Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumDavid__77
(23,369 posts)The whole thing, however, does demonstrate something very striking. That is, if you take this Syrian acceptance of this Russian proposal and you add to it al-Assad's interview [with Charlie Rose] that we have seen clips of, what I'm struck by is quite different from Saddam Hussein or many Arab leaders. Al-Assad is not engaging in a lot of bravado or kind of crazy talk if you think of Gadhafi's interview on the eve of that campaign. Al-Assad has been very cool, very calculating, very clever in what arguments he uses.
In the interview, he talked about how there wasn't public support for this. He reminded people of the Colin Powell speech at the United Nations. He talked about the fact that the rebels are linked to al Qaeda. This was not a kind of bizarre rant about American imperialism and Israel. It was clearly designed to weaken the American public's support. And so, you add to it this acceptance of a proposal, and it all strikes me as suggesting that the Syrians are playing a very clever game of counter offensive.
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/09/zakaria-syrians-seem-to-be-playing-clever-game/
I think that Assad is definitely like most Arab leaders in that regard.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... decent and rational men in the interviews I've seen. And Assad in particular does not strike me as someone engaged in deception. Conversely, I couldn't help noticing how Charlie Rose pretended, not once but twice, not to hear Assad's reminder of Colon Powell's BS WMD presentation at the UN. This was a very valid point for Assad to raise and leaving it unaddressed smacked of hubris and arrogance on Rose's part.
David__77
(23,369 posts)When Rose said the congressmen had "seen evidence," Assad could easily have pointed out that a number of members of congress stated that they have not seen a "shred" of evidence, and asked for it, and were not given it.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... the perfect time to point that out, not the Rose would have acknowledged hearing it.
David__77
(23,369 posts)I think it would be smart for him to avoid mentioning specific arguments with the US congress. Doing so could be turned into a pro-war talking point. It's just a point that he would have had to imply without saying.
MADem
(135,425 posts)person in the presence of someone under eighteen.
Assad is so "rational" that he has, and uses, chemical weapons against his enemies. He is the privileged child of a brutal dictator who looks like a pussycat compared to his kids.
I mean, really. Is this DU or the 700 Club forum?
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... I'm sure you'll turn the DU tide your way on Syria -- if you could just post off topic with no credible supporting links a little more often I'm sure DUers will come around.
Oh, and btw, don't forget to vote:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023625539
MADem
(135,425 posts)Can't imagine why you think it's so damn funny, with the icon, and the snark.
I am not interested in turning the "DU tide on Syria."
I'm also not interested in cheerleading for a KGB asshole who likes to persecute people for being gay.
If that's your thing, Skippy, knock yourself out.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... you'd come back empty handed, off topic, and once again with no credible supporting links, but I had no idea you were gonna start calling me Skippy.
And I have to admit that's pretty darned persuasive -- I might just change my vote to a YES on Syria yet.
As fruitful and enlightening as these exchanges with you always are MADem, I think I'll leave you the last word now. You have a nice evening, and thanks for the kicks.
Your pal,
Skippy
MADem
(135,425 posts)That's why Pootie is being so helpful.
Chew on that....Skippy.
David__77
(23,369 posts)They most assured would, given the opportunity. As a gay man, part of why I feel so strongly about opposing the terrorists in Syria is because of this. Not that the government is pro-gay in any way, but they largely ignore gay city dwellers.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Not liking Pootie and his shit 'tude doesn't mean that one "loves" the rebels.
Learn what a damn Yemen scenario is--that's what the US and the Arab League have wanted for Syria for the last several years. It doesn't entail regime change--it just entails "Assad" change.
That is probably not going to happen if Pootie can persuade Assad to give up his CW. At least not in the short term....the can will be kicked down the road for some other poor bastard to have to deal with it. All that will happen is that the inevitable will be forestalled for the time being.
If you think being "ignored" as a city dweller is a safe way to live, I just don't know what to say to you. I think that's INTOLERABLE. And what about the country dwellers? Get thee to a city?
I think anyone who opposes equality, or tolerates discrimination or hate crimes, is an asshole.
Pootie, IMO, is an ASSHOLE.
David__77
(23,369 posts)I said it was marginally better. Enemies should be dispensed with one by one, and that requires making all sorts of tactically alliances. One doesn't eat a meal all at one - it's bite by bite. That's my view. Perhaps it can be criticized as "binary."
MADem
(135,425 posts)Except that, no matter what we do, they aren't gonna stop until they get rid of al-Assad. That's why the Arab League and USA and others supported a Yemen scenario for Syria. Leave the regime but dump the despot. Leave the bureaucracy but dump the objectionable leader--then negotiate some sort of peaceful accommodations with the disparate groups; maybe a little power sharing, elections, whatever.
It's either do it that way, or do it via a bloody slog with a lot of death.
The problem with Syria is that their are assholes on every side. al-Assad is a murdering nut-job, some of the rebels are crazy religious killer loons, and there isn't any army of angels in the mix. It's a mess. al-Assad is not "the good guy," and neither are his opponents. And the only reason Pootie gives a shit is because al-Assad has paid him back the billions he owes him by handing over one of his best ports, and now al-Assad can keep Pootie's "MIC" going by buying more weapons from the Pootster. Hey, Russia has their arms manufacturers, too, after all...
