والشمالي لأهميته وحيويته على حدودها، وأنه سيكون ذلك فرصة لطلب المثل. وجاء النصر يسقط هذه الفرضية ويسقط معها المعوقات أمام التفكير العقلاني الذي يشكل شرطاً لنجاح الحل السياسي مع هذه الجماعات.
–
النصر السابع هو في تثبيت قواعد حاسمة لمفهوم السيادة في العلاقة السورية التركية، التي دخلت عليها بعض الأوهام لدى القيادة التركية، من نوع التلويح بالاستنجاد بالأطلسي أو بابتزاز الحليفين الروسي والإيراني، أو بالرهان على التهويل والترهيب بفرضية الحرب المباشرة بين الجيشين السوري والتركي، وكلها اختبارات جدّيّة وقاسية خاضتها القيادة السورية وفاز بها الرئيس بشار الأسد وأثبت الجيش السوري أهليته لتخطّيها، وباتت الحقائق التي قالتها معارك حلب خصوصاً حاكمة لمضامين لاحقة للعلاقة بين سورية وتركيا، عنوانها أن السيادة السورية خط أحمر.
–
النصر الثامن هو في تأثير معركة حلب الحاسمة على مستقبل الحسابات الإسرائيلية التي كانت تبني على ثبات تركيا ومَن معها من جماعات إرهابية ومن جهّزتهم من جماعات تحت مسمّى المعارضة، حسابات تفترض أن استعادة سورية وحدتها تحت سيادة جيشها أمر دونه الكثير، وبالتالي فالتعامل مع ما تسمّيه “إسرائيل” بالفوضى السورية مستمرّ لأجل بعيد. وجاء النصر ينبؤها بالعكس ويفرض عليها حسابات من نوع مختلف فقريباً ستكون سورية متفرّغة للتعامل مع الاعتداءات الإسرائيلية، وقد استعادت وحدتها وسيادتها وعافيتها.
–
النصر التاسع هو في تأثير المعركة الفاصلة في حلب على مستقبل الحسابات الأميركيّة التي تنازلت عن الواجهة الكرديّة في المناطق الشرقية لحساب الأتراك كي يصمدوا ويثبتوا، ويؤخروا لحظة الاستحقاق عن الوجود الأميركي، وجاءت الساعات التي سبقت النصر لتحمل طلباً تركياً بالتدخل المباشر للأميركيين أو للناتو كشرط لخوض تركيا المعركة عسكرياً بجيشها، وأقام الجميع حساباته، وعندما قرّر الناتو عدم الدخول، فهذا يعني أن واشنطن هي التي قرّرت، وقرارها هنا هو نسخة عن قرارها اللاحق بالنسبة للمناطق الشرقية، وإلا لكان الأفضل دمج المعركتين معاً وكسب ما تؤمّنه شراكة تركيا من فرص أفضل.
–
النصر العاشر سياسيّ ودبلوماسيّ في علاقات سورية العربية والدولية، فالمتأخّرون عن دقّ أبواب دمشق، أو الذين فعلوا ذلك بتردّد وبالنقاط، باتوا يدركون أن عليهم مسابقة الزمن لفعل ذلك بصورة جدّية وسريعة وفعّالة، لأن الدولة السورية تُنهي آخر معاركها بسرعة، وتسابق الوقت بالمفاجآت، وعليهم أن يلاقوا ساعة النصر النهائي من سفاراتهم وقد استعادت كامل جهوزيتها ودورها في دمشق.
–
نصر أخير لا رقم له هو انتقام رفاق السلاح للقائد قاسم سليماني الذي أقسم لأهل حلب بأن يكون معهم في التحرير الثاني الآتي بلا ريب، فكانوا معه يهدونه نصرَهم العظيم في ذكرى الأربعين.
Damascus – The year 2019 can be described as one of unimaginable transformations in Syria.
The last twelve months have been characterized by several major events in that country, including the collapse of Daesh as an integrated terrorist body. In the months that followed, US President Donald Trump backtracked on his promised withdrawal from Syria and deployed American troops to occupy Syrian oil wells. Meanwhile, Turkey expanded its invasion of northern Syria before the Syrian army deployed in the northeast of the country for the first time in seven years following an agreement with al-Qasd militias. The Syrian army was busy in other areas, recording significant advances in Hama’s northern countryside as well as southern Idlib where it regained several important towns and villages.
Away from the battlefield, the country also saw significant developments on the political front with the launch of the long-awaited Constitutional Committee. The committee is designed to put the country on the path towards a political settlement.
Daesh collapses but remains a pretext for occupation
The beginning of the year 2019 witnessed the fall of the last stronghold of the terrorist organization Daesh. The stronghold in the town of Al-Baghouz in Deir Ezzor’s countryside was overrun by Kurdish forces with the support of American warplanes. Prior to the Al-Baghouz news event, the Syrian army that spearheaded the fight against the Takfiri organization for years pushed Daesh out of large areas in the Syrian Badia.
As the year drew to a close, Daesh leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was assassinated in Idlib following a US operation. The assassination was shrouded in mystery as the US monopolized the narrative surrounding the killing. Meanwhile, the supposed threat of Daesh returning continues to be used by the Americans as a pretext to remain in Syria even though Trump announced on several occasions that he wanted to withdraw US troops.
The army makes advances in Idlib and Hama
In mid 2019, the Syrian army launched a massive military campaign against armed terrorist organizations in the northern countryside of Hama and southern Idlib. As the terrorist groups collapsed, the army was able to recapture the city of Kafr Nabudah in the Hama countryside, surrounding the Turkish observation post in Murak. The army’s advances in Idlib province culminated with the recapture of the town of Khan Shaykhun – a terrorist stronghold. Terrorists were plagued by infighting that saw the Nusra Front [Jabhat al-Nusra] eliminate the Army of Glory faction [Jaysh al-Izza] and Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement.
A new Turkish invasion as the Syrian army returns to the borders and “Israel” runs wild
The collapse of the terrorist groups in Idlib clarified a failed investment for Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. It prompted him to compensate by announcing another incursion into Syrian territory under the pretext of removing what he called the Kurdish terrorist threat. He had an agreement with the Americans as they announced their withdrawal from Syria, abandoning their assets including al-Qasd militias. However, the US backtracked from its announcement to withdraw due to its ambitions to seize Syrian oil, so it deployed its forces around the wells.
Erdogan and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin signed an understanding in Sochi where the Russians mapped their role as a policeman for the region to curb the Turkish incursion into Syria and to assure that it implements the Adna agreement signed in 1998 and stresses on respecting Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Immediately, the Syrian army moved to the Turkish-Syrian border, entering for the first time in seven years following an agreement with Syrian Kurds that have been abandoned by the US and threatened by Turkey.
Meanwhile, the Zionist enemy continued its policy aimed at raising the morale of its terrorist agents, so it carried out several raids on Syrian territory. However, the Syrian air defenses were able to thwart these attacks by intercepting a large number of “Israeli” missiles.
The Constitutional Committee sees the light of day
Moscow’s strategic patience in its relationship with Ankara bore fruit after the latter was left with few options. Hence, it reluctantly proceeded to implement part of its commitments, both in Sochi with the Russians and in Astana. The move showed Ankara as more of a guarantor and prevented it from investing in terrorist groups after the Syrian army tightened its noose around the militants.
Thus, the work of the Constitutional Committee between the national delegation supported by the Syrian government and delegations of civil society and the opposition began. But the latter adopted suggestions that were based on the Turkish and American desires that the national delegation strongly rejected.
The fourteenth and final round of the Astana agreement renewed the recognition of the legitimate right of Damascus to combat terrorism. But what is new was Russia formally firing at the autonomous administration project after confirming that the country would be centrally managed from Damascus.
Despite allowing the Syrian army to deploy in their areas, the separatists appeared to be under the mercy of President Trump’s mood swings and a limited US military presence to exploit Syrian oil wells.
Difficult economic circumstances did not prevent an increase in wages
Syrians experienced further economic hardship in 2019. This was made more difficult by Washington’s Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act that it slapped on Syrian companies dealing with the government. Nevertheless, at the end of the year, Syria saw a balanced increase in salaries and wages, the largest in its history. Damascus was more open to neighboring countries and its allies in terms of addressing the economic situation. Tehran was at the forefront of those activating joint agreements between the two countries. Despite US sanctions, Iran provided support for Damascus in all fields including reconstruction and housing, supplying oil, setting up joint projects and infrastructure.
Related Videos
الرئيس بشار الأسد في زيارة ميدانية لريف إدلب مع رجال الجيش العربي السوري
الحلقة 95 # من برنامج ستون دقيقة مع ناصر قنديل 29 12 2019
استديو الحدث 2019/12/30 عبدو زمام
الجيش السوري يتقدم نحو مدينة سراقب بريف إدلب
عيون السوريين نحو سراقب ومعرة النعمان الحيش العربي السوري يحرر جرجناز في ريف إدلب الجنوبي
AS DELIVERED Geir O. Pedersen United Nations Special Envoy for Syria BRIEFING TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL 20 December 2019
Madame President,
1. One year ago, many believed that the Syrian conflict was winding down. Yet the past 12 months have seen a steady stream of violence, punctuated by escalations, that continue to this day, across many areas of Syria – such as the northwest, the northeast and the south. Proscribed terrorist groups have also not been defeated and continue to pose a major security threat. All of this serves as a constant, grim reminder that the need for a comprehensive political process, as mandated by this Council in resolution 2254, is more pressing than ever.
2. Today, let me start by updating you on one aspect of that process – the Constitutional Committee.
3. On 25 November, the Small Body of the Syrian-led and Syrian-owned Constitutional Committee convened for its second session. Before arriving in Geneva, I had asked each Co-Chair to put forward proposals for an agenda for the second session, in line with the Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure.
4. On 21 November, the Co-Chair designated by the opposition Syrian Negotiations Commission, sent me a proposed workplan with 10 constitutional headings and an agenda focusing on the preamble to the Constitution and basic principles of the Constitution. On 25 November, the Co-Chair designated by the Syrian Government, proposed an agenda discussing “national pillars”, or national pillars of concern to the Syrian people.
5. At the same time, the Co-Chair designated by the Government insisted that constitutional issues could not be discussed until these “national pillars” were discussed. For its part, the SNC Co-Chair stated that “national pillars” could be discussed, provided this occurs within the context of the agreed Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure or within an agenda of basic constitutional principles.
6. From 25 through 29 November I sought, in line with my mandate, and consistent with the Syrian leadership and ownership of the process, to facilitate consensus between the Co-Chairs and bring their viewpoints closer together. We had serious discussions in this regard. Different formulas were put forward that might have enabled both sides to table and discuss the issues of interest to them within the scope of the Constitutional Committee’s mandate. By the end of the week, however, it was clear that consensus would not be reached and that a meeting of the Small Body was not possible.
7. During this recess, I remain focused on facilitating agreement on an agenda for the next session of the Small Body. I hope that I will soon be able to consult with the Syrian Government directly in Damascus to this end, as well as the Syrian Negotiations Commission. My team also remains in contact with the “Middle Third” civil society delegation and I stand ready to support them, along the lines I outlined in my last briefing.
8. I have also met with international stakeholders, on this and all other aspects of the process. This past month, I met with the Foreign Ministers of Russia and Turkey, as well as those of Italy, Jordan, Algeria, and senior officials from the US, France, Iran, and Germany, who all expressed support for my mediation efforts.
9. I hope agreement can be reached promptly on an agenda that falls in line with the Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Committee. As things stand and absent an agreed agenda, I see no reason to convene another session of the Small Body.
Madame President,
10. When I last briefed this Council, we had just concluded a successful opening session of the Constitutional Committee. This second session was obviously very different, in both substance and tone. But disagreement on the agenda is typical for any political process.
11. I do, however, believe there are several lessons we can draw from the experience of the second round.
12. First, the Constitutional Committee is and will remain fragile. Progress depends on the two sides, whose agreement made its creation possible – the Syrian Government and the Syrian Negotiations Commission – allowing their members to work professionally on the constitutional issues, and without disassociating themselves from the work of those they nominated. The Constitutional Committee needs to be nurtured, and genuinely supported if it is to succeed. This is the responsibility of the Syrian parties. International stakeholders, too, have a supporting role to play. I know I can count on the support of this Council in that regard.
13. Second, any proposed agenda must comply with the Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure, agreed between the Government and opposition. This means that all issues are open for discussion within the Committee – without preconditions, and without making consideration of one issue dependent on resolution of another. And it also means that issues should be framed and fall under a constitutional heading. The Constitutional Committee is mandated by agreement to prepare and draft a constitutional reform as a contribution to the political settlement. If the Constitutional Committee is to deliver on this, it must focus on its constitutional mandate.
14. Third, the second round only underscores the need for a broader and comprehensive political process. The Government and Opposition reaffirmed this when they agreed, in the Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure, on the need for a ‘broader political process moving forward to build trust and confidence and implement Security Council resolution 2254 (2015).’ Indeed, I believe that, while a Constitutional Committee cannot solve the crisis, it can help foster the trust and confidence between the parties, that can open the door to a broader process– and, equally, such a broader process can feed positively into the work on the constitutional issues.
Madame President,
15. I believe a meaningful, wider political process would be one that delivers tangible actions, such as progress on the release of detainees/abductees and the clarification of the fate of missing persons. It remains a matter of great frustration for me that there has not been meaningful movement on this issue. My Deputy and I will continue engaging with the Syrian parties directly as well as with other relevant actors. We also remain committed to actively contribute to the efforts of the Working Group that was set up to deal with this issue. In this context, I met with senior officials from Russia, Turkey and Iran in Nur-Sultan last week and, along with discussion on other issues, I stressed the need to move beyond the “one-for-one” exchanges, and to see releases, at a meaningful scale, of children, women and the sick.
16. De-escalating violence and a nationwide ceasefire should underpin a wider political process. Northwest Syria has seen a deeply troubling escalation of violence in recent days. ASG Muller briefed this Council in detail yesterday on the terrible suffering of civilians there. The devastating humanitarian cost of a full-scale military offensive for the 3 million people living in northwest Syria is a price we simply cannot afford to pay. All sides must de-escalate urgently. Civilians also continue to suffer in northeast Syria, where the security situation remains volatile, even if it is calmer relative to the days and weeks after Turkey first launched its intervention. It is crucial that the various ceasefire understandings negotiated between actors there are respected and lead to a sustained de-escalation in violence. The security situation in southern Syria also remains turbulent and should be addressed.
17. Countering Security Council-listed terrorist groups is imperative too – through an approach that is cooperative, that ensures the protection of civilians, respects international humanitarian and human rights law.
