3:22
|
4:04
|
3:38
|
4:39
|
2:35
|
1:50
|
Who Are Iranians? | A Nation of Resistance | Farsi Sub English
Who is the Iranian nation? Do you even recognize this nation? Do you care to know who represents the Islamic Iran? Imam Khamenei speaks.
A few hundred cowards, ill-informed, misguided,...
Who is the Iranian nation? Do you even recognize this nation? Do you care to know who represents the Islamic Iran? Imam Khamenei speaks.
A few hundred cowards, ill-informed, misguided, westoxified individuals come out on the streets every now and then and the zionist controlled \'mainstream media\' latch on to give them coverage and magnify these meaningless \"protests\". Do these low-lives represent the great Iranian nation?
If you want to know who the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran are, look at the massive turnouts that flood the streets of Iran every time the Islamic Resistance and the Islamic System needs support. For reference, check out Al-Quds Day rallies, 22 Bahman rallies, Shaheed Hojaji rallies, Shaheed Soleimani rallies.
Shame on the treacherous western media to hide the real presence of the Iranians while it highlights those couple of hundred notorious elements paid by the CIA to create chaos in the country.
More...
Description:
Who is the Iranian nation? Do you even recognize this nation? Do you care to know who represents the Islamic Iran? Imam Khamenei speaks.
A few hundred cowards, ill-informed, misguided, westoxified individuals come out on the streets every now and then and the zionist controlled \'mainstream media\' latch on to give them coverage and magnify these meaningless \"protests\". Do these low-lives represent the great Iranian nation?
If you want to know who the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran are, look at the massive turnouts that flood the streets of Iran every time the Islamic Resistance and the Islamic System needs support. For reference, check out Al-Quds Day rallies, 22 Bahman rallies, Shaheed Hojaji rallies, Shaheed Soleimani rallies.
Shame on the treacherous western media to hide the real presence of the Iranians while it highlights those couple of hundred notorious elements paid by the CIA to create chaos in the country.
Video Tags:
purestream,
media,
production,
Iranians,
Nation,
Resistance,
recognize,
represents,Hojaji,
notorious,
western,
Soleimani,
Islamic,Shaheed,
Bahman,
rallies,
System,
Resistance,
massive,
representatives,
streets,
meaningless,
mainstream,
zionist,
individuals,
Imam,
westoxified,
Khamenei,
cowards,
misguided,
Ignorance jahl persian
People are enemy of what they do not know
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحيمِ وَ الْعَصْرِ (1)
. Asr means age which implies...
People are enemy of what they do not know
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحيمِ وَ الْعَصْرِ (1)
. Asr means age which implies continuity of time..
According to some commentators it is a reference to the period in which the Holy Prophet was sent into this world to preach the religion of Allah, Islam, so that mankind, in all ages, come out from the darkness of ignorance into the light of divine guidance and reach higher realms of spiritual bliss..
Some say that it refers to afternoon prayers) salatul asr (..
Imam Jafar bin Muhammad as Sadiq said:.
Commentary)MirAhmad(, Page: 7651
" It refers to the age when the living Imam of the Ahl ul Bayt, Muhammad bin Hasan al Mahdi al Qa-im, will be commissioned by Allah to administer the society of all human beings under the law of Allah prescribed in the religion of Islam.".
Whether it refers to the time of the Holy Prophet or his true successor who will act according to the teachings and laws he brought from Allah to guide mankind, those who follow them will achieve success in the life of hereafter, and those who reject them will be the losers..
Aqa Mahdi Puya says:.
Asr literally means to wring out or press out implying squeezing or a squeezed object. It has been used figuratively for time in the sense of unfolding of the future by squeezing the past. The following two verses justify this interpretation..
The state of squeezing and unfolding in relation to the events taking place in" time" represents imperative proviso of the Imam as a microcosm and a medium between the finite and the infinite, therefore the Imam has been termed by the Ahl ul Bayt as mardar al dahr) axis of the age (, the actuating force behind every activity..
إِنَّ الْإِنْسانَ لَفي خُسْرٍ (2)
. If man does not believe in the oneness of Allah and accept the Holy Prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt as their mawla to give them on the right path shown by the religion of Allah, Islam, certainly he is in loss. If he is deprived of the pleasure of Allah on account of his rejection of that which has been stated above, he shall not obtain salvation which is the real loss..
إِلاَّ الَّذينَ آمَنُوا وَ عَمِلُوا الصَّالِحاتِ وَ تَواصَوْا بِالْحَقِّ وَ تَواصَوْا بِالصَّبْرِ (3)
." Those who believe" refers to every believer, but his or her status as believer is restricted to the degree of conviction of faith and submission to the will of Allah. Baqarah: 771; An-am: 361; Bara-at: 02 and 62 refer to the believers who manifest highest degree of conviction and submission whose possessions and lives Allah has purchased in exchange of His pleasure according to verse 111 of Bara-at and Baqarah: 702; and they are those who declare that the Holy Prophet has a greater claim over them than they have on their own selves as per verse 6 of Ahzab and whom Allah has thoroughly purified) Ahzab: 33 (. According to Minhajus Sadiqin the Holy Prophet referred to his Ahl ul Bayt as those mentioned in this verse. Refer to the commentary of Baqarah: 2; Ali Imran: 7 and 101 to 511; Yunus: 53; Rad: 7; Maryam: 14 to 05; Fatir: 23.
More...
Description:
People are enemy of what they do not know
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحيمِ وَ الْعَصْرِ (1)
. Asr means age which implies continuity of time..
According to some commentators it is a reference to the period in which the Holy Prophet was sent into this world to preach the religion of Allah, Islam, so that mankind, in all ages, come out from the darkness of ignorance into the light of divine guidance and reach higher realms of spiritual bliss..
Some say that it refers to afternoon prayers) salatul asr (..
Imam Jafar bin Muhammad as Sadiq said:.
Commentary)MirAhmad(, Page: 7651
" It refers to the age when the living Imam of the Ahl ul Bayt, Muhammad bin Hasan al Mahdi al Qa-im, will be commissioned by Allah to administer the society of all human beings under the law of Allah prescribed in the religion of Islam.".
Whether it refers to the time of the Holy Prophet or his true successor who will act according to the teachings and laws he brought from Allah to guide mankind, those who follow them will achieve success in the life of hereafter, and those who reject them will be the losers..
Aqa Mahdi Puya says:.
Asr literally means to wring out or press out implying squeezing or a squeezed object. It has been used figuratively for time in the sense of unfolding of the future by squeezing the past. The following two verses justify this interpretation..
The state of squeezing and unfolding in relation to the events taking place in" time" represents imperative proviso of the Imam as a microcosm and a medium between the finite and the infinite, therefore the Imam has been termed by the Ahl ul Bayt as mardar al dahr) axis of the age (, the actuating force behind every activity..
إِنَّ الْإِنْسانَ لَفي خُسْرٍ (2)
. If man does not believe in the oneness of Allah and accept the Holy Prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt as their mawla to give them on the right path shown by the religion of Allah, Islam, certainly he is in loss. If he is deprived of the pleasure of Allah on account of his rejection of that which has been stated above, he shall not obtain salvation which is the real loss..
إِلاَّ الَّذينَ آمَنُوا وَ عَمِلُوا الصَّالِحاتِ وَ تَواصَوْا بِالْحَقِّ وَ تَواصَوْا بِالصَّبْرِ (3)
." Those who believe" refers to every believer, but his or her status as believer is restricted to the degree of conviction of faith and submission to the will of Allah. Baqarah: 771; An-am: 361; Bara-at: 02 and 62 refer to the believers who manifest highest degree of conviction and submission whose possessions and lives Allah has purchased in exchange of His pleasure according to verse 111 of Bara-at and Baqarah: 702; and they are those who declare that the Holy Prophet has a greater claim over them than they have on their own selves as per verse 6 of Ahzab and whom Allah has thoroughly purified) Ahzab: 33 (. According to Minhajus Sadiqin the Holy Prophet referred to his Ahl ul Bayt as those mentioned in this verse. Refer to the commentary of Baqarah: 2; Ali Imran: 7 and 101 to 511; Yunus: 53; Rad: 7; Maryam: 14 to 05; Fatir: 23.
