Syrian President Assad: Resistance Against America in Iraq and Israel in Palestine is Legitimate

President Bashar al-Assad gave an extensive interview broadcast tonight by the Qatari TV. space Channel ,AlJazeera . On the president's look to the Arab general situation , the president indicated that there is a state of frustration and despair prevailing most of the Arabs due to the current situation.

He added that the Arab leaders bear the most part of responsibility which is a natural thing.

He pointed out that there are two current in the Arab world and both are present in the governments and among the people. The first current calls for surrender , despair , and to accept the state accompli and is based on its too late, while the second sees that things are relative stressing that he is with that current although there are ramifications accumulated through decades that have contributed to the current situation to which we add through our daily practices.

The present expressed confidence that it is never too late and what is needed is some determination ,patience and seriousness to start off.

On the very hot situation in Palestine where the Israeli prime minister has got promises from Washington and a current threat to harm Chairman Arafat and the assassination of Hamas leaders,

The president indicated that there is an on going campaign of assassination where there is no difference except in time between the assassination of Sheikh Ahmad Yassin , Dr. Rantisi and the massacres of Sabra and Shatila and other massacres committed in 1948 and prior to that date.

He added that it is an on going situation and nothing new. It is Israel expressing itself not by words but by the freedom of killing and this is the Israeli democracy.

On the question of whose responsibility, President Bashar al-Assad stressed that it is the silence, idleness and not dealing with the ramification and deviation by marginal issues on the account of fundamental issues, the non existence of a policy and cooperation .

Regarding US. President George Bush's latest promise to Sharon in Washington , the president indicated that some have called this promise Belford Declaration /2/ or /3/ it doesn't matter the difference is the declaration .We call all the US. Practices since the foundation of Israel as Belford Declarations in practice.

The president wondered why should ask some other countries to take moral stances while they have interests !!!.

On the very dangerous Palestinian situation that the Palestinian cause has ever faced and the privilege granted by the United States to Israel which is the separation wall , the president said : It is true , for that reason I do not differ with these presentations and every one sees that they carry an extent of danger and what is required now is finding solutions that is what is required.

Regarding Syria's initiative for the resumption of talks with the Israeli government, the president commented by saying it was not An initiative but a repeated Syrian stance on every occasion, speech or interview or meeting with foreigners.

The president stressed that Syria has always expressed readiness for peace in line with the resolutions of UN. Security Council.

On the warnings from Israel which sees Syria not cooperating enough as Sharon says, that they want as to cooperate with them to liquidate the Palestinian cause entirely and may be the Syrian Golan issue .

Regarding the resistance option, the president said that as long as the resistance is a popular situation then it is legitimate and is not linked to persons and in that light the Lebanese resistance emerged victorious.

Regarding the Syrian role in the Palestinian developments, the president indicated that there is a correlation of destiny between the Palestinian and the Syrian issues and both are affected by the development of each track. What about the fate of half a million Palestinians living in Syria and what about the fate of a similar number of Palestinian living in Lebanon particularly that both the Syrian and Lebanese tracks are inseparable.

Regarding the situation in Iraq, the president indicated that Syria has always stressed that the Americans will sink in the quagmire as the forces of occupation always do. As for the Iraqi they are to pay dear price and more than what the have paid in the past decades. and the Arab situation will be worse.

On the American function in Iraq, the president stressed that everything happens in Iraq except what is being propagated by the American such as the better standard of living , democracy or prosperity!!!.

Regarding the resistance against occupation in Iraq, the president stressed that since the resistance is popular in Iraq , then it is legitimate.

On the Iraqi ruling interim council , the president stressed that Syria deal with it a state of fait accompli. Syria can legitimize the council because it is an internal Iraqi issue and legitimacy comes from the Iraqi people. As for the provisional constitution , Syria can not evaluate it unless it is permanent.

Regarding the possible establishment of a federal regime in Iraq, the president stressed that any federalism that is built on ethnic background or denominations will be very dangers and the Iraqi people reject such a regime.