18. And as always, while the security situation is the most devastating threat, Syrians also face increasing economic hardship, including as a result of commodity shortages and entrenched poverty. A broader process must ultimately address this too.
19. A broader process should respect and ultimately restore Syria’s sovereignty, unity, territorial integrity and independence.
20. Such a process should achieve a long-lasting, real and genuine reconciliation.
Madame President,
21. A broader process must also be inclusive. We continue to consult with the Syrian Women’s Advisory Board on the concerns and priorities of diverse Syrian women and their perspectives on a sustainable and inclusive political solution.
22. Syrian civil society should be fully included in any broader process.
23. Ultimately, the process should help develop a safe, calm and neutral environment – an environment that sees safe, voluntary and dignified refugee returns, to their places of origin or of their choosing; an environment in which a new Constitution, adopted by popular approval, can be genuinely reflected in institutions and in practice; an environment in which inclusive, free and fair elections can take place, which include the diaspora and which are administered under the supervision of the United Nations in line with resolution 2254.
24. Many of these issues touch upon constitution-making and some could be discussed under a constitutional rubric. But a constitution-making process itself is not likely to resolve them in a way that meets the urgent and legitimate concerns of the Syrian people. I remain convinced that a “steps for steps” model could help unlock practical progress – steps that build trust and confidence among Syrians, and between Syrians and the international community, undertaken in a reciprocal fashion.
25. I continue to press on this in all of my engagements, with the Syrian parties and international stakeholders. I continue to offer my good offices in this regard. And I continue to support the convening of a new international format, to bring together the will of the key players.
Madame President,
26. This is my last briefing of my first year as Special Envoy. When I first briefed you, I said my priorities were a sustained dialogue with the Syrian Government and the opposition, the launch of the Constitutional Committee as a door opener, a wider dialogue with civil society, action on detainees, abductees and missing, and international discussions in support of a political solution.
27. These remain my priorities. But it is time now to update them. The Committee is launched – but needs to work expeditiously and continuously, producing results and continued progress. I appreciate my open and direct dialogue with both Syrian parties – but if we are to take it to the next level, we need to address the full array of issues. We must enable de-escalation leading towards a nationwide ceasefire, as well as a cooperative, lawful approach to countering proscribed terrorist groups. As part of this dialogue, we must generate concrete action on detainees, abductees and missing persons. I think all of this could take shape for the benefit of all Syrians, like through a “steps for steps” approach. And I think a key part of this is for international discussions to deepen and for a new international format to take shape, to underpin the process. We know that none of this will be easy, and I will continue to count on the full engagement of the Syrian parties and the full support of this Council. Thank you, Madame President.
أكد السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد أن سورية ستخرج من الحرب أكثر قوة وأن مستقبلها واعد والوضع الميداني فيها الآن أفضل، مشيراً إلى ما حققه الجيش العربي السوري من تقدم كبير في الحرب ضد الإرهاب.
وفي مقابلة مع التلفزيونالإيطالي جرت في الـ 26 من تشرين الثاني الماضي على أن تبث بتاريخ الثاني من كانون الأول الجاري وامتنع التلفزيون الإيطالي عن بثها لأسباب غير مفهومة أوضح الرئيس الأسد أن أوروبا كانت اللاعب الرئيسي في خلق الفوضى في سورية ومشكلة اللاجئين فيها بسبب دعمها المباشر للإرهاب إلى جانب الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية وتركيا ودول أخرى.
وبين الرئيس الأسد أنه منذ بداية الرواية المتعلقة بالأسلحة الكيميائية أكدت سورية أنها لم تستخدمها وأن التسريبات الأخيرة حول تقرير منظمة حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية تثبت أن كل ما قالته سورية على مدى السنوات القليلة الماضية كان صحيحاً وأنها كانت محقة وهم كانوا مخطئين.
وأكد الرئيس الأسد أن ما فعلته منظمة حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية هو فبركة وتزوير لتقرير بشأن استخدام الكيميائي لمجرد أن الأمريكيين أرادوا منها فعل ذلك لتثبت أنها منظمة منحازة ومسيسة تستخدم كذراع لأمريكا والغرب لخلق المزيد من الفوضى.
ودعا الرئيس الأسد الدول التي تتدخل في المسألة السورية للتوقف عن هذا التدخل وكذلك التوقف عن انتهاك القانون الدولي والتزام الجميع به الأمر الذي ينعكس إيجاباً على وضع الشعب السوري.
وفيما يلي النص الكامل للمقابلة…
السؤال الأول:
سيادة الرئيس، شكراً لكم على استقبالنا. هل لكم أن تخبرونا عن ماهية الوضع في سورية الآن؟ ما الوضع على الأرض، وماذا يحدث في البلاد؟
الرئيس الأسد:
لو أردنا الحديث عن المجتمع السوري، فإن الوضع أفضل بكثير، حيث إننا تعلمنا العديد من الدروس من هذه الحرب. وأعتقد أن مستقبل سورية واعد، لأن من الطبيعي أن نخرج من هذه الحرب أكثر قوة. فيما يتعلق بالوضع على الأرض، فإن الجيش السوري يحقق تقدماً على مدى السنوات القليلة الماضية، وحرر العديد من المناطق من الإرهابيين وبقيت إدلب، حيث توجد (جبهة النصرة) المدعومة من الأتراك. وهناك أيضاً الجزء الشمالي من سورية، حيث غزا الأتراك أراضينا الشهر الماضي. أما فيما يتعلق بالوضع السياسي فيمكن القول إنه أصبح أكثر تعقيداً بسبب وجود عدد أكبر من اللاعبين المنخرطين في الصراع السوري من أجل إطالة أمده وتحويله إلى حرب استنزاف.
السؤال الثاني:
عندما تتحدثون عن التحرير، نعلم أن هناك رؤية عسكرية في ذلك الشأن، لكن ماذا عن الوضع الآن بالنسبة للأشخاص الذين قرروا العودة إلى المجتمع؟ أين وصلت عملية المصالحة؟ هل تحقق نجاحاً أم لا؟
الرئيس الأسد:
في الواقع، إن النهج الذي تبنيناه عندما أردنا خلق مناخٍ إيجابي سميناه المصالحة، لكن من أجل تمكين الناس من العيش معاً، ولتمكين أولئك الذين عاشوا خارج المناطق التي تسيطر عليها الحكومة من العودة إلى المؤسسات وسيادة القانون، منحنا العفو للجميع، وسيتخلى هؤلاء عن أسلحتهم ويلتزمون بالقوانين. الوضع ليس معقداً فيما يتعلق بهذه القضية. وقد تتاح لكِ الفرصة لزيارة أي منطقة، وسترين أن الحياة تعود إلى وضعها الطبيعي. فالمشكلة لم تكن في أن “الناس كانوا يقاتلون بعضهم بعضاً”؛ ولم يكن الوضع -كما تحاول الرواية الغربية تصويره- أن السوريين يقاتلون بعضهم بعضاً، أو أنها “حرب أهلية” كما يسمونها، هذا تضليل. واقع الحال هو أن الإرهابيين كانوا يسيطرون على تلك المنطقة ويطبقون قواعدهم. وعندما لا يعود أولئك الإرهابيون موجودين، سيعود الناس إلى حياتهم الطبيعية ويعيشون مع بعضهم بعضاً. لم تكن هناك حربٌ طائفية ولا حربٌ عرقية ولا حرب سياسية، بل كان هناك إرهابيون مدعومون من قوى خارجية ولديهم المال والسلاح، ويحتلون تلك المنطقة.
السؤال الثالث:
هل لديكم مخاوف من أن هذا النوع من الأيديولوجيا الذي طبق وأصبح أساساً لحياة الناس اليومية لسنوات عديدة، يمكن أن يظل –بطريقة أو بأخرى- موجوداً في المجتمع وأن يعود إلى الظهور عاجلاً أم آجلاً؟
الرئيس الأسد:
هذا هو أحد التحديات الرئيسية التي نواجهها. ما طرحته صحيح تماماً. لدينا مشكلتان. تلك المناطق الواقعة خارج سيطرة الحكومة كان يتحكم بها أمران: الفوضى، بسبب غياب القانون، وبالتالي لا يعرف الناس، وخصوصاً الأجيال الشابة، شيئاً عن الدولة والقانون والمؤسسات. الأمر الثاني، وهو متجذر بعمق في العقول، هو الأيديولوجيا.. الأيديولوجيا الظلامية.. الأيديولوجيا الوهابية، إن كان (داعش) أو (النصرة) أو (أحرار الشام)، أو أي نوع من هذه الأيديولوجيات الإسلامية الإرهابية المتطرفة. الآن، بدأنا بالتعامل مع هذا الواقع، لأنه عندما يتم تحرير منطقة، ينبغي حل هذه المشكلة، وإلا فما معنى التحرير؟ الجزء الأول من الحل هو ديني، لأن هذه الأيديولوجيا هي أيديولوجيا دينية، ورجال الدين السوريون، أو لنقل المؤسسة الدينية في سورية، تبذل جهداً كبيراً في هذا المجال، وقد نجحوا في مساعدة هؤلاء الناس على فهم الدين الحقيقي، وليس الدين الذي علمتهم إياه (جبهة النصرة) أو (داعش) أو الفصائل الأخرى.
السؤال الرابع:
إذاً، فقد كان رجال الدين والجوامع، بشكل أساسي، جزءاً من عملية المصالحة هذه؟
الرئيس الأسد:
هذا هو الجزء الأكثر أهمية. الجزء الثاني يتعلق بالمدارس؛ ففي المدارس، هناك مدرسون وتعليم، وهناك المنهاج الوطني. وهذا المنهاج مهم جداً لتغيير آراء تلك الأجيال الشابة، ثالثاً، هناك الثقافة ودَوْر الفنون والمثقفين، وما إلى ذلك. في بعض المناطق، ما يزال من الصعب لعب ذلك الدور، وبالتالي كان من الأسهل علينا أن نبدأ بالدين، ومن ثم بالمدارس.
السؤال الخامس:
سيادة الرئيس، لنعد إلى السياسة للحظة. لقد ذكرتم تركيا، صحيح؟ وقد كانت روسيا أفضل حلفائكم على مدى هذه السنوات، وهذا ليس سراً، لكن روسيا تساوم تركيا على بعض المناطق التي تعتبر جزءاً من سورية. كيف تقيّمون ذلك؟
الرئيس الأسد:
لفهم الدور الروسي، علينا أن نفهم المبادئ الروسية. الروس يعتبرون أن القانون الدولي، والنظام الدولي الذي يستند إليه، هو في مصلحة روسيا ومصلحة العالم أجمع. وبالتالي، فإن دعم سورية، بالنسبة لهم، هو دعم للقانون الدولي. هذه نقطة. النقطة الثانية هي أن عملهم ضد الإرهابيين هو في مصلحة الشعب الروسي وفي مصلحة العالم بأسره. وبالتالي، فإن قيامهم بـ”مساومات” مع تركيا لا يعني أنهم يدعمون الغزو التركي، لكنهم أرادوا أن يلعبوا دوراً لإقناع الأتراك بأن عليهم أن يغادروا سورية. إنهم لا يدعمون الأتراك. إنهم لا يقولون: “هذا واقع جيد ونحن نقبله، ويتعين على سورية قبوله”. إنهم لا يقولون ذلك.
لكن، وبسبب الدور الأمريكي السلبي، والدور الغربي السلبي فيما يتعلق بتركيا والأكراد، تدخل الروس من أجل تحقيق التوازن مع ذلك الدور. لجعل الوضع، أنا لا أقول أفضل الآن، وإنما أقل سوءاً، إذا توخينا الدقة.
إذاً، هذا هو دورهم في هذه الأثناء. أما في المستقبل، فموقفهم واضح جداً: سيادة سورية وسلامة أراضيها. وسيادة سورية وسلامة أراضيها يتناقضان مع الغزو التركي، وهذا واضح بجلاء.
السؤال السادس:
إذاً، تقولون إن الروس يمكن أن يساوموا، لكن سورية لن تساوم تركيا. أقصد أن العلاقة ما تزال متوترة تماماً؟
الرئيس الأسد:
لا حتى الروس لم يساوموا بشأن السيادة. إنهم يتعاملون مع الواقع. وهناك واقع سيئ، وبالتالي عليك أن تنخرط فيه، ولا أقول للمساومة، لأن هذا ليس حلاً نهائياً. قد تكون مساومة فيما يتعلق بوضع قصير الأمد، لكن على المدى الطويل، أو المتوسط، ينبغي على تركيا أن ترحل. ليس هناك أي شك في ذلك.
السؤال السابع:
وعلى المدى البعيد، هل هناك خطة لإجراء نقاشات بينكم وبين السيد أردوغان؟
الرئيس الأسد:
لن أشعر بالفخر إذا تعين عليّ ذلك يوماً ما؛ بل سأشعر بالاشمئزاز من التعامل مع مثل هذا النوع من الإسلاميين الانتهازيين. ليسوا مسلمين، بل إسلاميين، وهذا مصطلح آخر، مصطلح سياسي. لكنني أقول دائماً إن وظيفتي لا تتعلق بمشاعري، ولا بأن أكون سعيداً أو غير سعيد بما أفعله، وظيفتي تتعلق بمصالح سورية. وبالتالي، أينما كانت تلك المصالح، فسأتجه.
السؤال الثامن:
في الوقت الراهن، عندما تنظر أوروبا إلى سورية، بصرف النظر عن اعتباراتها بشأن البلد، ثمة قضيتان رئيسيتان: الأولى تتعلق باللاجئين، والثانية تتعلق بالجهاديين أو المقاتلين الأجانب وعودتهم إلى أوروبا. كيف تنظر إلى هذه الهواجس الأوروبية؟
الرئيس الأسد:
بداية، علينا أن نبدأ بسؤال بسيط: من خلق هذه المشكلة؟ لماذا لديكم لاجئون في أوروبا؟ إنه سؤال بسيط. لأن الإرهاب مدعوم من أوروبا، وبالطبع من الولايات المتحدة وتركيا وآخرين؛ لكن أوروبا كانت اللاعب الرئيسي في خلق هذه الفوضى في سورية. وبالتالي كما تزرع تحصد.