Exclusive: Interview with Tony Blair on Gaza - 01Mar09 - English
Exclusive: Interview with Tony Blair on Gaza - 01Mar09 - English. Speaking to Al Jazeera English, after his first visit to the Gaza strip as the Quartet's Middle East Envoy, Tony Blair said he...
Exclusive: Interview with Tony Blair on Gaza - 01Mar09 - English. Speaking to Al Jazeera English, after his first visit to the Gaza strip as the Quartet's Middle East Envoy, Tony Blair said he wanted to hear first hand accounts of what it was like to live there during and after the war.
It is the first time Blair has visited Gaza since becoming the Middle East envoy to the so-called Quartet, which represents the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations.
More...
Description:
Exclusive: Interview with Tony Blair on Gaza - 01Mar09 - English. Speaking to Al Jazeera English, after his first visit to the Gaza strip as the Quartet's Middle East Envoy, Tony Blair said he wanted to hear first hand accounts of what it was like to live there during and after the war.
It is the first time Blair has visited Gaza since becoming the Middle East envoy to the so-called Quartet, which represents the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations.
15:33
|
A documentary on American detainee - English
A man held without charges since 2002 has committed suicide at the Guantanamo detention center, US military officials have revealed.
Yemeni national Muhammad Ahmad Abdallah Salih was found...
A man held without charges since 2002 has committed suicide at the Guantanamo detention center, US military officials have revealed.
Yemeni national Muhammad Ahmad Abdallah Salih was found "unresponsive and not breathing" when guards checked his cell Monday night, US Southern Command spokesman Jose Ruiz said in a statement.
A prison physician pronounced the man dead after efforts to resuscitate him had failed.
A man found innocent and subsequently released from Guantanamo Bay last year expounded on the situation at the notorious detention center in an interview with Press TV earlier in 2009.
Binyam Mohamed -- a British citizen arrested in Pakistan in 2002 on suspicion of plotting a string of bomb blast in the US -- said that during the five years he spent at the detention center he was surreptitiously "tortured in medieval ways".
"It is still difficult for me to believe that I was abducted, hauled from one country to the next and tortured in medieval ways. While I want to recover and put it all as far in the past as I can, I also know I have an obligation to the people who still remain in those torture chambers," he said.
This is not the first time a Guantanamo detainee has ended his life. In a coordinated act of protest, three Guantanamo detainees hanged themselves with their sheets on June 10, 2006. Another prisoner killed himself in May 2007 by hanging himself with a noose made from bed linens.
The death is expected to cause a new wave of criticism against the military prison, which Amnesty International calls the "the gulag of our times".
"The cost of keeping Guantanamo open could not be clearer at a time like this, both for the men there and for the perception of the US in the world," says the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents Guantanamo prisoners in habeas corpus cases.
Although US President Barack Obama has ordered an end to the 'harsh interrogation' program launched by the Bush administration, the fates of the detainees who await trials remain uncertain
www.presstv.com
More...
Description:
A man held without charges since 2002 has committed suicide at the Guantanamo detention center, US military officials have revealed.
Yemeni national Muhammad Ahmad Abdallah Salih was found "unresponsive and not breathing" when guards checked his cell Monday night, US Southern Command spokesman Jose Ruiz said in a statement.
A prison physician pronounced the man dead after efforts to resuscitate him had failed.
A man found innocent and subsequently released from Guantanamo Bay last year expounded on the situation at the notorious detention center in an interview with Press TV earlier in 2009.
Binyam Mohamed -- a British citizen arrested in Pakistan in 2002 on suspicion of plotting a string of bomb blast in the US -- said that during the five years he spent at the detention center he was surreptitiously "tortured in medieval ways".
"It is still difficult for me to believe that I was abducted, hauled from one country to the next and tortured in medieval ways. While I want to recover and put it all as far in the past as I can, I also know I have an obligation to the people who still remain in those torture chambers," he said.
This is not the first time a Guantanamo detainee has ended his life. In a coordinated act of protest, three Guantanamo detainees hanged themselves with their sheets on June 10, 2006. Another prisoner killed himself in May 2007 by hanging himself with a noose made from bed linens.
The death is expected to cause a new wave of criticism against the military prison, which Amnesty International calls the "the gulag of our times".
"The cost of keeping Guantanamo open could not be clearer at a time like this, both for the men there and for the perception of the US in the world," says the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents Guantanamo prisoners in habeas corpus cases.
Although US President Barack Obama has ordered an end to the 'harsh interrogation' program launched by the Bush administration, the fates of the detainees who await trials remain uncertain
www.presstv.com
3:25
|
Iran Summoned Western Diplomats - English
Iran's Foreign Ministry summons the Swiss ambassador, who represents US interest in Tehran, in protest to 'interventionist' statements by American officials on Iran's election.
The ministry...
Iran's Foreign Ministry summons the Swiss ambassador, who represents US interest in Tehran, in protest to 'interventionist' statements by American officials on Iran's election.
The ministry also summoned the Canadian charge d'affaires to convey Iran's official protest to Ottawa over the Canadian officials' recent remarks on Iran's presidential vote.
Several European envoys were also summoned on Tuesday over what Iran's Foreign Ministry called 'malicious stance' taken by their countries toward Iran.
On Tuesday, US President Barack Obama expressed 'deep concern' about the post-election unrest in Iran but warned that meddling in Iran's internal affairs would be counterproductive.
"We respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran," he said.
Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon also called on Monday for what he called 'a full and transparent investigation into electoral fraud and discrepancies' in Iran's presidential vote.
Friday's presidential election, which saw incumbent Iranian President Mahmoud re-elected for a second term in office, has caused mass rallies by hundreds of thousands of supporters of former prime minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi who reject the election as fraudulent.
The interior minister, who is appointed by president and is in charge of holding the election, has denied the allegation, saying the ministry adopted methods which could not possibly be subject to 'irregularities'.
At least eight people have been killed so far in recent post-election violence in Tehran.
More...
Description:
Iran's Foreign Ministry summons the Swiss ambassador, who represents US interest in Tehran, in protest to 'interventionist' statements by American officials on Iran's election.
The ministry also summoned the Canadian charge d'affaires to convey Iran's official protest to Ottawa over the Canadian officials' recent remarks on Iran's presidential vote.
Several European envoys were also summoned on Tuesday over what Iran's Foreign Ministry called 'malicious stance' taken by their countries toward Iran.
On Tuesday, US President Barack Obama expressed 'deep concern' about the post-election unrest in Iran but warned that meddling in Iran's internal affairs would be counterproductive.
"We respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran," he said.
Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon also called on Monday for what he called 'a full and transparent investigation into electoral fraud and discrepancies' in Iran's presidential vote.
Friday's presidential election, which saw incumbent Iranian President Mahmoud re-elected for a second term in office, has caused mass rallies by hundreds of thousands of supporters of former prime minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi who reject the election as fraudulent.
The interior minister, who is appointed by president and is in charge of holding the election, has denied the allegation, saying the ministry adopted methods which could not possibly be subject to 'irregularities'.
At least eight people have been killed so far in recent post-election violence in Tehran.
33:27
|
18thJune (Must watch) Elections in Iran - Live Questions to George Galloway - English
George Galloway (born 16 August 1954) is an outspoken British politician, author, and broadcaster, who has been a Member of Parliament (MP) since 1987 and is known for his...