Regarding relations with Washington , the president stressed that the base of the relations with Washington is dialogue until now but this doesn't mean that the relation is good and is keeps changing on daily on daily basis and varies between a current and another within the American administration. Some of these currents supports dialogue with Syria while others oppose that .. one cannot determine exactly particularly that the United States has entered the election race.

On the American role the president stressed that the European role has confined itself to the marketing the American initiative particularly the regarding the peace process. There is a US hegemony on the decision .

Regarding the next Arab summit the president stressed that Syria looks at it as a base for the Arab joint action and not only as an event. And the next summit is scheduled to discuss a reform project regarding the Arab league and the Arab situation in general .

Regarding the Syria-Saudi-Egyptian coordination, President al-Assad stressed that Syria looks at it not like an axis but as a nucleus for Arab joint action and such coordination is meant to keep the minimum level of Arab coordination.

On the Syrian -Turkish relations, the president stressed that such relations are characterized by specialty of the existence of a lot in common with the Turkish people and most of all the mutual desire and honesty in dealing and this has boosted the relation to a great extent. And the Iraqi issue has come as a direct threat to Syria , Turkey and Iran alike.

Regarding the development process in Syria, the president stressed that priority has been given to economic reform because the living standard is what concern Syria particularly those of the government employees who are in need improve their living standard.

On the recent events in the southern Syrian city of Qamishly, the president indicated that events are not oriented form abroad but the clashes took place following a football match and Syria dealt with the situation swiftly. The question of nationality is 42 years old because some in1962 acquired the Syrian nationality and some did not and this problem will be solved and the Kurdish people are par and parcel of the Syrian society and history.

Regarding the Lebanese presidential elections, the president stressed that Syria supports all the Lebanese establishments and all the people that represent them because it is the only guarantee for Lebanon not to go back to the civil strife.

He pointed out that Syria will support a non sectarian president in Lebanon, a president for all the Lebanese people.

The president concluded by calling for optimism because through it one can discern the future.

Musharraf and Quidafi hve taken the proper lessons from recent events. Alas, American educated Assad has taken precisely the wrong lesson. The Saudi royal house has come down somewhere in between.

It seems to me there are two models of instruction which Assad might investigate to improve his time. The first is Afganistan and the second is Irak. In Afganistan, America demonstrated the capacity and the will to take out a government which had supported terrorists but undertook relatively little in building a shining new western democracy. Our cost in blood and treasure has been minimal.

The second model, Irak, saw the attempt to build a democratic paradeigm at much greater cost. Rather than being applauded for our selfless trouble, the distorted Arab mind sees our efforts and losses to be indicia of defeat in a quagmire. Indeed, much of the world, including western Europe and the domestic Democrat party see the efforts as, at best, misguided.

These efforts in these two countries should not be judged sui generis but in the context of the world war against Muslim fanaticism and terror.

I believe that Assad while Machevellian is not foolish and has considered and rejected the possibility that he could end up in solitary confinement like Saddam if he flirts too closely with the terrorists. He probably fears his own fundamentalists more than the possibility that America will take him out. This is not the fear of Uncle Sam that we want to be animating the actions of these Arab dictators.

I listened intently to Charles Krauthammer s acceptance speech of his award from the Heritage Foundation in which he argued cogently that the Irak model of building a democracy was not a bridge too far. I hope feverently that he is correct but I suspect that some dictators like Assad are betting that he is not. Assad has, in effect, concluded that George Bush has shot his bolt and cannnot possibly start another war. He sees a fifty fifty chance that Bush will lose this election and Kerry will revert to the feckless appeasement of the Clinton administration.

I think it is time we reconsidered whether we can virtually alone take on the task of nation building throughout the Arab world and in Iran with the inevitable attendant guerilla conflicts following a relatively cheap and easy regime change.

After the dust settles in Irak, and not before, perhaps Bush shold modify his doctrine to confine it to regime change without the moral obligation to pay and bleed and die for a new democratic nation. If in the aftermath of regime change and new odious dictator assumes power, so be it unless he supports terror in which case he will know that he will go the way of his predecessor.

I invite comments about this proposal to return to the Afganistan model in the hope that our freedom of action which now appears to be greatly constrained might be restored.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.