السؤال التاسع:
لماذا تقول: إن أوروبا كانت اللاعب الرئيسي؟
الرئيس الأسد:
لأن الاتحاد الأوروبي دعم علنا الإرهابيين في سورية منذ اليوم الأول، أو لنقل الأسبوع الأول، من البداية. حمّلوا المسؤولية للحكومة السورية؛ وبعض الأنظمة -كالنظام الفرنسي- أرسلت لهم الأسلحة. هم قالوا ذلك، أحد مسؤوليهم، أعتقد أنه كان وزير الخارجية فابيوس الذي قال “إننا نرسل أسلحة”. هم أرسلوا الأسلحة وخلقوا هذه الفوضى. ولذلك فإن عددا كبيراً من الناس – ملايين الناس لم يعد بإمكانهم العيش في سورية ووجدوا صعوبة في ذلك، وبالتالي كان عليهم الخروج منها.
السؤال العاشر:
في اللحظة الراهنة، هناك اضطرابات في المنطقة، وهناك نوع من الفوضى. أحد حلفاء سورية الآخرين هي إيران، والوضع هناك يسير نحو التعقيد. هل لذلك أي انعكاس على الوضع في سورية؟
الرئيس الأسد:
بالتأكيد، فكلما كانت هناك فوضى، ستنعكس سلباً على الجميع، وسيكون لها آثار جانبية وتبعات، وخصوصاً عندما يكون هناك تدخل خارجي. إن كان الأمر عفوياً.. إن كنت تتحدثين عن مظاهرات وأناس يطالبون بالإصلاح أو بتحسين الوضع الاقتصادي، أو أي حقوق أخرى، فإن ذلك إيجابي. لكن عندما تكون عبارة عن تخريب ممتلكات وتدمير وقتل وتدخل من قبل القوى الخارجية، فلا يمكن لذلك إلا أن يكون سلبياً، لا يمكن إلا أن يكون سيئاً وخطيراً على الجميع في هذه المنطقة.
السؤال الحادي عشر:
هل أنتم قلقون حيال ما يحدث في لبنان، وهو جاركم الأقرب؟
الرئيس الأسد:
نفس الشيء. بالطبع، لبنان سيؤثر في سورية أكثر من أي بلد آخر لأنه جارنا المباشر. لكن مرة أخرى، إذا كان ما يحدث عفوياً ويتعلق بالإصلاح والتخلص من النظام السياسي الطائفي، فإنه سيكون جيداً للبنان. ومجددا، فإن ذلك يعتمد على وعي الشعب اللبناني بألا يسمح لأي كان من الخارج أن يحاول استغلال التحرك العفوي أو المظاهرات في لبنان.
السؤال الثاني عشر:
لنعد إلى ما يحدث في سورية. في حزيران، بعث البابا فرنسيس لكم برسالة يطلب فيها منكم الاهتمام بالناس واحترامهم، وخصوصاً في إدلب، حيث ما يزال الوضع متوتراً جداً بسبب القتال هناك، وحتى عندما يتعلق الأمر بمعاملة السجناء. هل رددتم عليه، وماذا كان ردكم؟
الرئيس الأسد:
تمحورت رسالة البابا حول قلقه بشأن المدنيين في سورية. وكان لدي ذلك الانطباع بأن الصورة ليست مكتملة لدى الفاتيكان، وهذا متوقع، بالنظر إلى أن الرواية في الغرب تدور حول هذه “الحكومة السيئة” التي تقتل “شعباً طيباً”. وكما ترين وتسمعين في نفس وسائل الإعلام بأن كل طلقة يطلقها الجيش السوري وكل قنبلة يرميها لا تقتل سوى المدنيين ولا تقع إلا على المستشفيات! إنها لا تقتل الإرهابيين بل تختار أولئك المدنيين! وهذا غير صحيح.
وبالتالي، رددت برسالة تشرح للبابا الواقع في سورية، وبأننا أول وأكثر من يهتم بحياة المدنيين، لأنك لا تستطيعين تحرير منطقة بينما يكون الناس فيها ضدك، لا تستطيعين التحدث عن التحرير بينما المدنيون أو المجتمع ضدك. الجزء المحوري الأهم في تحرير أي منطقة عسكرياً هو أن تحظى بالدعم الشعبي في تلك المنطقة بشكل عام. وهذا ما كان واضحاً على مدى السنوات التسع الماضية.
السؤال الثالث عشر:
لكن هل جعلتك تلك الدعوة تفطن، بطريقة ما، بأهمية حماية المدنيين وحماية الناس في بلدكم؟
الرئيس الأسد:
لا، فهذا ما نفكر فيه كل يوم، وليس من منظور الأخلاق والمبادئ والقيم وحسب، بل من منظور المصالح أيضاً. كما ذكرت قبل قليل، فبدون هذا الدعم، بدون الدعم الشعبي، لا يمكن تحقيق شيء، لا يمكن تحقيق التقدم سياسياً، أو عسكرياً، أو اقتصادياً أو في أي وجه من الوجوه. ما كنا سنتمكن من الصمود في هذه الحرب لتسع سنوات دون الدعم الشعبي، كما لا يمكنك أن تحظي بالدعم الشعبي بينما تقومين بقتل المدنيين، إنها معادلة بديهية لا يمكن لأحد دحضها. ولذلك قلت إنه بصرف النظر عن هذه الرسالة، فإن هذا هو هاجسنا.
لكن الفاتيكان دولة، ونعتقد أن دور أي دولة، إن كان لديها قلق بشأن أولئك المدنيين، هو أن تعود إلى السبب الرئيسي. والسبب الرئيسي هو الدعم الغربي للإرهابيين، والعقوبات المفروضة على الشعب السوري التي جعلت الوضع أسوأ بكثير، وهذا سبب آخر لوجود اللاجئين في أوروبا الآن. كيف تتسق رغبتكم بعدم وجود اللاجئين بينما تقومون في الوقت نفسه بخلق كل الأوضاع أو الأجواء التي تقول لهم: “اخرجوا من سورية واذهبوا إلى مكان آخر”. وبالطبع، فإنهم سيذهبون إلى أوروبا.
إذاً، ينبغي على هذه الدولة، أو أي دولة، أن تعالج الأسباب، ونأمل أن يلعب الفاتيكان ذلك الدور داخل أوروبا وفي العالم، لإقناع العديد من الدول بالتوقف عن التدخل في المسألة السورية، والتوقف عن انتهاك القانون الدولي. هذا كافٍ، فكل ما نريده هو التزام الجميع بالقانون الدولي. عندها سيكون المدنيون في أمان، وسيعود النظام، وسيكون كل شيء على ما يرام. لا شيء سوى ذلك.
السؤال الرابع عشر:
سيادة الرئيس، لقد اُتهمتم مرات عدة باستخدام الأسلحة الكيميائية، وقد شكل ذلك أداة لاتخاذ العديد من القرارات، ونقطة رئيسية، وخطاً أحمر ترتبت عليه العديد من القرارات. قبل عام أو أكثر من ذلك بقليل، وقع حادث دوما الذي اعتبر خطاً أحمر آخر. بعد ذلك، كانت هناك عمليات قصف، وكان يمكن أن تكون أسوأ، لكن شيئاً ما توقف. هذه الأيام، ومن خلال ويكيليكس، يتبين أن خطأً ما ارتكب في التقرير. إذاً، لا أحد يستطيع حتى الآن أن يقول ما حصل، إلا أن خطأ ما ربما حدث خلال صياغة التقرير حول ما جرى، ما رأيكم؟
الرئيس الأسد:
نحن نقول دائماً، ومنذ بداية هذه الرواية المتعلقة بالأسلحة الكيميائية، إننا لم نستخدمها، ولا نستطيع استخدامها، ومن المستحيل استخدامها في وضعنا، لعدة أسباب، دعينا نقل أسبابا لوجستية..
مداخلة:
أعطني سبباً واحداً!
الرئيس الأسد:
سبب واحد وبسيط جداً هو أننا عندما نكون في حالة تقدم، لماذا نستخدم الأسلحة الكيميائية؟! نحن نتقدم، فلماذا نحتاج لاستخدامها؟! نحن في وضع جيد جداً، فلماذا نستخدمها؟! وخصوصاً في عام 2018، هذا سبب.. السبب الثاني، ثمة دليل ملموس يدحض هذه الرواية: عندما تستخدمين الأسلحة الكيميائية، فأنتِ تستخدمين سلاح دمار شامل، أي تتحدثين عن آلاف القتلى، أو على الأقل مئات. وهذا لم يحدث أبداً، مطلقاً. هناك فقط تلك الفيديوهات التي تصوّر مسرحيات عن هجمات مفبركة بالأسلحة الكيميائية، وفي التقرير الذي ذكرته، طبقاً للتسريبات الأخيرة، ثمة عدم تطابق بين ما رأيناه في الفيديوهات وما رأوه كتقنيين وخبراء.
كما أن كمية الكلور التي يتحدثون عنها، وبالمناسبة فإن الكلور ليس سلاح تدمير شامل. هذا أولاً. ثانياً، الكمية التي عثروا عليها هي نفس الكمية التي يمكن أن تكون لديك في منزلك، لأن هذه المادة -كما تعرفين- موجودة في العديد من المنازل، ويمكن أن تستعمليها ربما في التنظيف، أو لأي غرض آخر. نفس الكمية بالتحديد. وما فعلته منظمة حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية، هو فبركة وتزوير التقرير لمجرد أن الأمريكيين أرادوا منهم فعل ذلك.
لذلك، لحسن الحظ، فإن هذا التقرير أثبت أن كل ما كنا نقوله على مدى السنوات القليلة الماضية، منذ عام 2013، كان صحيحاً. نحن كنا محقّين، وهم كانوا مخطئين. وهذا هو الدليل، الدليل الملموس بشأن هذه القضية.
إذاً، مرة أخرى تثبت منظمة حظر الأسلحة الكيميائية انحيازها، وأنها مسيّسة ولا أخلاقية. وتلك المنظمات التي ينبغي أن تعمل بالتوازي مع الأمم المتحدة على خلق المزيد من الاستقرار في سائر أنحاء العالم، تُستخدم كأذرع لأمريكا والغرب لخلق المزيد من الفوضى.
السؤال الخامس عشر:
سيادة الرئيس، بعد تسع سنوات من الحرب، تتحدثون عن أخطاء الآخرين. أودّ أن تتحدثوا عن أخطائكم، إذا كان هناك أي أخطاء. هل هناك شيء كان يمكن أن تفعلوه بطريقة مختلفة، وما الدرس الذي تعلمتموه ويمكن أن يساعد بلدكم؟
الرئيس الأسد:
بالتأكيد، فعندما تتحدثين عن فعل أي شيء، لا بد أن تجدي أخطاء. هذه هي الطبيعة البشرية. لكن عندما تتحدثين عن الممارسة السياسية، لنقل، ثمة شيئان: هناك الاستراتيجيات أو القرارات الكبرى، وهناك التكتيك، أو لنقل التنفيذ. وهكذا، فإن قراراتنا الاستراتيجية أو الرئيسية تمثلت في الوقوف في وجه الإرهاب، وإجراء المصالحات والوقوف ضد التدخل الخارجي في شؤوننا.
وحتى اليوم بعد تسع سنوات، ما زلنا نتبنى نفس السياسة، بل بتنا أكثر تمسكاً بها. لو كنّا نعتقد أنها كانت خاطئة، لغيرناها. في الواقع، فإننا لا نعتقد أنه كان هناك أي خطأ فيها. لقد قمنا بمهمتنا، وطبقنا الدستور في حماية الشعب.
الآن، إذا تحدثنا عن الأخطاء في التنفيذ، فبالطبع يوجد العديد منها. لكن أعتقد أنك إذا أردت التحدث عن الأخطاء المتعلقة بهذه الحرب فلا ينبغي أن نتحدث عن القرارات المتخذة خلالها، لأن الحرب -في جزء منها- هي نتيجة لأمور حدثت قبلها..
هناك شيئان واجهناهما خلال هذه الحرب: الأول هو التطرف. والتطرف نشأ في هذه المنطقة في أواخر ستينيات القرن العشرين وتسارع في ثمانينياته، خصوصاً الأيديولوجيا الوهابية. إذا أردت التحدث عن الأخطاء في التعامل مع هذه القضية، نعم، سأقول إننا كنّا متساهلين جداً مع شيء خطير جداً. وهذا خطأ كبير ارتكبناه على مدى عقود. وأتحدث هنا عن حكومات مختلفة، بما في ذلك حكومتنا قبل هذه الحرب.
الشيء الثاني هو عندما يكون هناك أشخاص مستعدون للثورة ضد النظام العام، وتدمير الممتلكات العامة، والتخريب، وما إلى ذلك، ويعملون ضد بلدهم، ويكونون مستعدين للعمل مع قوى أجنبية وأجهزة استخبارات أجنبية، ويطلبون التدخل العسكري الخارجي ضد بلادهم.. فهناك سؤال آخر: هو كيف وجد هؤلاء بيننا؟ إن سألتني كيف، فسأقول لك إننا قبل الحرب، كان لدينا نحو 50 ألف خارج عن القانون لم تقبض عليهم الشرطة، على سبيل المثال. وبالنسبة لأولئك الخارجين عن القانون فإن عدوهم الطبيعي هو الحكومة، لأنهم لا يريدون أن يدخلوا السجن.
السؤال السادس عشر:
وماذا عن الوضع الاقتصادي أيضا؟ لأن جزءاً مما حدث – لا أعلم ما إذا كان جزءاً كبيراً أم صغيراً – تمثل في سخط السكان والمشاكل التي عانوا منها في مناطق معينة لم يكن الاقتصاد ناجحاً فيها. هل يشكل هذا درساً ما تعلمتموه؟
الرئيس الأسد:
قد يشكل هذا عاملاً، لكنه بالتأكيد ليس عاملاً رئيسياً، لأن البعض يتحدث عن أربع سنوات من الجفاف دفعت الناس لمغادرة أراضيهم في المناطق الريفية والذهاب إلى المدن.. وبالتالي يمكن أن تكون تلك مشكلة، لكنها ليست المشكلة الرئيسية. البعض أيضا يتحدث عن السياسات الليبرالية. لم يكن لدينا سياسة ليبرالية، بل ما نزال اشتراكيين، وما يزال لدينا قطاع عام كبير جداً في الحكومة. لا يمكن الحديث عن سياسة ليبرالية بينما لديك قطاع عام كبير. وكنّا نحقق نموا جيداً.