George Galloway (born 16 August 1954) is an outspoken British politician, author, and broadcaster, who has been a Member of Parliament (MP) since 1987 and is known for his anti-war,[1] socialist, and anti-Zionist views. He was a Labour Party MP for Glasgow Hillhead, and for Glasgow Kelvin, before his expulsion from the party in October 2003,[2] and his subsequently becoming a founding member of Respect. He currently represents the Bethnal Green and Bow constituency, having been most recently elected to that seat in 2005.
Galloway is perhaps best known for his vigorous campaign to both overturn economic sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s and early 2000s, and to avert the 2003 invasion of that country, as well as for his speech before the then President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, in which he appeared to praise the Iraqi dictator,[3] although Galloway actively opposed the regime until the United States-led Gulf War in 1991 and has always stated that he was addressing the Iraqi people.[4][5] Galloway has also expressed his support for the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,[6] and broadcasts regularly on the Iranian government-funded news channel Press TV.
More...
Description:
George Galloway (born 16 August 1954) is an outspoken British politician, author, and broadcaster, who has been a Member of Parliament (MP) since 1987 and is known for his anti-war,[1] socialist, and anti-Zionist views. He was a Labour Party MP for Glasgow Hillhead, and for Glasgow Kelvin, before his expulsion from the party in October 2003,[2] and his subsequently becoming a founding member of Respect. He currently represents the Bethnal Green and Bow constituency, having been most recently elected to that seat in 2005.
Galloway is perhaps best known for his vigorous campaign to both overturn economic sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s and early 2000s, and to avert the 2003 invasion of that country, as well as for his speech before the then President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, in which he appeared to praise the Iraqi dictator,[3] although Galloway actively opposed the regime until the United States-led Gulf War in 1991 and has always stated that he was addressing the Iraqi people.[4][5] Galloway has also expressed his support for the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,[6] and broadcasts regularly on the Iranian government-funded news channel Press TV.
47:34
|
25thJune (Must watch) Elections in Iran - Live Questions to George Galloway - English
George Galloway (born 16 August 1954) is an outspoken British politician, author, and broadcaster, who has been a Member of Parliament (MP) since 1987 and is known for his...
George Galloway (born 16 August 1954) is an outspoken British politician, author, and broadcaster, who has been a Member of Parliament (MP) since 1987 and is known for his anti-war,[1] socialist, and anti-Zionist views. He was a Labour Party MP for Glasgow Hillhead, and for Glasgow Kelvin, before his expulsion from the party in October 2003,[2] and his subsequently becoming a founding member of Respect. He currently represents the Bethnal Green and Bow constituency, having been most recently elected to that seat in 2005. Galloway is perhaps best known for his vigorous campaign to both overturn economic sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s and early 2000s, and to avert the 2003 invasion of that country, as well as for his speech before the then President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, in which he appeared to praise the Iraqi dictator,[3] although Galloway actively opposed the regime until the United States-led Gulf War in 1991 and has always stated that he was addressing the Iraqi people.[4][5] Galloway has also expressed his support for the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,[6] and broadcasts regularly on the Iranian government-funded news channel Press TV.
More...
Description:
George Galloway (born 16 August 1954) is an outspoken British politician, author, and broadcaster, who has been a Member of Parliament (MP) since 1987 and is known for his anti-war,[1] socialist, and anti-Zionist views. He was a Labour Party MP for Glasgow Hillhead, and for Glasgow Kelvin, before his expulsion from the party in October 2003,[2] and his subsequently becoming a founding member of Respect. He currently represents the Bethnal Green and Bow constituency, having been most recently elected to that seat in 2005. Galloway is perhaps best known for his vigorous campaign to both overturn economic sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s and early 2000s, and to avert the 2003 invasion of that country, as well as for his speech before the then President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, in which he appeared to praise the Iraqi dictator,[3] although Galloway actively opposed the regime until the United States-led Gulf War in 1991 and has always stated that he was addressing the Iraqi people.[4][5] Galloway has also expressed his support for the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,[6] and broadcasts regularly on the Iranian government-funded news channel Press TV.
5:47
|
How Israeli Ambassador in Californian University Treated - English
Contributed by Herald. February 8th, 2010, 6:01 pm Eleven people were arrested Monday evening during a raucous lecture at UC Irvine where Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren came to talk about...
Contributed by Herald. February 8th, 2010, 6:01 pm Eleven people were arrested Monday evening during a raucous lecture at UC Irvine where Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren came to talk about U.S.-Israel relations. (UCI earlier said that 12 were arrested.) Oren was interrupted 10 times Monday while trying to give his speech before 500 people at the UCI Student Center, where there was heavy security. Oren took a 20 minute break after the fourth protest, asked for hospitality and resumed his speech, only to be interrupted again by young men yelling at him every few minutes. Many members of the audience also applauded Oren. After the 10th interruption, several dozens students who opposed Oren’s talk got up and walked out and staged a protest outside. It is not clear whether they were members of the UCI Muslim Student Union, which issued an email earlier in the day condemning Oren’s appearance on campus. Oren continued talking, completing his speech at 6:42 p.m. Originally, he planned to take question from the audience. But that was canceled after the repeated delays. The second person yelled about “Zionism.†The third yelled, “Israel.†The fourth could not be clearly heard. UCI Police Chief Paul Henisey said it is not clear whether any of the protesters are UCI students. Mark Petracca, a UCI political science professor, lost his temper and yelled, “This is embarrassing … Shame on all of you.†UCI Chancellor Michael Drake also told the audience that he was embarrassed by the outburst. Drake and Petracca were booed by many people, and applauded by others. Hours earlier, UCI’s Muslim Student Union said in an email today that its members “condemn and oppose the presence of Michael Oren, the ambassador of Israel to the United States, on our campus today. We resent that the Law School and the Political Science Department on our campus have agreed to cosponsor a public figure who represents a state that continues to break international and humanitarian law and is condemned by more UN Human Rights Council resolutions than all other countries in the world combined.†The Jewish Federation Orange County said earlier in the day that it had been informed that Oren’s speech at UC Irvine late today might be disrupted by protestors. Shalom C. Elcott, president of JFOC, said in a statement today that, “We have been informed that some students may attempt to disrupt the event. We want to assure the community that our goal is to create a positive environment — indeed, a sacred space – for open dialogue, intellectual debate and civil discourse that befits a university setting.†This was not the first time that there has been confrontation at a political lecture at UCI. In January 2007, Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum was interrupted by protesters at UCI while giving a speech titled, “The Threat to Israel’s Existence.†The protesters ended up getting into a brief shouting match with some members of the audience.
More...