مرة أخرى بالطبع، وفي أثناء تنفيذ سياستنا، يتم ارتكاب أخطاء. كيف يمكن خلق فرص متكافئة بين الناس.. بين المناطق الريفية والمدن؟ عندما تفتح الاقتصاد بشكل ما، فإن المدن ستستفيد بشكل أكبر، وسيؤدي هذا إلى المزيد من الهجرة من المناطق الريفية إلى المدن. قد تكون هذه عوامل، وقد يكون لها بعض الدور، لكنها ليست هي القضية، لأنه في المناطق الريفية، حيث هناك درجة أكبر من الفقر، لعب المال القطري دوراً أكثر فعالية مما لعبه في المدن، وهذا طبيعي؛ إذ يمكن أن يدفع لهم أجر أسبوع على ما يمكن أن يقوموا به خلال نصف ساعة. وهذا أمرٌ جيد جداً بالنسبة لهم.
السؤال السابع عشر:
شارفنا على الانتهاء، لكن لديّ سؤالين أودُّ أن أطرحهما عليكم. السؤال الأول يتعلق بإعادة الإعمار التي ستكون مكلفة جداً. كيف تتخيلون أنه سيكون بإمكانكم تحمّل تكاليف إعادة الإعمار، ومن الذين يمكن أن يكونوا حلفاءكم في إعادة الإعمار؟
الرئيس الأسد:
ليس لدينا مشكلة كبيرة في ذلك. وبالحديث عن أن سورية ليس لديها المال. لا، لأن السوريين في الواقع يمتلكون الكثير من المال. السوريون الذين يعملون في سائر أنحاء العالم لديهم الكثير من المال، وأرادوا أن يأتوا ويبنوا بلدهم؛ لأنك عندما تتحدثين عن بناء البلد، فالأمر لا يتعلق بإعطاء المال للناس، بل بتحقيق الفائدة. إنه عمل تجاري. ثمة كثيرون، وليس فقط سوريون، أرادوا القيام بأعمال تجارية في سورية. إذاً، عند الحديث عن مصدر التمويل لإعادة الإعمار، فالمصادر موجودة، لكن المشكلة هي في العقوبات المفروضة التي تمنع رجال الأعمال أو الشركات من القدوم والعمل في سورية. رغم ذلك، فقد بدأنا وبدأت بعض الشركات الأجنبية بإيجاد طرق للالتفاف على هذه العقوبات، وقد بدأنا بالتخطيط. ستكون العملية بطيئة، لكن لولا العقوبات لما كان لدينا أي مشكلة في التمويل.
السؤال الثامن عشر:
أودُّ أن أختتم بسؤال شخصي جداً. سيادة الرئيس، هل تشعر بنفسك كناجٍ؟
الرئيس الأسد:
إذا أردت الحديث عن حرب وطنية كهذه، حيث تعرضت كل مدينة تقريباً للأضرار بسبب الإرهاب أو القصف الخارجي أو أشياء من هذا القبيل، عندها يمكنك اعتبار أن كل السوريين ناجون. لكن مرة أخرى أعتقد أن هذه هي الطبيعة البشرية، أن يسعى المرء للنجاة.
مداخلة:
وماذا عنك شخصيا؟
الرئيس الأسد:
أنا جزءٌ من هؤلاء السوريين، ولا يمكن أن أنفصل عنهم، ولديّ نفس المشاعر. مرة أخرى، الأمر لا يتعلق بأن تكون شخصاً قوياً ناجياً، لو لم يكن لديك هذا المناخ، هذا المجتمع، هذه الحاضنة -إذا جاز التعبير- للنجاة، فإنك لا تستطيعين النجاة. إنها عملية جماعية، ولا تقتصر على شخص واحد. إنها ليست عملاً فردياً.
Compare US pillaging with Russia-Iran-Turkey’s active involvement in a political solution to normalize Syria
What happened in Geneva this Wednesday, in terms of finally bringing peace to Syria, could not be more significant: the first session of the Syrian Constitutional Committee.
The Syrian Constitutional Committee sprang out of a resolution passed in January 2018 in Sochi, Russia, by a body called the Syrian National Dialogue Congress.
The 150-strong committee breaks down as 50 members of the Syrian opposition, 50 representing the government in Damascus and 50 representatives of civil society. Each group named 15 experts for the meetings in Geneva, held behind closed doors.
This development is a direct consequence of the laborious Astana process – articulated by Russia, Iran and Turkey. Essential initial input came from former UN Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura. Now UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen is working as a sort of mediator.
The committee started its deliberations in Geneva in early 2019.
Crucially, there are no senior members of the administration in Damascus nor from the opposition – apart from Ahmed Farouk Arnus, who is a low-ranking diplomat with the Syrian Foreign Ministry.
Among the opposition, predictably, there are no former leaders of weaponized factions. And no “moderate rebels.” The delegates include several former and current parliament members, university rectors and journalists.
After this first round, significantly, the committee’s co-chair, Ahmad Kuzbari, said: “We hope that our next meeting could take place in our native land, in our beloved Damascus, the oldest continuously inhabited capital in history.”
Even the opposition, which is part of the committee, hopes that a political deal will be clinched next year. According to co-chair Hadi al-Bahra: “I hope that the 75th anniversary of the United Nations next year will be an opportunity to celebrate another achievement by the universal organization, namely the success of efforts under the auspices of a special envoy for political process, who will bring peace and justice to all Syrians.”
Join the patrol
The committee’s work in Geneva proceeds in parallel to ever-changing facts on the ground. These will certainly force more face-to-face negotiations between Presidents Putin and Erdogan, as Erdogan himself confirmed: “A conversation with Putin can take place any time. Everything depends on the course of events.”
“Events” seem not to be that incandescent, so far, even as Erdogan, predictably, releases the whiff of a threat in the air: “We reserve the right to resume military operation in Syria if terrorists approach at the distance of 30km to Turkey’s borders or continue attacks from any other Syrian area.”
Erdogan also said the de facto safe zone along the Turkish-Syrian border could be “expanded,” something that he would have to clear in minute detail with Moscow.
Those threats have already manifested on the ground. On Wednesday, Turkey and allied Islamist factions launched an attack against Tal Tamr, a historic Assyrian Christian enclave 50km deep inside Syrian territory – far beyond the scope of the 10km patrol zone or the 30km “safe” zone.
Poorly-armed Syrian troops pulled out under fierce attack, and with no apparent Russian cover. The Syrian military on the same day issued a public statement calling on the Syrian Democratic Forces to reintegrate under its command. The SDF has said a compromise must be reached first over semi-autonomy for the northeastern region. Thousands of residents in the meantime fled farther south to the more protected city of Hasakeh.
Two facts are absolutely crucial. The Syrian Kurds have completed their pull out ahead of schedule, as confirmed by Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu. And, this Friday, Russia and Turkey start their joint military patrols to the depth of 7km away from the border, part of the de facto safe zone in northeast Syria.
The devil in the immense details is how Ankara is going to manage the territories that it now actually controls, and to which it plans to relocate as many as 2 million Syrian refugees.
Your oil? Mine
Then there’s the nagging issue that simply won’t go away: the American drive to “secure the oil” (Trump) and “protect” Syrian oilfields (the Pentagon), for all practical purposes from Syria.
In Geneva, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov – alongside Iran’s Javad Zarif and Turkey’s Mevlut Cavusoglu – could not have been more scathing. Lavrov said Washington’s plan is “arrogant,” and violates international law. The very American presence on Syrian soil is “illegal,” he said.
All across the Global South, especially among countries in the Non-Aligned Movement, this is being interpreted, stripped to the bone, for what it is: the United States government illegally taking possession of natural resources of a third country via a military occupation.
And the Pentagon is warning that anyone attempting to contest it will be shot on sight. It remains to be seen whether the US Deep State would be willing to engage in a hot war with Russia over a few Syrian oilfields.
Under international law, the whole “securing the oil” scam is a euphemism for pillaging, pure and simple. Every single takfiri or jihadi outfit operating across the “Greater Middle East” will converge, perversely, to the same conclusion: US “efforts” across the lands of Islam are all about the oil.
Now compare that with Russia-Iran-Turkey’s active involvement in a political solution and normalization of Syria – not to mention, behind the scenes, China, which quietly donates rice and aims for widespread investment in a pacified Syria positioned as a key Eastern Mediterranean node of the New Silk Roads.
Sergey Lavrov, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, addresses the general debate of the 74th Session of the General Assembly of the UN (New York, 24 – 30 September 2019).
Statement by H.E. Mr. Sergey Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, at the 74th session of the UN General Assembly, New York, September 27, 2019
Unofficial translation
Distinguished Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The 75th anniversary of the United Nations which was established as a result of the Victory in World War II and the realization of the need for a collective mechanism to maintain international peace and security, is getting closer. Regrettably, the events of the Cold War, which started soon after, prevented this tremendous creative potential from being unleashed.
The hope arose again almost 30 years ago when the Berlin Wall symbolizing confrontation of the two irreconcilable systems fell. It was the hope for the possibility to finally turn the grievous pages of wars – not only hot but also cold – and to join efforts for the benefit of all mankind.
However, we have to admit – although World War III was prevented thanks to the UN, the number of conflicts on the planet has not declined and enmity has not weakened. New most acute challenges emerged – international terrorism, drug trafficking, climate change, illegal migration, the growing gap between the rich and the poor. It is getting harder to address these and many other challenges from year to year. The fragmentation of international community is only increasing.
In our view, the reason for the current state of affairs lies, first and foremost, in the unwillingness of the countries which declared themselves winners in the Cold War to reckon with the legitimate interests of all other states, to accept the realities of the objective course of history.
It is hard for the West to put up with its weakening centuries-long dominance in world affairs. New centers of economic growth and political influence have emerged and are developing. Without them it is impossible to find sustainable solution to the global challenges which can be addressed only on the firm basis of the UN Charter through the balance of interests of all states.
Leading Western countries are trying to impede the development of the polycentric world, to recover their privileged positions, to impose standards of conduct based on the narrow Western interpretation of liberalism on others. In a nutshell, “we are liberals, and we can do anything”. Pursuing these aspirations, the West is less frequently recalling international law and more often and importunately dwelling upon the “rules-based order”.
The aim of such a concept is obvious – to revise the norms of international law which no longer suit the West, to substitute it for the “rules” adjusted to its self-serving schemes which are elaborated depending on the political expediency, and to proclaim the West and only the West as an indisputable source of legitimacy. For instance, when it is advantageous, the right of the peoples to self-determination has significance and when it is not – it is declared “illegal”.
In order to justify revisionist “rules” the West resorts to manipulation of public consciousness, dissemination of false information, double standards on human rights, suppression of undesirable media, bans on practicing journalism. Moreover, the West got “apt students” among its wards on the post-Soviet territory.
Instead of equal collective work, closed formats beyond legitimate multilateral framework are being created, and approaches agreed upon behind closed doors by a narrow group of the “select few” are then declared “multilateral agreements”. This is accompanied by the attempts to “privatize” the secretariats of international organizations, to use them in order to advance non-consensual ideas in circumvention of universal mechanisms.
Attacks on international law are looming large. The US withdrawal from the JCPOA endorsed by UNSC Resolution 2231 is broadly discussed. Washington not just repudiated its obligations enshrined in this Resolution but started demanding from others to play by American “rules” and sabotage its implementation.
The United States set a tough course for abolishing the UN resolutions on international legal framework of the Middle East settlement. It suggests waiting for some “deal of the century”, meanwhile it has taken unilateral decisions on Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. A two-state solution to the Palestinian issue – which is essential for satisfying the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people and providing security for Israel and the whole region – is under threat.
Apparently, when NATO members were bombing Libya blatantly violating the UNSC resolution, they were also guided by the logic of their “rules-based order”. It resulted in the destruction of Libyan statehood, and international community is still disentangling the disastrous repercussions of NATO’s adventure with African countries affected the most.
“Hidden agendas” in countering terrorism remain – despite the universally binding Security Council decisions on listing terrorist organizations, some countries made it a “rule” to cover terrorists and even to engage in cooperation with them on the ground as it is happening, for instance, in Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria. The United States has already been saying it loud that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham is a rather moderate structure which “can be dealt with”. As recent discussions on the situation in the Syrian Idlib showed, the United States wants to induce members of the UNSC to such unacceptable logic.
The West also has its own “rules” regarding the Balkans where it is pursuing an open course for undermining the UNSC decisions on Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina settlement.
Universal conventions together with the SC resolutions are an integral part of international law. The West would like to substitute even them for its “rules” as it happened in the OPCW whose Technical Secretariat was illegally granted “attributive” functions through unlawful manipulations and unscrupulous pressure in direct violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention and exclusive prerogatives of the Security Council.
Playing with Conventions obliging all countries to provide linguistic, educational, religious and other rights of national minorities continue. Even here our Western colleagues are guided by their “rules” – they turn a blind eye to the open denial of national minorities’ relevant rights and indulge the retaining of an ignominious phenomenon of statelessness in Europe.
The course for the revision of international law is more frequently observed in the persistent policy of rewriting the history of World War II, justifying an increasing number of manifestations of neo-Nazism, vandalism against the monuments to the liberators of Europe and Holocaust victims.
The key principles of the UN Charter – non-interference in internal affairs, non-use of force or the threat of force – are also undergoing durability tests.
We are now facing the attempts to add Venezuela to the list of countries whose statehood was destroyed before our eyes through aggression or coups inspired from abroad. Like the overwhelming majority of the UN members, Russia is rejecting the attempts to return the “rules” dating back to the times of Monroe Doctrine to Latin America, to change from outside regimes in sovereign states descending to the methods of military blackmail, unlawful coercion and blockade as it happens in relation to Cuba in defiance of the UN resolutions.
Next year marks the 60th anniversary of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples adopted at the initiative of our country. However, a number of Western states are still clinging to the old “rules”, ignoring this Declaration and other decisions of the General Assembly on decolonization addressed directly to them, while keeping former overseas territories under their control.
This November marks another anniversary – 20 years since the adoption of the Charter for European Security and the Platform for Co-operative Security. These documents set out principles of cooperation for all countries and organizations in the Euro-Atlantic region. Heads of states and governments solemnly declared that no one should provide his own security at the expense of other’s security. Regrettably, the consensus reached back then today is substituted for taken as a “rule” NATO practice, the organization which continues thinking in terms of searching for enemies, while moving its military infrastructure to the East to the Russian borders and increasing its military budgets, although they already exceed the Russian one more than 20 times. We call on NATO to return to the agreements on shaping equal and indivisible security in the OSCE area. Recently, responsible European politicians have been speaking in favor of it, which, in particular, was demonstrated during the meeting of the Presidents of the Russian Federation and France in August.
The Asia-Pacific region needs a reliable and open architecture. It is dangerous to yield to the temptation and divide it into conflicting blocs. Such attempts will contradict the task to join efforts of all countries in the region in order to effectively address the continuing threats and challenges there, including the task to resolve a whole range of issues on the Korean Peninsula exclusively by peaceful means.
Actions taken by the United States, which, following its withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, destroyed the INF Treaty with the overwhelming support of all NATO members, caused a huge damage to the global system of strategic stability which had been established for decades. Now the United States is questioning the future of the New START Treaty, refusing to ratify the CTBT. Moreover, it has lowered the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons in its doctrinal documents. The United States is setting course for transforming cyberspace and outer space into the arena for military confrontation.
In order to prevent further escalation of tensions, Russia proposed several initiatives. President Vladimir Putin announced the decision not to deploy land-based intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles in Europe or other regions if and as long as the Americans refrain from doing it. We called on the United States and NATO to join such a moratorium. We have also repeatedly suggested Washington that we start negotiations on prolonging the New START Treaty. Together with China we support the harmonization of a legally binding document on the prevention of an arms race in outer space. So far, the reaction of the United States and its allies has not been encouraging.
We are alarmed by the protracted lack of answer to our proposal made to American colleagues already a year ago – to adopt a high-level Russian-American statement on unacceptability and inadmissibility of the nuclear war which by definition cannot have a winner. We call on all countries to support this initiative.
Today I would like to make an announcement – at the current session of the General Assembly we are introducing a draft resolution on Strengthening and Developing the System of Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Agreements. We invite everyone to conduct substantial talks. The adoption of the resolution would greatly contribute to the creation of conditions for a successful hosting of another NPT Review Conference next year.
Russia will continue to work persistently in order to strengthen universal security. In this sphere, we are acting with utmost responsibility, exercising restraint in enhancing defence capacity – obviously, without any damage to the effective delivery of national security and in full compliance with international law.
We support the consolidation of efforts to combat international terrorism under the auspices of the UN. In the interests of mobilizing the potential of regional organizations to suppress the terrorist threat Russia initiated a Ministerial meeting of the Security Council with the participation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
Among the most critical tasks of the world community is elaboration of generally acceptable approaches to the digital sphere management and understanding of the processes related to the creation of artificial intelligence. Last year, the General Assembly endorsed the beginning of the substantive work on discussing the rules of the responsible conduct of states in information space. Resolution on Combating Cybercrime was adopted at Russia’s initiative. It is important to work for achieving legally binding agreements on all aspects of international information security.
We need to step up efforts to facilitate the settlement of numerous crises and conflicts in all regions of the world. The main point is to seek compliance with already existing agreements from parties without allowing them to invent pretexts to refuse from implementing obligations already taken during negotiations. This also concerns conflicts on the post-Soviet territory, including the need to strictly follow the provisions of the Minsk Package of Measures to settle the crisis in the East of Ukraine.
In Syria, where major success in combating terrorism has been achieved, further advancement of the political process lead by the Syrians with the assistance of the UN is at the forefront. With the decisive contribution of Russia, Turkey, and Iran as guarantors of the Astana format, the establishment of the Constitutional Committee has been finished, which was announced by the UN Secretary-General António Guterres a few days ago. Post-conflict reconstruction and creation of conditions for the return of the refugees are the items on the agenda. Here the UN system is to play an important role.
Yet, on the whole, the Middle East and North Africa still face many challenges. We witness what is happening in Libya and Yemen. Prospects for the Palestinian settlement are on the verge of collapse. Efforts to play the “Kurdish card” – which is combustible for many countries – are alarming.
The Persian Gulf region is facing artificial escalation of tensions. We call on overcoming the existing disagreements through dialogue without baseless accusations. On our part, we made a contribution having presented this summer the renewed Russian concept of the collective security in this region.
Supporting the efforts of the African states to put an end to conflicts on their continent, yesterday Russia organized the meeting of the Security Council on strengthening peace and security in Africa. At the end of October, Sochi will host the first ever Russia-Africa Summit. We hope its outcomes will help increase the effectiveness of addressing modern challenges and threats and of work to overcome the problems of development African countries are facing.
The reform of the SC is aimed at improving the UN anti-crisis and peacekeeping activities. Given the realities of the multipolar world, the main task is to find a formula which would correct an obvious geopolitical imbalance in its current composition and would ensure increased representation of African, Asian, and Latin American countries in the Council with the broadest possible agreement of the UN Member States.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dividing lines are harmful not only to the world politics but also to the economy. Its inclusive growth is curbed as a result of the WTO norms being substituted for other “rules” – methods of unfair competition, protectionism, trade wars, unilateral sanctions, and open abuse of the American dollar status. All this leads to the fragmentation of the global economic space, negatively affects people’s standards of living. We believe it necessary to get back to the substantial work both in the UN system organizations and in the G-20. To this end, we will contribute to the creation of favorable conditions, including through the opportunities offered by BRICS, where Russia will assume the chairmanship in 2020.
Together with other like-minded countries we support the harmonization of integration processes. This philosophy lies at the core of President Vladimir Putin’s initiative of the Greater Eurasian Partnership involving the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), SCO, ASEAN, and which is open to all other Eurasian states, including the EU countries. We have already started moving in this direction by interconnecting development plans of the EAEU and the Chinese Belt And Road Initiative. Consistent implementation of these endeavors will contribute not only to increasing economic growth but also to laying a solid foundation in order to form the territory of peace, stability, and cooperation from Lisbon to Jakarta.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
In the run-up to the next anniversary of the United Nations, I would like to underline – the UN-centered system of the world order, despite all trials, is stable and has a great margin of safety. It is a kind of a safety net which guarantees – if the UN Charter is respected – a peaceful development of mankind through finding a balance of sometimes rather contradictory interests of various countries.
At the outcome of these 75 years the main conclusion is probably that the experience of de-ideologized cooperation of states at the face of common threat, gained in the years of that most severe war, is still relevant.
Today’s challenges and threats are no less dangerous.
Only working together we will be able to effectively address them. Half a century ago a prominent scientist and public figure, the Nobel Prize Laureate Andrei Sakharov wrote the following – The division of mankind threatens it with destruction. If mankind is to get away from the brink, it must overcome its divisions It was the unity which was considered the key task of the UN by its Founding Fathers. Let us be worthy of their legacy and memory.
– ليس من إثبات قانوني على مسؤولية إيران عن أي من الحوادث التي تصيب سوق النفط وتتسبب بالمزيد من التدهور في استقراره والمزيد من الصعود في أسعاره، لكن الأكيد أن ما تشهده منطقة الخليج من حوادث تستهدف سوق النفط يتمّ على خلفية النظر إلى مشهد التوتر الناتج عن الاستهداف الأميركي لقدرة إيران على تصدير نفطها من جهة، والرد الإيراني القائم على معادلة، إذا لم نستطع تصدير نفطنا فإن غيرنا لن يستطيع ذلك أيضاً، والعالم كله ينظر للتصعيد القائم الآن وفقاً لمعادلة أبعد من كيف تثبت واشنطن قوتها، أو كيف تردّ واشنطن على ما تتهم إيران به، فالسؤال الكبير دولياً هو مَن يضمن عودة الاستقرار إلى سوق النفط وإلى أسعاره؟
– إذا سلكت واشنطن طريق الاستهداف العسكري المباشر أو غير المباشر، الضيّق والمحدود أو الأوسع، فإن ذلك سيعني تصاعد الوضع أكثر واستدراج ردود على الردود من نوعها، مباشرة أو غير مباشرة، محدودة أو واسعة النطاق، لكن الأكيد هو أن سوق النفط ستبلغ المزيد من الاضطراب والأسعار ستبلغ المزيد من السقوف العالية، وإذا سلكت واشنطن طريق التجاهل واكتفت بالتحذير والسعي لردود دبلوماسيّة، فإن ذلك يقول إن الخط البياني للأحداث التي استهدفت سوق النفط سيتصاعد وبات هو الحاكم المسيطر على معادلات هذا السوق، وعنوانها، إن لم تستطع إيران تصدير نفطها فإن غيرها لن يستطيع.
– بالتوازي تتبقى ثلاثة أسابيع أمام نهاية مهلة الستين يوماً التي ستبادر إيران بنهايتها إلى التخصيب المرتفع لليورانيوم والتخزين لليورانيوم المخصب، وصولاً لامتلاك ما قالت واشنطن ودول الغرب إنه نقطة الخطر، اي امتلاك إيران ما يكفي لإنتاج أول قنبلة نووية، رغم قرارها بعدم فعل ذلك. والسؤال الموازي ماذا ستفعل واشنطن عندها، أو ماذا ستفعل واشنطن قبلها لمنع بلوغ تلك اللحظة، وبمعزل عن المسؤوليات القانونية التي لا تفيد في مثل هذه الحالات تواجه واشنطن أخطر اختبار لمشهد قوتها على الساحة الدولية حيث تبدو كل الخيارات صعبة، ويبدو الزمن الذي تحتاجه واشنطن لاختبار فعالية إجراءاتها الاقتصادية التصعيدية بوجه إيران أكبر بكثير من الزمن الذي وضعت فيه طهران واشنطن أمام اللحظات الحرجة لضمان استقرار سوق النفط ومواجهة مستقبل ملفها النووي.
– الطريق السالك الوحيد أمام واشنطن لتفادي الأسوأ هو استغلال الوقت المتبقي قبل دخول مهلة الستين يوماً حيّز التنفيذ في الشق النووي، والذهاب إلى قمة العشرين في نهاية الشهر الحالي بخريطة طريق، لتأجيل متبادل أميركي وإيراني للحزمة الأخيرة من الخطوات التصعيديّة لستة شهور تمنح خلالها الوساطات الفرص المناسبة للوصول إلى مبادرات سياسية بديلة. وهذا يعني تراجع واشنطن عن كل ما صدر عنها من عقوبات منذ نهاية شهر نيسان الماضي عندما قامت بإلغاء الاستثناءات الممنوحة على شراء النفط والغاز من إيران لثماني دول، وما تلاها من عقوبات على المعادن والبتروكيماويات الإيرانية، مقابل تراجع إيران عن مهلة الستين يوماً، وتوصل الدول المعنية لضمانات للتعاون في منع أي استهداف لأسواق النفط، وسيتلقف الروس والصينيّون والأوروبيّون واليابانيّون هذه المبادرة وتتجاوب معها إيران، التي كان مدخل خيارها التصعيدي التصعيد الأميركي الجديد.
– تبريد التصعيد سيفتح الطريق للبحث عن سقوف منخفضة لتسويات واقعية في سورية واليمن بعيداً عن المطالب الأميركية الوهمية والخيالية. ويفتح طريق تجميد النزاع حول الملف النووي الذي لا يزعج إيران خروج واشنطن منه ولا يريح واشنطن عودتها إليه، ويصعب على الطرفين التنازل في بنوده، وإلا فإن الرعونة الأميركية التي كانت وراء الخطوات الأخيرة في التصعيد تحتاج لخريطة طريق نحو الحرب والفوز بها، وادعاء واشنطن بامتلاكها كذبة ستفضحها كل محاولة للعب بالنار في منطقة تقف على برميل بارود، ربما تكون كلفة الحروب فيه أعلى بكثير من كلفة التسويات، مع فارق أن بين خاسر وخاسر سيختلف الوضع كثيراً. فهناك مَن سيخسر مكانته العالمية كحال أميركا ووجوده كحال «إسرائيل» ونظام حكمه كحال أنظمة الخليج، فوق الخسائر البشرية والمادية المؤلمة التي سيتساوى فيها مع إيران وحلفائها.
In his first interview with a non-Iranian media outlet, the spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Minister, Sayyed Abbas Mousavi, said that the visit by his country’s top diplomat, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, to Damascus and later to Ankara is very important.
Speaking to al-Ahed News Website, he explained that the visit would have a great impact on the expansion and development of the Islamic Republic’s relations with Syria and Turkey, especially in the fields of economy and trade.
Mousavi also pointed out that the visit is of particular importance in bridging differences on regional issues.
According to Mousavi, the visit is an important step to removing existing obstacles when it comes to settling the crisis in Syria as communications, negotiations and efforts to reach a political solution continue.
“We hope to see positive results from these endeavors in the near future as we take another step towards peace, stability and security in Syria and the region,” the foreign ministry spokesperson told Al-Ahed.
Zarif visited the Syrian capital a few days ago where he met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and other senior officials. He, then, headed to the Turkish capital Ankara where he met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Turkish officials. The meetings Zarif held focused on bilateral relations between Iran, Damascus and Ankara as well as ways to enhance these relations since the Islamic Republic has excellent relations with both countries.
Observers described this visit as important in the light of the developments in the region and the world, especially regarding the Syrian dossier.
At the eve of the 8 year anniversary of the Syrian war, the battle for one of the last ISIS strongholds in Syria is still raging. The so called “caliphate” is on its last knees as US president Trump declares that “100 percent of ISIS ‘caliphate’ has been taken back.
Trump was of course only referring to the US coalitions “efforts” and didn’t even bother to mention that it is Syria and her allies that have done most of the heavy lifting. Nevertheless, he was right about ISIS losing all of the territories they occupied in Syria, but what happens now?
The US has for long declared that their presence (occupation) in Syria is mainly to fight ISIS, while sometimes also claiming to “prevent Iran from entrenching itself” in Syria. Of course any serious observer who has the slightest interest in Middle Eastern politics understands that this is a lie.
The US’ top priority has been from the beginning to save its masters in Israel from their day of reckoning. In the long run this objective is and has always been linked to the much greater plan of destroying the Islamic Republic, the only true threat to Israel’s continued existence. For years Washington has deceived and fooled a vast majority of the world’s population and “analysts” into believing that its presence in Syria is tied to “fighting ISIS”, while hiding their intentions to overthrow the Syrian government and destroying the Resistance Axis. Now, Washington’s true objective will resurface for everyone to see.
This goal has not been linked to a specific US administration but has been a very longstanding policy for decades no matter who’s the president.
Despite Trump’s bogus declaration back in December that the US is pulling out of Syria, Washington recently backtracked and declared it won’t fully withdraw its troops from Syria but will leave “400 peacekeeping forces”, making these soldiers an official occupation force as the last ISIS stronghold is about to be destroyed. This new situation leaves the US and European allies without any cloak of legality since the pretext of “counterterrorism” is no longer plausible.
But this should not come as a surprise to anyone. Only a fool would believe that the US has spent so much time and money on training and arming Kurdish militias to grab as much land as possible east of the Euphrates, just to let the Syrian government take all the land back in a deal with the Kurdish militias.