Description:
Contributed by Herald. February 8th, 2010, 6:01 pm Eleven people were arrested Monday evening during a raucous lecture at UC Irvine where Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren came to talk about U.S.-Israel relations. (UCI earlier said that 12 were arrested.) Oren was interrupted 10 times Monday while trying to give his speech before 500 people at the UCI Student Center, where there was heavy security. Oren took a 20 minute break after the fourth protest, asked for hospitality and resumed his speech, only to be interrupted again by young men yelling at him every few minutes. Many members of the audience also applauded Oren. After the 10th interruption, several dozens students who opposed Oren’s talk got up and walked out and staged a protest outside. It is not clear whether they were members of the UCI Muslim Student Union, which issued an email earlier in the day condemning Oren’s appearance on campus. Oren continued talking, completing his speech at 6:42 p.m. Originally, he planned to take question from the audience. But that was canceled after the repeated delays. The second person yelled about “Zionism.†The third yelled, “Israel.†The fourth could not be clearly heard. UCI Police Chief Paul Henisey said it is not clear whether any of the protesters are UCI students. Mark Petracca, a UCI political science professor, lost his temper and yelled, “This is embarrassing … Shame on all of you.†UCI Chancellor Michael Drake also told the audience that he was embarrassed by the outburst. Drake and Petracca were booed by many people, and applauded by others. Hours earlier, UCI’s Muslim Student Union said in an email today that its members “condemn and oppose the presence of Michael Oren, the ambassador of Israel to the United States, on our campus today. We resent that the Law School and the Political Science Department on our campus have agreed to cosponsor a public figure who represents a state that continues to break international and humanitarian law and is condemned by more UN Human Rights Council resolutions than all other countries in the world combined.†The Jewish Federation Orange County said earlier in the day that it had been informed that Oren’s speech at UC Irvine late today might be disrupted by protestors. Shalom C. Elcott, president of JFOC, said in a statement today that, “We have been informed that some students may attempt to disrupt the event. We want to assure the community that our goal is to create a positive environment — indeed, a sacred space – for open dialogue, intellectual debate and civil discourse that befits a university setting.†This was not the first time that there has been confrontation at a political lecture at UCI. In January 2007, Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum was interrupted by protesters at UCI while giving a speech titled, “The Threat to Israel’s Existence.†The protesters ended up getting into a brief shouting match with some members of the audience.
US Hand-Over Abducted Iranian Nuclear Scientist - 13Jul2010 - English
Iranian academic Shahram Amiri who was abducted by the US last year is now in Iran's interest section in Washington.
Iranian academic Shahram Amiri, who was abducted by the US last year, has...
Iranian academic Shahram Amiri who was abducted by the US last year is now in Iran's interest section in Washington.
Iranian academic Shahram Amiri, who was abducted by the US last year, has been escorted by American forces to Iran's interest section in Washington.
IRIB reported on Tuesday that Amiri took refuge in Iran's interest section in Washington, urging an "immediate return" to Iran.
The Pakistani Embassy in Washington preserves Iran's interests in the United States, since the two countries have no diplomatic relations.
In collaboration with Saudi forces, US security forces kidnapped Amiri while he was on a pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia in June 2009 and took him to America.
Since then, two videos and one audio message featuring him have emerged.
In the first video, Amiri said that he was abducted "in a joint operation by terror and kidnap teams from the US intelligence service, CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) and Saudi Arabia's Istikhbarat" from Medina.
In the second video, he contradicted his earlier statements, saying that he was in the US of his own free will to further his education, dismissing all rumors about his defection.
However, in the latest audio message obtained by Iran's intelligence sources, Amiri insists that he was offered $10 million to appear on CNN and announce that he had willingly defected to the US.
Holding the US accountable for Amiri's abduction, the Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned the Swiss charge d'affaires, whose embassy represents US interests in Iran, earlier this month and handed over new documents related to the abduction of the Iranian national by the CIA.
Analysts say US intelligence officials decided to free Amiri after they failed to advance their propaganda campaign against Iran's nuclear program via fabricating interviews with the Iranian national.
More...
Description:
Iranian academic Shahram Amiri who was abducted by the US last year is now in Iran's interest section in Washington.
Iranian academic Shahram Amiri, who was abducted by the US last year, has been escorted by American forces to Iran's interest section in Washington.
IRIB reported on Tuesday that Amiri took refuge in Iran's interest section in Washington, urging an "immediate return" to Iran.
The Pakistani Embassy in Washington preserves Iran's interests in the United States, since the two countries have no diplomatic relations.
In collaboration with Saudi forces, US security forces kidnapped Amiri while he was on a pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia in June 2009 and took him to America.
Since then, two videos and one audio message featuring him have emerged.
In the first video, Amiri said that he was abducted "in a joint operation by terror and kidnap teams from the US intelligence service, CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) and Saudi Arabia's Istikhbarat" from Medina.
In the second video, he contradicted his earlier statements, saying that he was in the US of his own free will to further his education, dismissing all rumors about his defection.
However, in the latest audio message obtained by Iran's intelligence sources, Amiri insists that he was offered $10 million to appear on CNN and announce that he had willingly defected to the US.
Holding the US accountable for Amiri's abduction, the Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned the Swiss charge d'affaires, whose embassy represents US interests in Iran, earlier this month and handed over new documents related to the abduction of the Iranian national by the CIA.
Analysts say US intelligence officials decided to free Amiri after they failed to advance their propaganda campaign against Iran's nuclear program via fabricating interviews with the Iranian national.
International Rights Activists Express Grave Concern At Crackdown On Shia In Bahrain - 23 SEP 2010 - English
Bahrain triggers human rights uproar
As many as 26 human rights organizations have called on the international community to address Bahrain's suppression of rights advocates and Shias...
Bahrain triggers human rights uproar
As many as 26 human rights organizations have called on the international community to address Bahrain's suppression of rights advocates and Shias population, an Egyptian institute says.
"We stress the international community's responsibility for curbing the security campaign aimed at silencing human rights defenders and concealing the grave abuses committed by the authorities against the citizenry, particularly the Shia community," the organizations said in a petition.
The bodies warned about "the authorities' increasing crackdown on the different forms of expression and peaceful association and assembly" and "the government's growing tendency to set the law aside in favor of naked force, detention, the torture and abuse of peaceful opponents," one of the cosignatories, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), said in a press release on Wednesday.
They said Manama maintained "a policy of systematic discrimination and marginalization of the Shia majority."
The Shia opposition refuses to recognize the 2002 constitution and has called for a boycott of the upcoming parliamentary elections, set for October 23. The protesting organizations also said that the suppression campaign was meant "to pave the way for wide-ranging election fraud."
Despite their demographic predominance in the kingdom, the Shias have long complained about being discriminated against by the Bahraini government when it comes to obtaining jobs and receiving services.
Earlier in the month, the Manama government revoked the citizenship of leading Shia cleric Ayatollah Sheikh Hussein al-Najati, who represents top Iraqi cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Bahrain, as well as the citizenship of his family.
An outspoken critic of the government, Sheikh Abdul Jaleel al-Miqdad, has also been prohibited from leading the Friday Prayers.
The Bahraini government has arrested more than 250 Shias since August, accusing 23 of them of plotting a coup and provoking "violence, rioting and terrorism."
Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/143715.html
More...
Description:
Bahrain triggers human rights uproar
As many as 26 human rights organizations have called on the international community to address Bahrain's suppression of rights advocates and Shias population, an Egyptian institute says.
"We stress the international community's responsibility for curbing the security campaign aimed at silencing human rights defenders and concealing the grave abuses committed by the authorities against the citizenry, particularly the Shia community," the organizations said in a petition.
The bodies warned about "the authorities' increasing crackdown on the different forms of expression and peaceful association and assembly" and "the government's growing tendency to set the law aside in favor of naked force, detention, the torture and abuse of peaceful opponents," one of the cosignatories, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), said in a press release on Wednesday.
They said Manama maintained "a policy of systematic discrimination and marginalization of the Shia majority."
The Shia opposition refuses to recognize the 2002 constitution and has called for a boycott of the upcoming parliamentary elections, set for October 23. The protesting organizations also said that the suppression campaign was meant "to pave the way for wide-ranging election fraud."
Despite their demographic predominance in the kingdom, the Shias have long complained about being discriminated against by the Bahraini government when it comes to obtaining jobs and receiving services.
Earlier in the month, the Manama government revoked the citizenship of leading Shia cleric Ayatollah Sheikh Hussein al-Najati, who represents top Iraqi cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Bahrain, as well as the citizenship of his family.
An outspoken critic of the government, Sheikh Abdul Jaleel al-Miqdad, has also been prohibited from leading the Friday Prayers.
The Bahraini government has arrested more than 250 Shias since August, accusing 23 of them of plotting a coup and provoking "violence, rioting and terrorism."
Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/143715.html
27:31
|
[Must Watch] Predictions in a 1400 Year Old Document - Signature of the Creator - English
In the name of God Most Gracious Most Merciful, Predictions in a 1400 year old document - God's scriptures are not the only mathematically composed creations of God where the number 19 is the...
In the name of God Most Gracious Most Merciful, Predictions in a 1400 year old document - God's scriptures are not the only mathematically composed creations of God where the number 19 is the common denominator. It is profound indeed that Galileo made his famous statement: "Mathematics is the language with which God created the universe." A plethora of scientific findings have now shown that the number 19 represents God's signature upon certain creations. This divine stamp appears throughout the universe in much the same manner as the signature of Michelangelo and Picasso identify their works. For example: 1. The sun, the moon, and the earth become aligned in the same relative positions once every 19 years (see ENCYCLOPEDIA JUDAICA under "Calendar"). 2. Halley's comet, a profound heavenly phenomenon, visits our solar system every 76 years, 19x4. 3. God's stamp on you and me is manifested in the fact that the human body contains 209 bones, 19x11. 4. LANGMAN'S MEDICAL EMBRYOLOGY, by T. W. Sadler, is used as a textbook in most of the Medical Schools in the U.S.A. On Page 88 of the Fifth edition, we read the following statement: "In general the length of pregnancy for a full term fetus is considered to be 280 days or 40 weeks after onset of the last menstruation, or more accurately, 266 days or 38 weeks after fertilization." The numbers 266 and 38 are both multiples of 19.
More...
Description:
In the name of God Most Gracious Most Merciful, Predictions in a 1400 year old document - God's scriptures are not the only mathematically composed creations of God where the number 19 is the common denominator. It is profound indeed that Galileo made his famous statement: "Mathematics is the language with which God created the universe." A plethora of scientific findings have now shown that the number 19 represents God's signature upon certain creations. This divine stamp appears throughout the universe in much the same manner as the signature of Michelangelo and Picasso identify their works. For example: 1. The sun, the moon, and the earth become aligned in the same relative positions once every 19 years (see ENCYCLOPEDIA JUDAICA under "Calendar"). 2. Halley's comet, a profound heavenly phenomenon, visits our solar system every 76 years, 19x4. 3. God's stamp on you and me is manifested in the fact that the human body contains 209 bones, 19x11. 4. LANGMAN'S MEDICAL EMBRYOLOGY, by T. W. Sadler, is used as a textbook in most of the Medical Schools in the U.S.A. On Page 88 of the Fifth edition, we read the following statement: "In general the length of pregnancy for a full term fetus is considered to be 280 days or 40 weeks after onset of the last menstruation, or more accurately, 266 days or 38 weeks after fertilization." The numbers 266 and 38 are both multiples of 19.
FULL Speech on the Anniversary of Martyrs Day by Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah - 11 November 2011 - [ENGLISH]
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah called on the US administration and the Zionist entity to understand very well that a war against Iran and Syria will not stay inside Iran and...
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah called on the US administration and the Zionist entity to understand very well that a war against Iran and Syria will not stay inside Iran and Syria, but will roll instead and spread out to the entire region.
During a ceremony on the Martyr’s Day in Master of Martyrs Complex (PBUH) in the southern suburb of Beirut Friday afternoon, his eminence delivered his speech via video link at the rally, noting that despite all the threats in the region, all the local, regional and international situations of today are in favor of the peoples of the region and the axis of defiance and resistance more than any time ever.
Sayyed Nasrallah believed that talk of an attack or a new war on Lebanon is an intimidation.
“We still rule out such an enemy assault on Lebanon regardless the developments in the region and the regional situation,” his eminence said, pointing out that if there is no plan for a regional war, any plan for an imminent war on Lebanon is ruled out.
His Eminence went on to call upon those who bet on the fall of the Syrian regime to abandon their bet. “Put this bet aside, it will fail just like previous bets had failed,” he said.
In his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah saw no reason why Lebanon should be expected to contribute its share of the tribunal\\\\\\\'s funding given Washington\\\\\\\'s decision to cut off funds to the United Nations cultural agency UNESCO after members voted to admit Palestine as a full member.
\\\\\\\"Isn\\\\\\\'t the funding of UNESCO an international obligation for the US?\\\\\\\" he said. \\\\\\\"Why can it shirk its obligation and not Lebanon?\\\\\\\"
\\\\\\\"If Lebanon doesn\\\\\\\'t fund this unconstitutional and illegal court, Feltman comes along and threatens sanctions,\\\\\\\" he added, referring to Jeffrey Feltman, the US assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs.
OUR SOUTH, STRONG and SAFE
At the beginning of his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah said that martyrs are “life makers” by the will of God, and that Jihad, martyrdom and the will of those resisting and steadfasting constitute the key path of this concept.
Noting that lovers of Imam Mousa al-Sadr live today special sentiment waiting for his return to Lebanon, God willing, his eminence read the words of Imam al-Sadr said in 1978, when he felt sorry for what suffered by Southern Lebanon attacked by Zionist entity.
“I told him to myself when you return you will be proud of your students, sons and the resistance, which was founded and sacrificed in order to be,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, adding “the South today is safe, strong and constant firm. It is no more under the mercy of anyone, but strongly present in the regional equation.”
TURNING TABLE OVER THE AGRESSOR
His Eminence added: “We still rule out an enemy assault on Lebanon regardless the regional developments and situation,” his eminence said, pointing out that if there is no plan for a regional war, any scheme for an imminent war on Lebanon is ruled out.
He stressed this is not due to the moral generosity of Israel, the US and the UN Security Council, but because “Lebanon is not weak anymore. It is a strong state and is able - with his army, people and resistance - to defeat.”
“Lebanon has become able to turn the table on anyone who attacks him. Lebanon has become able to turn the threats into real opportunities,” he noted, stressing that Resistance did not sleep one day.
In Martyr\\\\\\\'s Day, Hezbollah S.G. went on to call for adherence to the resistance, the army and the popular will for being the real element of force.
LOCALS AND SECURITY
The Lebanese government has so far proved to be the government of diversity, for it represents a popular majority, a cabinet of research, discussion and dialogue.
“Members of Lebanese cabinet discuss and make decisions. They neither wait for \\\\\\\"sms\\\\\\\", nor receive signals or suggestions from anyone. We call upon cabinet today to work, achieve, follow-up files and not to listen to all the noise, Sayyed Nasrallah said.
“The most important of the government\\\\\\\'s work is giving priority to livelihood issues.”
Addressing the Lebanese Army, his eminence called to neutralize the army as a guarantor of the sovereignty, national unity and security.
“All harsh experiences of Lebanon had proven that at the end of the day Lebanon was lost and divided, while this institution remained the salvation stage,” he added.
UNESCO SCANDAL
Sayyed Nasrallah said that the issue of STL fund should be discussed in the cabinet, calling to learn lessons from the UNESCO event.
“It is useful that Lebanese and the public recognize what happened in the issue of UNESCO, an international organization recognized the state of Palestine. The USA became angry and stopped funding the organization. Why Lebanon should be expected to contribute its share of the tribunal\\\\\\\'s funding given Washington\\\\\\\'s decision to cut off funds to the United Nations cultural agency UNESCO?\\\\\\\" his eminence asked.
IRAN AND SYRIA
Hezbollah Secretary General assured that betting on regional developments will eventually fail.
Touching the recent US and Zionist threats against Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that Iran will not be afraid of fleets and intimidation.
“Iran and Syria were the two countries that opposed the US occupation of Iraq and the killing of its people. Iran did neither weaken nor subjected to the American terms.
\\\\\\\"Whoever dares to launch war against Iran will be met with doubly that force,\\\\\\\" he warned. \\\\\\\"Iran is strong, solid and united; Iran is powerful and has a leader unique to the whole world.\\\\\\\"
He added that any military action against Iran or Syria would engulf the entire region.