The continued US occupation makes any kind of reconciliation between the Kurdish militias and Damascus impossible. Now that the ISIS terrorists are gone, the future of the Kurdish militias remain very much at the hands of Washington. Where will they be used next?
Turkey has for long threatened to invade north eastern Syria as Turkish president Erdogan vowed to create a “safe zone” along the Syrian-Turkish border after a phone call between him and Trump. At the same time Trump has threatened Turkey to refrain from attacking its Kurdish proxies in that region. This contradictory situation became even messier when Moscow declared that it will not accept such a “safe zone” without Damascus approval, a highly unlikely outcome as relations between Damascus and Ankara remain very hostile.
To the northwest, jihadist group Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham has outmanoeuvred and taken over most of the other “rebel groups’” positions and now remains the sole powerhouse in the Idlib province. Turkey’s inability or rather lack of interest to remove these terrorists has opened up the possibility for a new Syrian Army offensive on the region. If history is to repeat itself, we should expect Washington to threaten Damascus to refrain from launching this offensive.
Meanwhile, voices are being raised in neighbouring Iraq, demanding US forces stationed near the Syrian border to leave the country. Despite the unlikelihood of US troops withdrawing from Iraq, such a scenario would give Washington even more incentive to hold on to its foothold in Syria.
Washington has recently showed a great obsession with Iran and will do its utmost to destroy the Iranian-Syrian alliance and to isolate Iran, making the Islamic Republic an easy target for Washington’s next planned “humanitarian intervention”. This is manifested through Washington’s strategic occupation of eastern Syria and the Al-Tanf region, located right next to the Iraqi border and close to the Golan Heights. This was further proven after President Assad’s surprise visit to Iran where Iranian officials revealed that Washington had offered Assad to back his presidency in exchange for him breaking ties with Tehran.
Terrorist forces in Syria may be on the verge of defeat, but their sponsors in Washington remain as dangerous as ever. The last chapter of the Syrian war is yet to be written.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and his Syrian counterpart, Walid al-Moallem, held talks on a range of issues, including the latest efforts to boost strategic relations between the two countries.
In a telephone conversation on Wednesday, Zarif and Moallem also exchanged views about the outcomes of a recent historic visit by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to Tehran.
Assad paid an unannounced visit to Iran and met with Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei in Tehran on Monday.
Speaking at the meeting, the Leader praised the resistance of Syria’s government and people that led to the defeat of Washington and its regional mercenaries.
Ayatollah Khamenei emphasized that the triumph of the resistance front in Syria has made Americans angry and prompted them to hatch new plots, adding, “The issue of the buffer zone, which Americans seek to establish in Syria, is among those dangerous plots that must be categorically rejected and stood against.”
Conflicts erupted in Syria back in 2011, when a small group of opposition forces took up arms against Damascus.
Soon, however, a mix of international terrorists and paid mercenaries mingled with and then largely sidestepped the armed Syrian opposition groups, effectively turning the Arab country into a battlefield for foreign governments opposed to Assad.
But the Syrian military, with advisory military help from Iran and Russia — and a Russian aerial bombardment campaign — has retaken control of much of the country, and the conflict is generally believed to be winding down.
TEHRAN, (ST)- President Bashar Al-Assad on Monday visited Iran and held meetings with Sayyed Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran and President Hassan Rouhani.
President Al-Assad congratulated Sayyed Khamenei and the Iranian people on the 40th anniversary of the victory of Iran’s Islamic Revolution which has been over the past four decades an example to follow in terms of building a strong state that is able to achieve the interests of its people and is fortified enough against all forms of foreign intervention and that adopts principled stances in support of the region’s peoples and their just causes.
President Al-Assad –Sayyed Khamenei meeting discussed developments in the region and reviewed the deep-rooted brotherly relations between the Syrian and Iranian peoples and stressed that these relations have been the main factor that enhanced the steadfastness of Syria and Iran in the face of enemies’ schemes which aimed at destabilizing the two countries and spread chaos in the entire region.
Sayyed Khamenei congratulated President Al-Assad, the Syrian people and army on the victories achieved on terrorism, pointing out that these victories have dealt a heavy blow to the western-American schemes in the region. He stressed that these schemes necessitate more caution against future plots the West may prepare in reaction to their failure.
Khamenei Vows Firm Support for Syria
The supreme leader affirmed his country’s firm support for Syria until its full recovery and until terrorism is completely eliminated, pointing out that Syria and Iran are each other’s strategic depth.
President Al-Assad: Governments of some region’s countries should stop obeying dictates of the West
On his part, President Al-Assad stressed that achieving the interests of the peoples of the region’s countries necessitates that the governments of these countries stop obeying the dictates of some western countries, at the top of which is the United States, and adopt balanced policies based on respecting other countries’ sovereignty and non-interference in their internal affairs, particularly after experience has proved that subordination and implementing others’ dictates bring worse results than the adherence of countries to their sovereign decision.
The two sides reiterated that the policy of escalation and the attempts to spread chaos practiced by some western states, particularly against Syria and Iran, won’t prevent the two countries from pressing ahead with defending the interests of their peoples and supporting the regions’ just causes and rights.
Presidents Al-Assad and Rouhani discuss efforts exerted within Astana process to end the war on Syria
Later, President Al-Assad met with his Iranian counterpart Hassan Rouhani. The two sides expressed satisfaction over the strategic level the Syrian-Iranian relations have reached.
President Al-Assad thanked Iran’s leadership and people for supporting Syria during the terrorist war waged on the country.
On his part, President Rouhani asserted that the Iranian people’s support for Syria started from a principled stance on supporting legitimacy which resists terrorism.
“Syria’s victory is a victory for Iran and the entire Islamic nation,” President Rouhani said, pointing out that Tehran will continue supporting the Syrian people to complete the elimination of terrorism and start reconstruction.
Talks during the meeting also focused on the efforts exerted within Astana process to end the war on Syria.
President Rouhani talked to President Al-Assad about the recent Sochi summit of the leaders of the three guarantor states of Astana process on Syria. The viewpoints of two presidents were identical on ways to achieve the hoped-for progress that preserves Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and that leads to full elimination of terrorism in Syria.
The two leaders agreed on continuous coordination at all levels to serve the interests of the peoples of the two countries.
– يحتلّ ملف عودة النازحين السوريين إلى بلادهم أولوية اهتمامات المسؤولين اللبنانيين، في ملف العلاقات اللبنانية السورية. وهو ملف يستحق الاهتمام، خصوصاً لجهة فصله عن الشروط الدولية الهادفة لاستعماله للضغط على كل من لبنان وسورية الضغط على لبنان لفرض شروط تبقي حمل النازحين على عاتق الدولة والاقتصاد والمجتمع في لبنان، ليتحوّل بلداً متسوّلاً للمساعدات ومرتهناً لشروط المانحين، فيسهل تطويعه في الملفات الصعبة كمستقبل سلاح المقاومة، وما سماه المانحون في مؤتمر سيدر بإدماج العمالة السورية بالمشاريع المموّلة أو ما أسموه بالاستقرار عبر تسريع استراتيجية الدفاع الوطني التي يقصد أصحابها هنا «نزع أو تحييد سلاح المقاومة»، والضغط على سورية عبر تحويل كتل النازحين إلى ورقة انتخابية يمكن توظيفها في أي انتخابات مقبلة، بربط عودتهم بما يسمّيه المانحون بالحل السياسي، والمقصود تلبية شروطهم حول الهوية السياسية للدولة السورية أو استخدام النازحين لاحقا في ترجيح كفة مرشحين بعينهم لإقامة توازن داخل الدولة السورية يملك المانحون تأثيراً عليه.
– السؤال الرئيسي هنا هو رغم أهمية ملف النازحين، هل يمكن اختزال العلاقات اللبنانية السورية بعودة النازحين؟ وهل يمكن النجاح بإعادة النازحين بلا عودة العافية إلى العلاقات اللبنانية السورية؟ والجواب يبدأ من نصوص اتفاق الطائف حول اعتبار العلاقات المميزة بسورية التجسيد الأهم لعروبة لبنان، وما ترجمته معاهدة الأخوة والتعاون والتنسيق السارية المفعول حتى تاريخه، والتي تشكل وحدها الإطار القانوني والدستوري لمعالجة قضية النازحين، حيث يتداخل الشأن الأمني بالشأن الإداري بالشؤون الاقتصادية، وكلها لها أطر محددة في بنود المعاهدة يسهل تفعيلها لبلورة المعالجات، بحيث يصير البحث عن هذه المعالجات من خارج منطق المعاهدة والعلاقات المميزة، سعياً هجيناً لبناء علاقة تشبه الحمل خارج الرحم، وهو حمل كاذب لا ينتهي بمولود ولا بولادة.
– عند الحديث عن عودة العلاقات بين لبنان وسورية سيكون مفيداً الاطلاع على ما نشرته صحيفة الشرق الأوسط السعودية، من دراسة استطلاع رأي أجراها مركز غلوبال فيزيون لحساب مؤسسة بوليتيكا التي يرأسها النائب السابق فارس سعيد، حول عودة العلاقات اللبنانية السورية، والجهة الناشرة كما الجهة الواقفة وراء الاستطلاع وخلفياتهما السياسية في النظر لسورية والعلاقة معها، تكفيان للقول إن الأرقام التي حملتها الدراسة يجب أخذها من كل مسؤولي الدولة اللبنانية بعين الاعتبار، حيث 70 من المستطلعين أعلنوا تأييدهم لعودة العلاقات بين البلدين، ووقف 30 ضد هذه العودة. وفي تفاصيل توزّع أسباب المستطلعين يتضح أن نسبة تأثير الموقف السياسي والعقائدي تحضر في الرافضين للعلاقة بين البلدين، بينما أغلب المتحمّسين لعودة العلاقات ينطلقون من اعتبارات تتّصل بالمصلحة اللبنانية الصرفة، فيظهر المعارضون مجرد دعاة لمعاقبة بلدهم لأنهم يحملون أحقاداً أو خلفيات عدائية تخص موقفهم السياسي وهؤلاء أكثر من 90 من الرافضين، بينما لم تظهر الخلفية السياسية في صف دعاة عودة العلاقات إلا بنسبة ضئيلة لا تذكر، لكن من بين المؤيدين لعودة العلاقات الذين شكلوا 70 من اللبنانيين وفقاً للعينة المختارة لتنفيذ الاستفتاء، لم يحتل ملف عودة النازحين نسبة 10 من المستطلعين، بينما احتلت عناوين مثل عودة الترانزيت نسبة نصف المؤيدين أي ثلث المستطلعين.
– التعافي اللبناني بقوة الجغرافيا السياسية والاقتصادية له معبر واحد هو تعافي العلاقات اللبنانية السورية، والتذاكي في التعاطي مع هذا العنوان، أو التهاون بربطه بأطراف ثالثة، سيعقد التعافي اللبناني وضمناً سيجعل ملف عودة النازحين مربوطاً بأطراف ثالثة، فجعل ملف تجارة الترانزيت لبنانياً سورياً، لا لبنانياً سورياً خليجياً، يتوقف على جعل العلاقة اللبنانية السورية شأناً لبنانياً سورياً لا شأناً ينتظر ضوء الخليج الأخضر، وجعل قضية النازحين شأناً لبنانياً سورياً، لا لبنانياً سورياً أوروبياً، يتوقف على جعل العلاقة اللبنانية السورية شأناً يخصّ اللبنانيين والسوريين وحدهم ولا ينتظر إذناً أوروبياً.
– من المهم أن يلتفت اهتمام الحكومة إلى أن ما فعله وزير شؤون النازحين يستحقّ التقدير، لأنه نابع من خلفية إيمان بالعلاقة اللبنانية السورية، وما يستحق الاهتمام هو التفات الحكومة إلى حاجتها لهذه الخلفية بدلاً من وقوع البعض في أحقادهم أو حساباتهم التي قالت استطلاعات الرأي إنها لا تهمّ اللبنانيين.
بدّلت «جبهة النصرة» جلدها مرات عديدة على امتداد السنوات السابقة، من دون أن يغيّر ذلك شيئاً في جوهرها المتطرف. اليوم، تتسارع جهود أبو محمد الجولاني لإعادة تصدير جماعته في صورة جديدة، تطمح إلى التشبّهبـ«جماعة الإخوان المسلمين». وإذا ما رأت خطط الجولاني النور، فإنها لن تعدو كونها «تكتيكات ضرورية» وفق ما يروج في الكواليس، مع التشدّد في التزام «الجهاد» استراتيجية ثابتة.
لا تجد «هيئة تحرير الشام/ النصرة» حرجاً في تغيير أزيائها. كلّما دعت الحاجة إلى ذلك، أثبت زعيم الجماعة المتطرفة، أبو محمد الجولاني، استعداده لتعديل التكتيكات و«المنهجيات»، وقدرته على ضبط التناقضات داخل جماعته. ولا يعدم الجولاني الوسائل والأدوات الناجعة، وخاصة حين تمنحه تعقيدات المشهد السوري «كتفاً إقليمياً» يتّكئ عليه، وهو أمرٌ لم تُحرم «النصرة» منه، باستثناء فترات مؤقتة، كانت أشدّها وطأة فترة الانكماش القطري في مستهلّ الأزمة الخليجية الأخيرة.
البراغماتية في نظر الجولاني حصان تمكن الاستعانة به دائماً، و«فقه الضرورة» جاهزٌ لتقديم «المسوّغات الشرعية». بالاستفادة مما تقدم، لا يزال مشروع «النصرة» مستمرّاً في تسجيل «النقاط»، والقفز درجات إلى أعلى السلم، في خضمّ المشاريع «الجهادية» التي انخرطت منذ مطلع العام الحالي في سباق جديد على رسم مشهدية إدلب (راجع «الأخبار»، 1 شباط). وتحظى «النصرة» بمكانة «فريدة» وسط الصراع المذكور، بوصفها قاسماً مشتركاً بين مشاريع متناقضة، تتباين رؤاها في النظر إلى الدور الوظيفي الذي يمكن للجماعة لعبه، وتتوافق على أهميتها في المعادلة.
دعم «التمكين» المستتر
توحي المعطيات المتتالية بأن السباق راهناً قد حُسم لمصلحة المشروع القطري، الذي يلحظ أهمية دعم الجولاني ومدّ يد العون لجماعته على طريق تحقيق «التمكين». وباشرت الأدوات الإدارية للجولاني نشاطاً مكثّفاً في سباق مع الوقت، لرسم ملامح «التمكين» المنشود، في صورة تتوخّى تورية «الراية السوداء» خلف ستار «مدني»، من دون أن يعني ذلك التخلّي عن «تحكيم الشريعة» بوصفه جوهر المشروع. وسمح تعزيز القبضة العسكرية لـ«تحرير الشام» بتكريس هيمنة «إدارية» لـ«حكومة الإنقاذ» على كثير من تفاصيل الحياة اليومية في إدلب، وبشكل خاص قطاعات التعليم والاقتصاد والطاقة.
>يبدو أن «تحرير الشام» بدأت تسعى إلى «بلوغ التمكين بالموعظة الحسنة»
اللافت أن هيمنة «الإنقاذ» على قطاع التعليم ركّزت تحديداً على التعليم الجامعي الخاص، فيما تركت مهمة تعليم الأطفال لـ«المكاتب الدعوية» في الدرجة الأولى. وتطالب «الإنقاذ» الجامعات والمعاهد الراغبة في مواصلة عملها بتسديد مبالغ باهظة مقابل منحها «التراخيص» اللازمة. وبالتوازي، كثّفت «سلسلة المكاتب الدعوية» في الشهرين الأخيرين «نشاطاتها التعليمية»، فافتتحت عشرات المراكز والمكاتب و«حلقات العلم» الجديدة المخصّصة للأطفال واليافعين، إضافة إلى توسيع عدد «المدارس القرآنية» التابعة لـ«دار الوحي الشريف». ودشّنت «سلسلة المكاتب الدعوية في بلاد الشام» حملة توزيع مجاني لمعونات غذائية، وسلع استهلاكية، علاوة على توزيع معونات مالية في بعض القرى والبلدات.
«الجهاد» استراتيجية ثابتة
>رغم حرص «تحرير الشام» على إظهار بعض التفاصيل التي توحي باستعدادها لالتزام الاتفاقات الخاصة بإدلب («سوتشي» على وجه الخصوص)، إلا أنها تعمل على أرض الواقع بطريقة مغايرة. وراجت أخيراً صور لوحات إعلانية عملاقة في بعض الطرق والأوتوسترادات، وقد أزيلت عنها العبارات الداعية إلى «الجهاد»، وطُليت باللون الأبيض محلّ الأسود. في المقابل، وجّهت «وزارة الأوقاف» في «حكومة الإنقاذ» رسالة إلى أئمة وخطباء المساجد، تنصّ على وجوب التزام «بث روح الجهاد في الأمة، وتحريض المسلمين على البذل والعطاء في سبيل الله… والدعوة لتحكيم الشريعة والاعتصام ورصّ الصفوف». كذلك، كثّف «المكتب الشرعي» التابع لـ«الجناح العسكري» في «تحرير الشام» أعماله «الدعوية»، وضمّ في الأسابيع الأخيرة عشرات «الدعاة» إلى كوادر «فريق العمل الدعوي/ الفاتحون»، فيما بوشرت حملة أعمال موسّعة لحفر وتجهيز سلاسل خنادق جديدة في كثير من مناطق سيطرة «تحرير الشام»، التي يُراد لها أن «تستلهم تجربة غزة»، وفقاً لما يتم تداوله في الكواليس.
“قرى «جهادية» نموذجية!
تعوّل «تحرير الشام» على نجاح مشروع «القرى النموذجية»، الذي باشرت تنفيذه قبل فترة «الإدارةُ العامة للخدمات الإنسانية»، بتمويل قطري معلن. ويتوخّى المشروع كسب «الحواضن الشعبية»، وجمع مئات العائلات في تجمعات سكنية تُدار بـ«أحكام الشريعة»، من دون الحاجة إلى «تحكيم السيف». وأُنجز بناء أولى القرى في منطقة سرجيلّا في جبل الزاوية، وتضمّ 500 شقة سكنية، فيما يستمر العمل على تشييد تجمعات مماثلة، وعلى تحسين ظروف تجمعات أخرى (موجودة سابقة) وإعادة تأهيل بناها التحتية.
واعتُمدت «منهجية» أولية لإدارة «القرى النموذجية» وفق «الشريعة الإسلامية»، وقد بوشر تنفيذها أخيراً على سبيل التجربة، استعداداً لتحويلها إلى آلية شاملة تُطبّق في كل التجمعات المماثلة. وعمّمت «إدارة القرية» التعليمات على السكان وأصحاب المحال، وعلى رأسها «إلزامية التعليم الشرعي» وإلحاق الأطفال ببرنامج «صلاتي حياتي»، والتزام أصحاب المحال بعدم بيع التبغ، وبإغلاق محالّهم في مواقيت الصلوات الخمس. ويتوخّى «المشروع» التحول إلى «نموذج ناجح للتنمية الجهادية، وتكريس العمل على أساس خدمي دعوي». ويضع على رأس أهدافه «تعزيز البيئة الحاضنة للجهاد، وامتلاك قلوب الناس، وإشراك الأهالي في تبني المشروع، والقضاء على المعاصي، وإنشاء جيل مسلم يحارب الروس والمجوس ومرتزقة النظام من خلال الدعاة العاملين في المشروع».
نحو «الأخونة»؟
لم يأتِ صبّ الاهتمام على «التمكين» من فراغ؛ إذ تعدّه بعض «الاجتهادات الشرعية» شرطاً أساسياً من شروط «حكم الشريعة» و«إقامة الحدود». وترى تلك «الاجتهادات» أنه إذا «كان في إقامة الحدود فساد يربو على مصلحة إقامتها لم تُقم»، وأن «تطبيق الحدود في حال انعدام السلطان أو ضعفه هو فرض كفاية». ويبدو أن «تحرير الشام» في مرحلتها الراهنة باتت تسعى إلى «بلوغ التمكين بالموعظة الحسنة»، على ما تلاحظه مصادر «جهادية» مواكبة للمشهد في إدلب. وتشير معلومات «الأخبار» إلى أن كواليس إدلب تشهد في الفترة الراهنة جهوداً حثيثة لتطعيم «منهجية النصرة» بسلوكيات «سياسية» تستلهم تجارب «جماعة الإخوان».
وربّما تقدم هذه التفاصيل تبريراً مفهوماً لإبعاد أبو اليقظان المصري عن الواجهة «الشرعية». وكان المصري «شرعياً في الجناح العسكري لهيئة تحرير الشام»، قبل أن يستقيل في مطلع الشهر الحالي، عقب خلاف بينه وبين «قيادة الهيئة»، التي وجّهت له إنذاراً لأنه «يخالف أوامر الجماعة ولا يلتزم بالضوابط الإعلامية التي تقدّرها». وعُرف المصري بوضوحه في التعبير عن روح «المشروع الجهادي» المتطرف، خلافاً لتيارات أخرى داخل «الهيئة» لا تجد مانعاً في المواربة إذا ما «دعت الضرورة».
ولا تمثّل هذه التغييرات سابقة في سجل «جبهة النصرة»، بل هي في الواقع تأتي إحياءً لمرحلة مماثلة عرفتها «النصرة» عقب سيطرتها مع «جيش الفتح» على كامل محافظة إدلب، وفي خضم النقاشات التي كانت مستعرة وقتذاك حول «فك الارتباط» بتنظيم «القاعدة». وراجت في تلك الفترة أحاديث عن ضرورة «تشكيل جسم سياسي لجيش الفتح» يستلهم تجربة «حركة طالبان»، الأمر الذي أعيد إلى التداول أخيراً مع تغيير المسميات (إذ لم يعد لتحالف «جيش الفتح» وجود). وكانت «الأخبار» قد تناولت المشروع الجاري إحياؤه إبّان طرحه أول مرة قبل أربعة أعوام (راجع «الأخبار» 25 أيار 2015).
«الهيئة» و«الحرّاس»: احتواء مؤقت
“>رغم الاستنفار الذي أحدثته «هبّة» تنظيم «حراس الدين» قبل أسبوعين، بطريقة توحي بأن ساعة الانفجار بينه وبين «تحرير الشام» قد دنت، إلا أن المعطيات اليوم تعكس التزام الطرفين تهدئة إعلامية لافتة. وكما كان «حراس الدين» صاحب المبادرة في التصعيد، عاد ليصبح سبّاقاً إلى إرسال إشارات التهدئة و«حسن النوايا». واعتذر التنظيم المتطرف، في بيان، عن قتل مجموعة تابعة له قائداً تابعاً لـ«الهيئة»، هو عادل حوير (أبو إبراهيم)، قبل أن يعلن الطرفان توقيع اتفاق تهدئة في العاشر من الشهر الجاري. وتؤكد مصادر «جهادية» لـ«الأخبار» أن «الهيئة كانت حريصة على التهدئة» هذه المرة، ويُرجّح أن السبب في ذلك رغبتها في عدم التشويش على مشروعها «السياسي» في المرحلة الراهنة. وعُرف عن «النصرة» حرصها على خوض معاركها الكبرى ضد المجموعات الأخرى في مواقيت تختارها بما يتناسب مع أولوياتها، وعدم الانجرار إليها إذا لم تكن مستعدة على مختلف الصعد.
President Bashar al-Assad stressed that thanks to our armed forces, the supporting forces, allies, friends and brothers we managed to defeat terrorism, stressing that protecting the homeland would not have been achieved unless there have been a unified popular will of all the Syrian spectra.
President al-Assad said in a speech during his meeting with heads of local councils from all provinces on Monday that holding elections of local councils on time proves the strength of the Syrian people and the state, adding that the elections proves the failure of enemies’ bet to turn the Syrian state into a failed state unable to perform its tasks.
President al-Assad stressed that issuing law no. 107 was a significant step for enhancing effectiveness of the local administrations.
The President said that the launch of development projects locally will be integrated with the strategic projects of the state and this in itself is an investment of financial and human resources.
He added that one of the positive aspects of local administration’s law is to broaden the participation in the development of the local community that manages resources.
President al-Assad said that with liberating every inch, there is an agent or a traitor who collapsed after their sponsors betrayed them.
“After the improvement of field situation, we have the opportunity to make a qualitative leap in the work of the local administration that would reflect on all walks of life,” the President said.
President al-Assad added that the local units have become more able today to perform their tasks without depending on the central authority.
He stressed that the policies of some states towards Syria depended on supporting terrorism and promoting the attempt to apply a comprehensive decentralization to undermine the authority of the state.
President al-Assad underlined that the partition scheme isn’t new and it doesn’t stop at the borders of the Syrian state, but it covers the region as a whole.
President al-Assad added that the partition scheme isn’t new and it doesn’t stop at the borders of the Syrian state, but it covers the region as a whole, adding “those who set the scheme are narrow-minded because reaching this aim cannot be achieved unless there is a real social division and that does not exist in Syria and had it been really, the country would have been divided during the first years of the war or maybe since the very first months of the war.”
He clarified that there are two unchangeable facts…”the first one is hegemony on the world led by the US hasn’t changed and the second is that our people’s resistance has become more solid,” affirming that the homeland isn’t a commodity and it is sacred and it has its real owners and not thieves.”
“After all of those years, the agents haven’t learnt that nothing gives man his value except his real belonging,” the President said, affirming that the only way to get rid of misguidance is to join the reconciliations and to hand over the arms to the Syrian state.
The President added “We have been able to eliminate terrorism thanks to our armed forces and the support by the supporting forces, the allies, the friends and the brothers.”
The President said “It couldn’t have been possible to protect the homeland without the unified popular will through different segments of the Syrian society.”
“The Syrian people have a deep-rooted history and they have resisted terrorism…We achieve victory with each other not on each other,” President al-Assad said.
President al-Assad said that that the Syrian state is working to return displaced people who left their homes due to terrorism as their return is the only way to end their suffering.
He underlined that the absence of belonging to the homeland is the weapon used by the outside to target our homeland.
The President added that the term of the broad popular support may be explained by some as the support of the majority, which were present in the state-controlled areas , but while the truth is that the support was also present in areas controlled by gunmen, clarifying that the citizens were living in those areas and they were forced to stay there.
”some of them continued contacting with several government sides by conveying information and giving ideas as they were constantly insisting on the return of the army and the state institutions to those areas, and some of them unfortunately paid the price,” the President highlighted.
“The absence of belonging to the homeland is the fuel which is used by the foreign parties to target our homeland,” President al-Assad said.
The President continued to say “The Syrian people have suffered a lot during the war and we do not forget that part of the suffering was due to the state imposed by terrorism in terms of the displacement of millions of people outside the country as they suffered from all aspects of displacement including humiliation and inhuman treatment, in addition to the political, financial and human exploitation of them.”
“The more the state has sought to alleviate the suffering inside Syria and worked on making the displaced return to their hometowns after liberating them from terrorism, the more it sought at the same time to work on the return of the refugees to the homeland being the only way for putting an end to their suffering,” he added.
The President noted that the states concerned in the file of refugees are hindering their return and the main basis of the scheme hatched against Syria is the issue of the refugees which has been prepared before the beginning of the crisis.
He indicated that the issue of refugees has been a source of corruption that has been exploited by a number of states which are supporting terrorism, and the return of refugees will deprive those from the political and material benefit.
“The file of the refugees abroad is an attempt by the states which support terrorism to condemn the Syrian state,” the President said, adding ” We will not allow the sponsors of terrorism to transform the Syrian refugees into a political paper to achieve their interests.”
The President called upon everyone who left the homeland due to terrorism to contribute to the reconstruction process as the homeland is for all of its people.
“Our national awareness has foiled the sinister scheme of our enemies which hasn’t finished yet…Some are still entrapped by the schemes of partition hatched by our enemies,” President al-Assad said.
President al-Assad asserted that “Dialogue is necessary, but there is a difference between the proposals that create dialogue and others which create partition and we should focus on the common things.”
“Criticism is a necessary issue when there is a default but it should be objective,” the President noted.
The President stressed that dialogue should be a fruitful one that is based on facts and not emotions, adding that such dialogue differentiates between those who have real problems and those who are opportunistic.
He noted that social media have contributed to a certain extent to the deterioration of the situation in the country.
“We all know that we are in a state of blockade, and we should deal with this positively and cooperatively,” he said, adding that “we shouldn’t think that war is over, and this is addressed to both citizens and officials alike.”
The President pointed out that “We are facing four wars. The first war is a military one; the second is the blockade, the third is via the internet and the forth is the war launched by the corrupt people.”
The state of negligence that happened recently in relation to shortage of gas cylinders is due to the lack of transparency on the part of the institutions concerned towards the citizens, the President noted.
Her stressed that the current situation demands great caution, explaining that since the enemies have failed through supporting terrorism and through their agents, they will seek to create chaos from inside the Syrian society.
He went on saying that the major challenge now is providing the basic living materials to the citizens that are suffering due to the blockade.