“They want to drag Iran into negotiations, and to force Syria to accept what it rejected in the past,” he noted.
“American defeat in Iraq has strategic results at every level of our region. I call to shed light upon American withdrawal and defeat in Iraq. Ben Ali\\\\\\\'s and Gaddafi\\\\\\\'s regimes fall is a loss to the US project; fall of Mubarak\\\\\\\'s regime is a major loss for the US and Israel,” his eminence added addressing the US project defeat in the Middle East.
“We affirm that since the reign of martyr Ahmad Qasir to the day we entered the era of victories, where days of defeats had gone. Local, regional and international situations are today in the interests of peoples of the region, as well as the axis of defiance and resistance more than any time ever”.
“As long as we are the people of faith, determination and will in all next expectations, God willing we will win,” Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah concluded.
More...
Description:
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah called on the US administration and the Zionist entity to understand very well that a war against Iran and Syria will not stay inside Iran and Syria, but will roll instead and spread out to the entire region.
During a ceremony on the Martyr’s Day in Master of Martyrs Complex (PBUH) in the southern suburb of Beirut Friday afternoon, his eminence delivered his speech via video link at the rally, noting that despite all the threats in the region, all the local, regional and international situations of today are in favor of the peoples of the region and the axis of defiance and resistance more than any time ever.
Sayyed Nasrallah believed that talk of an attack or a new war on Lebanon is an intimidation.
“We still rule out such an enemy assault on Lebanon regardless the developments in the region and the regional situation,” his eminence said, pointing out that if there is no plan for a regional war, any plan for an imminent war on Lebanon is ruled out.
His Eminence went on to call upon those who bet on the fall of the Syrian regime to abandon their bet. “Put this bet aside, it will fail just like previous bets had failed,” he said.
In his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah saw no reason why Lebanon should be expected to contribute its share of the tribunal\\\\\\\'s funding given Washington\\\\\\\'s decision to cut off funds to the United Nations cultural agency UNESCO after members voted to admit Palestine as a full member.
\\\\\\\"Isn\\\\\\\'t the funding of UNESCO an international obligation for the US?\\\\\\\" he said. \\\\\\\"Why can it shirk its obligation and not Lebanon?\\\\\\\"
\\\\\\\"If Lebanon doesn\\\\\\\'t fund this unconstitutional and illegal court, Feltman comes along and threatens sanctions,\\\\\\\" he added, referring to Jeffrey Feltman, the US assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs.
OUR SOUTH, STRONG and SAFE
At the beginning of his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah said that martyrs are “life makers” by the will of God, and that Jihad, martyrdom and the will of those resisting and steadfasting constitute the key path of this concept.
Noting that lovers of Imam Mousa al-Sadr live today special sentiment waiting for his return to Lebanon, God willing, his eminence read the words of Imam al-Sadr said in 1978, when he felt sorry for what suffered by Southern Lebanon attacked by Zionist entity.
“I told him to myself when you return you will be proud of your students, sons and the resistance, which was founded and sacrificed in order to be,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, adding “the South today is safe, strong and constant firm. It is no more under the mercy of anyone, but strongly present in the regional equation.”
TURNING TABLE OVER THE AGRESSOR
His Eminence added: “We still rule out an enemy assault on Lebanon regardless the regional developments and situation,” his eminence said, pointing out that if there is no plan for a regional war, any scheme for an imminent war on Lebanon is ruled out.
He stressed this is not due to the moral generosity of Israel, the US and the UN Security Council, but because “Lebanon is not weak anymore. It is a strong state and is able - with his army, people and resistance - to defeat.”
“Lebanon has become able to turn the table on anyone who attacks him. Lebanon has become able to turn the threats into real opportunities,” he noted, stressing that Resistance did not sleep one day.
In Martyr\\\\\\\'s Day, Hezbollah S.G. went on to call for adherence to the resistance, the army and the popular will for being the real element of force.
LOCALS AND SECURITY
The Lebanese government has so far proved to be the government of diversity, for it represents a popular majority, a cabinet of research, discussion and dialogue.
“Members of Lebanese cabinet discuss and make decisions. They neither wait for \\\\\\\"sms\\\\\\\", nor receive signals or suggestions from anyone. We call upon cabinet today to work, achieve, follow-up files and not to listen to all the noise, Sayyed Nasrallah said.
“The most important of the government\\\\\\\'s work is giving priority to livelihood issues.”
Addressing the Lebanese Army, his eminence called to neutralize the army as a guarantor of the sovereignty, national unity and security.
“All harsh experiences of Lebanon had proven that at the end of the day Lebanon was lost and divided, while this institution remained the salvation stage,” he added.
UNESCO SCANDAL
Sayyed Nasrallah said that the issue of STL fund should be discussed in the cabinet, calling to learn lessons from the UNESCO event.
“It is useful that Lebanese and the public recognize what happened in the issue of UNESCO, an international organization recognized the state of Palestine. The USA became angry and stopped funding the organization. Why Lebanon should be expected to contribute its share of the tribunal\\\\\\\'s funding given Washington\\\\\\\'s decision to cut off funds to the United Nations cultural agency UNESCO?\\\\\\\" his eminence asked.
IRAN AND SYRIA
Hezbollah Secretary General assured that betting on regional developments will eventually fail.
Touching the recent US and Zionist threats against Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that Iran will not be afraid of fleets and intimidation.
“Iran and Syria were the two countries that opposed the US occupation of Iraq and the killing of its people. Iran did neither weaken nor subjected to the American terms.
\\\\\\\"Whoever dares to launch war against Iran will be met with doubly that force,\\\\\\\" he warned. \\\\\\\"Iran is strong, solid and united; Iran is powerful and has a leader unique to the whole world.\\\\\\\"
He added that any military action against Iran or Syria would engulf the entire region.
“They want to drag Iran into negotiations, and to force Syria to accept what it rejected in the past,” he noted.
“American defeat in Iraq has strategic results at every level of our region. I call to shed light upon American withdrawal and defeat in Iraq. Ben Ali\\\\\\\'s and Gaddafi\\\\\\\'s regimes fall is a loss to the US project; fall of Mubarak\\\\\\\'s regime is a major loss for the US and Israel,” his eminence added addressing the US project defeat in the Middle East.
“We affirm that since the reign of martyr Ahmad Qasir to the day we entered the era of victories, where days of defeats had gone. Local, regional and international situations are today in the interests of peoples of the region, as well as the axis of defiance and resistance more than any time ever”.
“As long as we are the people of faith, determination and will in all next expectations, God willing we will win,” Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah concluded.
3:06
|
The Corporatization of Universities - English
What happened about 1980 was that states started to cut their funding of higher education, & so universities looked for other ways of making money, & so they concentrated on raising funds...
What happened about 1980 was that states started to cut their funding of higher education, & so universities looked for other ways of making money, & so they concentrated on raising funds & doing research, & especially research funded by corporations & the federal government. And so, basically now at a lot of universities, instruction only represents about ten percent of the budget, and so its a minor aspect of the universities. And most people dont know that, that universities, in some ways, are just kind of fronts for investment banks and investments...."
Bob Samuels, president of the University of California American Federation of Teachers, interviewed on Democracy Now, 20 Nov 2009
More...
Description:
What happened about 1980 was that states started to cut their funding of higher education, & so universities looked for other ways of making money, & so they concentrated on raising funds & doing research, & especially research funded by corporations & the federal government. And so, basically now at a lot of universities, instruction only represents about ten percent of the budget, and so its a minor aspect of the universities. And most people dont know that, that universities, in some ways, are just kind of fronts for investment banks and investments...."
Bob Samuels, president of the University of California American Federation of Teachers, interviewed on Democracy Now, 20 Nov 2009
2:44
|
[25 July 2012] New premier sparks mixed reactions in Egypt - English
[25 July 2012] New premier sparks mixed reactions in Egypt - English
The choice of Egypt's new premier has sparked mixed reactions in Egypt. Supporters of Hisham Qandil say he represents the...
[25 July 2012] New premier sparks mixed reactions in Egypt - English
The choice of Egypt's new premier has sparked mixed reactions in Egypt. Supporters of Hisham Qandil say he represents the youth revolution that toppled former dictator Hosni Mubarak.
More...
Description:
[25 July 2012] New premier sparks mixed reactions in Egypt - English
The choice of Egypt's new premier has sparked mixed reactions in Egypt. Supporters of Hisham Qandil say he represents the youth revolution that toppled former dictator Hosni Mubarak.
2:19
|
26:44
|
[22 May 13] Iran city and village council elections - English
In Iran, the spotlight is on the June 14 presidential election. The crucial vote will determine the path the country will be taking for the next four years.
This has to great extent undermined...
In Iran, the spotlight is on the June 14 presidential election. The crucial vote will determine the path the country will be taking for the next four years.
This has to great extent undermined the city and village council elections which are set to be held on the same day as the presidential election.
Since the victory of the Islamic revolution Iranians have gone to the polls three times to vote for the city and village councils. A fourth round was to be held in June 2010 but was postponed for three years according to a decision made by the parliament.
This year 352 thousand hopefuls have registered to compete for 207 thousand seats around the country. Unlike other elections held in Iran, the Guardian Council is not responsible for the vetting process. Instead a parliamentary committee has to decide which of the candidates are qualified to run.
Since the 1979 Islamic revolution, on average one election has been held each year but the fourth round of city and village council elections is different in many ways.
First and foremost it is going be the biggest election ever held in the history of Iran in terms of the number of candidates and the number of seats at stake.
According to law any village with a population of over 100 should have its own council tasked with paving the way for the social, economic, and cultural development of the community that it represents.
In this edition of the show we will be taking a closer look at the preparations made for this round of city and village council elections and the role these councils have played in the development of cities and villages and the services that they provide.
More...
Description:
In Iran, the spotlight is on the June 14 presidential election. The crucial vote will determine the path the country will be taking for the next four years.
This has to great extent undermined the city and village council elections which are set to be held on the same day as the presidential election.
Since the victory of the Islamic revolution Iranians have gone to the polls three times to vote for the city and village councils. A fourth round was to be held in June 2010 but was postponed for three years according to a decision made by the parliament.
This year 352 thousand hopefuls have registered to compete for 207 thousand seats around the country. Unlike other elections held in Iran, the Guardian Council is not responsible for the vetting process. Instead a parliamentary committee has to decide which of the candidates are qualified to run.
Since the 1979 Islamic revolution, on average one election has been held each year but the fourth round of city and village council elections is different in many ways.
First and foremost it is going be the biggest election ever held in the history of Iran in terms of the number of candidates and the number of seats at stake.
According to law any village with a population of over 100 should have its own council tasked with paving the way for the social, economic, and cultural development of the community that it represents.
In this edition of the show we will be taking a closer look at the preparations made for this round of city and village council elections and the role these councils have played in the development of cities and villages and the services that they provide.
33:34
|
[English Translation] Interview Bashar Al-Asad - President Syria on current situation - 30 May 2013
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
More...
Description:
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
34:40
|
[Arabic] لقاء خاص مع الرئيس بشار الأسد - Bashar Asad Interview - 30 May 2013
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
More...
Description:
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
2:35
|
[06 June 13] Syrian army recaptures city of Qusayr - English
The battle for Qusayr is over. The Syrian Army is now in full control of what the foreign-backed opposition called \"the backbone of the revolution\". Video footage from the previous...
The battle for Qusayr is over. The Syrian Army is now in full control of what the foreign-backed opposition called \"the backbone of the revolution\". Video footage from the previous night when the city was under the insurgents\' control reveals a lot about the nature of the battle that represents a turning point in the Syrian government\'s fight against the militants. After the sunset on June 4th, The Syrian army intensified attacks on insurgents\' strongholds from various directions. The army took new routes different from the ones used in previous days pressuring the militants and making them leave Qusayr\'s city center into the northern quarter. By then, it wasn\'t long before the militants made the conclusion that the battle is lost and started leaving the city.
Alaa Ebrahim, press TV, Qusayr
More...
Description:
The battle for Qusayr is over. The Syrian Army is now in full control of what the foreign-backed opposition called \"the backbone of the revolution\". Video footage from the previous night when the city was under the insurgents\' control reveals a lot about the nature of the battle that represents a turning point in the Syrian government\'s fight against the militants. After the sunset on June 4th, The Syrian army intensified attacks on insurgents\' strongholds from various directions. The army took new routes different from the ones used in previous days pressuring the militants and making them leave Qusayr\'s city center into the northern quarter. By then, it wasn\'t long before the militants made the conclusion that the battle is lost and started leaving the city.
Alaa Ebrahim, press TV, Qusayr
1:57
|
[15 June 13] Who is Dr Hassan Rohani? - English
Hassan Rohani\'s Biography
The newly-elected Iranian president was born into a religious family on November 13, 1948 in the city of Sorkheh in Semnan Province.
Rohani started his religious...
Hassan Rohani\'s Biography
The newly-elected Iranian president was born into a religious family on November 13, 1948 in the city of Sorkheh in Semnan Province.
Rohani started his religious education in 1960 at Semnan Seminary. One year later, he moved to the holy city of Qom. In 1969, he was admitted into Tehran University and received his BA in law after three years. Rohani earned his MA and PhD in law from Glasgow Caledonian University.
Rohani was involved in the struggle against the Pahlavi regime as a young man. After the late Imam Ruhollah Khomeini\'s return from exile in France in 1979, Rohani was politically active in Europe. He held question-and-answer sessions with students in Britain and France.
Rohani was elected to parliament following the establishment of the Islamic Republic and served as a lawmaker for five consecutive terms until 2000. He held positions such as deputy Majlis Speaker and head of the Defense and Foreign Policy committees.
During the 1980-1988 Iraqi imposed war, Rohani served as member of the High Council of Defense, commander of the Iran Air Defense and deputy commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces.
Rohani currently represents Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei in the Supreme National Security Council, and is member of the Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts. He is also President of the Expediency Council\'s Center for Strategic Research.
Rohani speaks fluent English, Arabic and Persian and has written nearly 100 books and articles as well as conducting 700 different research projects.
More...
Description:
Hassan Rohani\'s Biography
The newly-elected Iranian president was born into a religious family on November 13, 1948 in the city of Sorkheh in Semnan Province.
Rohani started his religious education in 1960 at Semnan Seminary. One year later, he moved to the holy city of Qom. In 1969, he was admitted into Tehran University and received his BA in law after three years. Rohani earned his MA and PhD in law from Glasgow Caledonian University.
Rohani was involved in the struggle against the Pahlavi regime as a young man. After the late Imam Ruhollah Khomeini\'s return from exile in France in 1979, Rohani was politically active in Europe. He held question-and-answer sessions with students in Britain and France.
Rohani was elected to parliament following the establishment of the Islamic Republic and served as a lawmaker for five consecutive terms until 2000. He held positions such as deputy Majlis Speaker and head of the Defense and Foreign Policy committees.
During the 1980-1988 Iraqi imposed war, Rohani served as member of the High Council of Defense, commander of the Iran Air Defense and deputy commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces.
Rohani currently represents Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei in the Supreme National Security Council, and is member of the Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts. He is also President of the Expediency Council\'s Center for Strategic Research.