“The blockade,” he said, “is a battle in itself. It is a battle of attack and retreat similar to the military battles.”
The President said that those who suffer need to have their problems dealt with, not to listen to rhetorical speeches.
He highlighted the important role the Local Administration plays since “no matter how much honesty, integrity and how many good laws we have, they cannot be managed centrally.”
The President added that “We have laws, but we lack the standards and mechanisms, which even if they exist are weak and not good, and without the standards we will not be able to solve any problems, therefore we have to be practical in our dialogues.”
The President went on saying that “Suffering is the justification for looking for rights, but it cannot be a justification for treating the truth unfairly, and the truth says that there is war, terrorism and blockade, and the truth is that there is a lack of morality and there are selfishness and corruption, and part of these facts are out of our hands partially but not entirely.”
The President said that rebuilding the minds and reforming the souls is the biggest challenge, not the reconstruction of the infrastructure.
“When our enemies started the war, they knew that they would leave us destructive infrastructure, and they know that we will reconstruct it, but the hardest thing is to deal with the intellectual structure and we should not fail in that,” the President said.
The President stressed that the future of Syria is decided exclusively by the Syrians.
He said the sovereignty of states is a sacred thing, and that if this sovereignty is violated through aggression and terrorism, this does not mean abandoning its essence, which is the independent national decision.
The President stressed that “the constitution is not subject to bargaining. We will not allow the hostile states to achieve any of their objectives through their agents who hold the Syrian nationality.”
He added that hostile countries are still insisting on their aggression and obstruction of any special process if it is serious like Sochi and Astana.
He said that any role of the UN is welcomed if it is based on the UN Charter.
The President reaffirmed that there will be no dialogue between the national party and the agents, stressing that it is the people’s steadfastness and their support to the Syrian Arab Army is what has protected the homeland.
He went on saying that those who conspired against Syria have failed in their reliance on the terrorists and the agents in the political process, and therefore they have moved to the third stage, which is activating the Turkish agent in the northern areas.
The President made it clear that “Syria will be liberated to the last inch, and the interferers and occupiers are enemies.”
President al-Assad addressed the groups that serve as agents to the US saying: “the Americans will not protect you, and you will be a tool for bargaining in their hands. Only the Syrian Arab Army can defend you.”
“When we stand in one trench and aim in the same direction instead of aiming at each other, no threat can make us worried no matter how big,” the President said.
He added “We will not forget our kidnapped citizens, hundreds of whom have been liberated. We will not stop working until liberating them and we will not spare any chance to ensure their return.”
The President said “We all have responsibility and a national obligation to stand by the families of the martyrs and the injured.”
“The big recovery and stability will only be achieved through eliminating all the terrorists to the last one,” he stressed.
The Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said that holding elections of local councils on time proves the strength of the Syrian people and the state.
President al-Assad, in a speech during his meeting with heads of local councils from all provinces on Monday added that the elections proves the failure of enemies’ bet to turn the Syrian state into a failed state unable to perform its tasks.
President al-Assad stressed that issuing law no. 107 was a significant step for enhancing effectiveness of the local administrations.
The President said that the launch of development projects locally will be integrated with the strategic projects of the state and this in itself is an investment of financial and human resources.
He added that one of the positive aspects of local administration’s law is to broaden the participation in the development of the local community that manages resources.
President al-Assad said that with liberating every inch, there is an agent or a traitor who collapsed after their sponsors betrayed them.
“After the improvement of field situation, we have the opportunity to make a qualitative leap in the work of the local administration that would reflect on all walks of life,” the President said.
President al-Assad added that the local units have become more able today to perform their tasks without depending on the central authority.
He stressed that the policies of some states towards Syria depended on supporting terrorism and promoting the attempt to apply a comprehensive decentralization to undermine the authority of the state.
President al-Assad underlined that the partition scheme isn’t new and it doesn’t stop at the borders of the Syrian state, but it covers the region as a whole.
President al-Assad added “the scheme of imposing hegemony on the world led by the US hasn’t changed and our people’s resistance has become more solid, affirming that the homeland isn’t a commodity and it is sacred and it has its real owners and not thieves.”
“After all of those years, the agents haven’t learnt that nothing gives man his value except his real belonging,” the President said, affirming that the only way to get rid of misguidance is to join the reconciliations and to hand over the arms to the Syrian state.
The President added “We have been able to eliminate terrorism thanks to our armed forces and the support by the supporting forces, the allies, the friends and the brothers.”
The President said “It couldn’t have been possible to protect the homeland without the unified popular will through different segments of the Syrian society.”
“The Syrian people have a deep-rooted history and they have resisted terrorism…We achieve victory with each other not on each other,” President al-Assad said.
President al-Assad said that that the Syrian state is working to return displaced people who left their homes due to terrorism as their return is the only way to end their suffering.
He underlined that the absence of belonging to the homeland is the weapon used by the outside to target our homeland.
“The absence of belonging to the homeland is the fuel which is used by the foreign parties to target our homeland,” President al-Assad said, adding that the Syrian state works on the return of all the displaced due to terrorism because their return is the only way to end their suffering.
The President noted that the states concerned in the file of refugees are hindering their return and the main basis of the scheme hatched against Syria is the issue of the refugees which has been prepared before the beginning of the crisis.
He indicated that the issue of refugees has been a source of corruption that has been exploited by a number of states which are supporting terrorism, and the return of refugees will deprive those from the political and material benefit.
“The file of the refugees abroad is an attempt by the states which support terrorism to condemn the Syrian state,” the President said, adding ” We will not allow the sponsors of terrorism to transform the Syrian refugees into a political paper to achieve their interests.”
The President called upon everyone who left the homeland due to terrorism to contribute to the reconstruction process as the homeland is for all of its people.
“Our national awareness has foiled the sinister scheme of our enemies which hasn’t finished yet…Some are still entrapped by the schemes of partition hatched by our enemies,” President al-Assad said.
President al-Assad asserted that “Dialogue is necessary, but there is a difference between the proposals that create dialogue and others which create partition and we should focus on the common things.”
“Criticism is a necessary issue when there is a default but it should be objective,” the President noted.
The President stressed that dialogue should be a fruitful one that is based on facts and not emotions, adding that such dialogue differentiates between those who have real problems and those who are opportunistic.
He noted that social media have contributed to a certain extent to the deterioration of the situation in the country.
“We all know that we are in a state of blockade, and we should deal with this positively and cooperatively,” he said, adding that “we shouldn’t think that war is over, and this is addressed to both citizens and officials alike.”
The President pointed out that “We are facing four wars. The first war is a military one; the second is the blockade, the third is via the internet and the forth is the war launched by the corrupt people.”
The state of negligence that happened recently in relation to shortage of gas cylinders is due to the lack of transparency on the part of the institutions concerned towards the citizens, the President noted.
Her stressed that the current situation demands great caution, explaining that since the enemies have failed through supporting terrorism and through their agents, they will seek to create chaos from inside the Syrian society.
He went on saying that the major challenge now is providing the basic living materials to the citizens that are suffering due to the blockade.
“The blockade,” he said, “is a battle in itself. It is a battle of attack and retreat similar to the military battles.”
The President said that those who suffer need to have their problems dealt with, not to listen to rhetorical speeches.
He highlighted the important role the Local Administration plays since “no matter how much honesty, integrity and how many good laws we have, they cannot be managed centrally.”
The President added that “We have laws, but we lack the standards and mechanisms, which even if they exist are weak and not good, and without the standards we will not be able to solve any problems, therefore we have to be practical in our dialogues.”
The President went on saying that
“Suffering is the justification for looking for rights, but it cannot be a justification for treating the truth unfairly, and the truth says that there is war, terrorism and blockade, and the truth is that there is a lack of morality and there are selfishness and corruption, and part of these facts are out of our hands partially but not entirely.”
The President said that rebuilding the minds and reforming the souls is the biggest challenge, not the reconstruction of the infrastructure.
“When our enemies started the war, they knew that they would leave us destructive infrastructure, and they know that we will reconstruct it, but the hardest thing is to deal with the intellectual structure and we should not fail in that,” the President said.
The President stressed that the future of Syria is decided exclusively by the Syrians.
He said the sovereignty of states is a sacred thing, and that if this sovereignty is violated through aggression and terrorism, this does not mean abandoning its essence, which is the independent national decision.
The President stressed that “the constitution is not subject to bargaining. We will not allow the hostile states to achieve any of their objectives through their agents who hold the Syrian nationality.”
He added that hostile countries are still insisting on their aggression and obstruction of any special process if it is serious like Sochi and Astana.
He said that any role of the UN is welcomed if it is based on the UN Charter.
The President reaffirmed that there will be no dialogue between the national party and the agents, stressing that it is the people’s steadfastness and their support to the Syrian Arab Army is what has protected the homeland.
He went on saying that those who conspired against Syria have failed in their reliance on the terrorists and the agents in the political process, and therefore they have moved to the third stage, which is activating the Turkish agent in the northern areas.
The President made it clear that
“Syria will be liberated to the last inch, and the interferers and occupiers are enemies.”
President al-Assad addressed the groups that serve as agents to the US saying:
“the Americans will not protect you, and you will be a tool for bargaining in their hands. Only the Syrian Arab Army can defend you.”
“When we stand in one trench and aim in the same direction instead of aiming at each other, no threat can make us worried no matter how big,” the President said.
He added
“We will not forget our kidnapped citizens, hundreds of whom have been liberated. We will not stop working until liberating them and we will not spare any chance to ensure their return.”
The President said
“We all have responsibility and a national obligation to stand by the families of the martyrs and the injured.”
“The big recovery and stability will only be achieved through eliminating all the terrorists to the last one,” he stressed.
It was billed as a “peace and security” conference on the Middle East, held in the Polish capital Warsaw this week. The much-vaunted US-led summit was anything but about peace and security in the conflict-ridden region. It was intended as a war summit against Iran.
Even the venue, Warsaw, had an unwitting Orwellian twist to its name. Warsaw? More like War Foresaw.
For several months, the Trump administration had been organizing the “ministerial-level” two-day summit held this week. As it turned out, major powers gave the conference a clunking big miss, knowing full well that the event was a thinly veiled attempt by Washington to organize an “Iran-bashing” summit. How stupid do the Americans think the rest of the world is? They are shameless in their arrogance.
Russia, Turkey, Qatar, Lebanon as well as most European leaders decided to stay away from the venue. This was in spite of the White House sending a high-level delegation led by Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Also in attendance was Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, best buddy of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed, and spectacularly unqualified peace tribune for the Mideast.
The de facto boycott by other powers can be seen as a sign of times of Washington’s diminished role, if not its fraudulent claims of being a diplomatic arbiter.
The reason for the absence of Russia and others was because they knew the American agenda was to drum up international support for antagonizing Iran with intensified economic sanctions. Despite its claims of being a “peace and security” conference, few nations believed that it was anything other than a war summit to galvanize international support or acquiescence for Washington’s obsessive aggression towards Iran.
The fact that the US-led conference in Warsaw was avoided by so many international powers, conspicuously the European Union, shows that Washington’s days of self-proclaimed global leadership are numbered. Washington’s credibility is spent. Indeed grossly in arrears.
The farce is almost beyond words. After decades of illegal warmongering and regime-change machinations in the Middle East, how could Washington expect anyone to take its conference this week on “peace and security” to be taken seriously with a straight face?
Misplaced arrogance or delusion are the only explanations for Washington’s belief that it could organize such a conference – and expect that anyone of significance would attend.
For years, Washington has been swinging a sledgehammer in the region, destroying whole nations, from Afghanistan to Iraq, from Libya to Syria, killing millions of civilians with its criminal imperialist wars. Peace and security called for by the United States? Give us a break from the sickening delusional pretense.
President Donald Trump’s unilateral abrogation of the international nuclear accord with Iran last year is testimony to the rogue state nature of the US. Yet, Washington in its arrogance expects others to attend a conference this week on the Middle East and its pejorative depiction of Iran as a rogue state.
It should be noted that while the US tried to rally the conference in Warsaw – and so evidently failed – the leaderships of Russia, Turkey and Iran were gathered in Sochi to continue diplomatic efforts at resolving the war in Syria. Nothing could highlight more the irrelevance and moral bankruptcy of Washington. Its conference in Warsaw aimed at increasing tensions with Iran was largely ignored, meanwhile Russia and others were continuing earnest diplomatic efforts to actually bring about a peace settlement in Syria – a country ravaged by eight years of war largely sponsored covertly by Washington.
Why Warsaw, or rather War Foresaw? Poland has been obsequiously sucking up to Washington over recent years, buying INF-busting American missiles systems and even calling for a new US military base on its territory, proposed, ingratiatingly, with the name ‘Fort Trump’.
The contradictions are choking. Trump is accused by domestic political opponents of being a “Russian stooge” and yet Poland’s anti-Russian government is laying down the red carpet for American militarism under Trump to antagonize Russia.
The farcical US-led Middle East conference could not be held in any self-respecting European country because of the glaring contradiction of Trump’s hostility towards Iran cutting across the European Union’s commitment to upholding the international nuclear accord with Tehran.
Trump’s so-called “peace and security” conference this week was an Orwellian masquerade for drumming up war against Iran. Germany, France and others committed to the nuclear accord knew that they could not possibly host such an absurd event.
The true belligerence underlying the Warsaw conference was betrayed by Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu, who on his way to the venue, bragged that it was about forming a war front against Iran.
The Warsaw summit was thus intended as a war conference against Iran. Fortunately, the event has fizzled into irrelevance due to the absence of Russia and major European powers.
However, it nevertheless shows that Washington is intent on starting another war in the Middle East – against Iran. Its propaganda effort may have misfired this week, but the non-event at least demonstrates the warmongering intent the US harbors towards Iran.
Fortunately, too, it can be averred that Washington’s decades of criminality, duplicity and deception have finally caught up with it. Nobody in their right mind can believe anything that US rulers say – especially in regard to peace and stability for the Middle East. Washington’s every word on the subject is an Orwellian parody.
On his part, President Al-Assad stressed that achieving the interests of the peoples of the region’s countries necessitates that the governments of these countries stop obeying the dictates of some western countries, at the top of which is the United States, and adopt balanced policies based on respecting other countries’ sovereignty and non-interference in their internal affairs, particularly after experience has proved that subordination and implementing others’ dictates bring worse results than the adherence of countries to their sovereign decision.
Later, President Al-Assad met with his Iranian counterpart Hassan Rouhani. The two sides expressed satisfaction over the strategic level the Syrian-Iranian relations have reached.