Rohani speaks fluent English, Arabic and Persian and has written nearly 100 books and articles as well as conducting 700 different research projects.
1:02
|
[17 June 13] Tide of congratulations coming to Iran president-elect Rohani - English
A huge tide of congratulations from senior politicians and officials from different parts of the world are coming to the newly elected Iranian president Dr. Hassan Rohani.
Nearly 50.5 million...
A huge tide of congratulations from senior politicians and officials from different parts of the world are coming to the newly elected Iranian president Dr. Hassan Rohani.
Nearly 50.5 million Iranians, including more than 1.6 million first-time voters, were eligible to participate in the June 14 presidential election. The Interior Ministry put the voter turnout at 72.7 percent.
Rohani won 50.7 percent of the vote to secure an outright victory.
Rohani currently represents Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Khamenei in the Supreme National Security Council, and is a member of the Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts. He is also director of the Expediency Council\'s Center for Strategic Research.
More...
Description:
A huge tide of congratulations from senior politicians and officials from different parts of the world are coming to the newly elected Iranian president Dr. Hassan Rohani.
Nearly 50.5 million Iranians, including more than 1.6 million first-time voters, were eligible to participate in the June 14 presidential election. The Interior Ministry put the voter turnout at 72.7 percent.
Rohani won 50.7 percent of the vote to secure an outright victory.
Rohani currently represents Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Khamenei in the Supreme National Security Council, and is a member of the Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts. He is also director of the Expediency Council\'s Center for Strategic Research.
2:00
|
[19 July 13] Houthis rally in Yemen to demand justice - English
Houthis in Yemen have once again taken to the streets of the capital, Sana\'a, to demand justice for those members of their community who were killed by regime forces last month, Press TV reports....
Houthis in Yemen have once again taken to the streets of the capital, Sana\'a, to demand justice for those members of their community who were killed by regime forces last month, Press TV reports.
Chanting anti-government slogans, the demonstrators called on Friday for the downfall of the regime and an end to US intervention in their country.
They said the interference of Washington in domestic issues of Yemen has robbed the nation of its sovereignty and a government that represents the people\'s demands.
More...
Description:
Houthis in Yemen have once again taken to the streets of the capital, Sana\'a, to demand justice for those members of their community who were killed by regime forces last month, Press TV reports.
Chanting anti-government slogans, the demonstrators called on Friday for the downfall of the regime and an end to US intervention in their country.
They said the interference of Washington in domestic issues of Yemen has robbed the nation of its sovereignty and a government that represents the people\'s demands.
24:22
|
Toronto Holds Massive Al-Quds Rally, Video- 03Aug2013 - All Languages
Like their counterparts in 770 cities in 80 countries of the world, thousands of Torontonians took to the streets on the International Day of Al-Quds to denounce Zionism and express their complete...
Like their counterparts in 770 cities in 80 countries of the world, thousands of Torontonians took to the streets on the International Day of Al-Quds to denounce Zionism and express their complete solidarity with the brutally oppressed, indigenous population of Palestine. The rally in Toronto was led by Jewish rabbis, activists from Independent Jewish Voices and other Jews who want to reclaim the hijacked faith of Judaism from the Zionist extremists. The rally also featured representatives from 150 peace organizations, labor movements, churches, mosques and human rights groups.
The attendees, which comprised of men women and children of all ages and faiths, carried signs like \\\\\\\"We Love Jews, Not Zionists\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\"Yes to Islam, Christianity and Judaism, No to Zionism\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\"Yes to Torah, Bible and Quran, no to Zionism\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\"Yes to Moses, Jesus and Mohammad, No to Zionism\\\\\\\" and \\\\\\\"Criticism of Israel is Not Anti-Semitism\\\\\\\".
Various organizations representing the interests of Israel and settlers in Canada had lobbied hard to stop the rally and tried to intimidate people from attending it, however, their efforts failed miserably and the Toronto city witnessed one of the largest and most organized Al-Quds rallies ever held in the western hemisphere. Some extremists from the radical Zionist organization, JDL, and their Islamophobic hatemongering friends from the Sun News Network tried to harass the attendees but were not successful. The JDL has been designated the terrorist status by the FBI and represents the true face of Zionism and the settler mentality of arrogance, racism and bullying. An anchor of Sun News Network has advocated dropping a nuclear bomb on the civilian population of a Muslim country and their so-called journalists are always shamelessly trying to propagate the Zionist narrative about the indigenous Christians and Muslims of Palestine. However, initiatives like the Al-Quds day have taken the mask off the ugly face of Zionism and today Israel is more isolated in the world than ever before. At the recent UN vote, 174 nations voted against the Israeli position (http://muslimperspectives.com/?p=823, http://muslimperspectives.com/?p=685)
The Al-Quds rally organizers, speakers and participants vowed not to get intimidated by Zionist extremists and refused to allow them to turn Canada into one of the Israeli settlements. The Al-Quds rallies in Toronto and the world will continue to grow in future and peace and justice loving individuals will continue to give voice to the voiceless. The future of Israel will not be, and cannot be different from other oppressive regimes in history; whether it is the regime of the Pharaoh or Apartheid, those who commit heinous crimes against the innocent are bound to be defeated. It is high time that the larger Jewish community distances itself from this racist ideology and reclaim the beautiful faith of Judaism from these extremists.
More...
Description:
Like their counterparts in 770 cities in 80 countries of the world, thousands of Torontonians took to the streets on the International Day of Al-Quds to denounce Zionism and express their complete solidarity with the brutally oppressed, indigenous population of Palestine. The rally in Toronto was led by Jewish rabbis, activists from Independent Jewish Voices and other Jews who want to reclaim the hijacked faith of Judaism from the Zionist extremists. The rally also featured representatives from 150 peace organizations, labor movements, churches, mosques and human rights groups.
The attendees, which comprised of men women and children of all ages and faiths, carried signs like \\\\\\\"We Love Jews, Not Zionists\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\"Yes to Islam, Christianity and Judaism, No to Zionism\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\"Yes to Torah, Bible and Quran, no to Zionism\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\"Yes to Moses, Jesus and Mohammad, No to Zionism\\\\\\\" and \\\\\\\"Criticism of Israel is Not Anti-Semitism\\\\\\\".
Various organizations representing the interests of Israel and settlers in Canada had lobbied hard to stop the rally and tried to intimidate people from attending it, however, their efforts failed miserably and the Toronto city witnessed one of the largest and most organized Al-Quds rallies ever held in the western hemisphere. Some extremists from the radical Zionist organization, JDL, and their Islamophobic hatemongering friends from the Sun News Network tried to harass the attendees but were not successful. The JDL has been designated the terrorist status by the FBI and represents the true face of Zionism and the settler mentality of arrogance, racism and bullying. An anchor of Sun News Network has advocated dropping a nuclear bomb on the civilian population of a Muslim country and their so-called journalists are always shamelessly trying to propagate the Zionist narrative about the indigenous Christians and Muslims of Palestine. However, initiatives like the Al-Quds day have taken the mask off the ugly face of Zionism and today Israel is more isolated in the world than ever before. At the recent UN vote, 174 nations voted against the Israeli position (http://muslimperspectives.com/?p=823, http://muslimperspectives.com/?p=685)
The Al-Quds rally organizers, speakers and participants vowed not to get intimidated by Zionist extremists and refused to allow them to turn Canada into one of the Israeli settlements. The Al-Quds rallies in Toronto and the world will continue to grow in future and peace and justice loving individuals will continue to give voice to the voiceless. The future of Israel will not be, and cannot be different from other oppressive regimes in history; whether it is the regime of the Pharaoh or Apartheid, those who commit heinous crimes against the innocent are bound to be defeated. It is high time that the larger Jewish community distances itself from this racist ideology and reclaim the beautiful faith of Judaism from these extremists.