It's not about picking off enemies or eating a meal. It's about trying to find a solution for Syria, one that doesn't include more deployment of CW, and it's not like USA and Arab League haven't been trying for YEARS to do just that. Now, though, everyone is having a fine old time finger wagging most didactically, when they don't appreciate how hard this has been to try to get a handle on it.
DhhD
(4,695 posts)There was a split in the Shiite and Sunni Syrian factions in the Syrian Spring with one branch going to Turkey and Jordan the other seeking shelter with the influx of Al-Qaeda and Al-Nursa terrorists coming into Syria. Iranian Shiite helped the northern Iraqi Kurds during the 1988-89 Iranian-Iraqi War. Sunni, Saddam Hussein had the northen Kurds gassed in 1988.
Catherina
(35,568 posts)Much appreciated to hear his own words instead of some misleading quotes floating around.
Strong, rational answers and kudos for bringing up the criminal lies we used to commit war crimes against Iraq.
Charlie Rose is such a tool. I can't wait for him to be retired by the independent media.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)I thought Assad's answers squared well with the UN report too.
The WH is afraid of the scrutiny that their "evidence" will draw from all corners -- that's why they're being so sketchy and vague with details. They know their BS can't stand up to scrutiny.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)He speaks well and is mild mannered and remains calm. I find what he has to say convincing, rational and sensible.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)If terrorists in Syria have chemical weapons (which have been used against civilians and soldiers, as Assad admits) why wouldn't that be part of the response after the United States strikes Syria?
I find Charlie Rose's brave prodding a bit deflating and the usual bimbo of CBS nothing more the the news bobbles we can depend on.
Believe it or not, Al Jazeera and CNN had much better coverage of this news, but Rose got "the interview". Too bad he didn't do a more cerebral job with it.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... to bait Assad into making some bellicose parting threat, it simply didn't work. So what do they do?
Well that's easy -- just pretend it did work and describe his parting remarks as "chilling."
Traditional media is quite unhappy with having to compete with the Internet where people can go and actually find out, and then help spread, something much closer to the truth than MSM is ever permitted to get.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)and wanted to watch this.
I think Charlie has lost some of his interviewing skills over the decades.
I would have loved to have seen Rachel or Chris Hayes do it but no matter.
If CNN or ABC we would have gotten
some old hack too.
Interesting interview none the less
and should be viewed
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... and thank you for setting an excellent example of how people can begin to recapture some of their battered grey matter back by simply NOT having a TV.
I agree that people should see, or at least read transcripts of, this interview.
Catherina
(35,568 posts)Following is the full text of the interview:
Charlie Rose: Mr. President thank you very much for this opportunity to talk to you at a very important moment because the President of the United States will address the nation this week and, as you know an important conversation is taking place in Washington and important things are happening here in your country. Do you expect an airstrike?
President al-Assad: As long as the United States doesnt obey the international law and trample over the Charter of the United Nations we have to worry that any administration not only this one would do anything. According to the lies that weve been hearing for the last two weeks from high-ranking officials in the US administration we have to expect the worst.
Charlie Rose: Are you prepared?
President al-Assad: Weve been living in difficult circumstances for the last two years and a half, and we prepare ourselves for every possibility. But that doesnt mean if youre prepared things will be better; its going to get worse with any foolish strike or stupid war.
Charlie Rose: What do you mean worse?
President al-Assad: Worse because of the repercussions because nobody can tell you the repercussions of the first strike. Were talking about one region, bigger regions, not only about Syria. This interlinked region, this intermingled, interlocked, whatever you want to call it; if you strike somewhere, you have to expect the repercussions somewhere else in different forms in ways you dont expect.
Charlie Rose: Are you suggesting that if in fact there is a strike; there will be repercussions against the United States from your friends in other countries like Iran or Hezbollah or others?
President al-Assad: As I said, this may take different forms: direct and indirect. Direct when people want to retaliate, or governments. Indirect when youre going to have instability and the spread of terrorism all over the region that will influence the west directly.
Charlie Rose: Have you had conversations with Russia, with Iran or with Hezbollah about how to retaliate?
President al-Assad: We dont discuss this issue as a government, but we discuss the repercussions, which is more important because sometimes repercussions could be more destroying than the strike itself. Any American strike will not destroy as much as the terrorists have already destroyed in Syria; sometimes the repercussions could be many doubles the strike itself.
Charlie Rose: But some have suggested that it might tip the balance in the favor of the rebels and lead to the overthrow of your government.
Any strike will be as direct support to Al-Qaeda
President al-Assad: Exactly. Any strike will be as direct support to Al-Qaeda offshoot thats called Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Youre right about this. Its going to be direct support.
Charlie Rose: This is about chemical warfare. Lets talk about that. Do you approve of the use of chemical warfare, the use of deadly chemicals? Do you think that it is an appropriate tool of war, to use chemicals?
President al-Assad: We are against any WMD, any weapons of mass destruction, whether chemical or nuclear.
Charlie Rose: So youre against the use of chemical warfare?
20130910-065004.jpg
President al-Assad: Yes, not only me. As a state, as a government, in 2001 we proposed to the United Nations to empty or to get rid of every WMD in the Middle East, and the United States stood against that proposal. This is our conviction and policy.
Charlie Rose: But youre not a signatory to the chemical warfare agreement.
President al-Assad: Not yet.
Charlie Rose: Why not?
President al-Assad: Because Israel has WMD, and it has to sign, and Israel is occupying our land, so thats we talked about the Middle East, not Syria, not Israel; it should be comprehensive.
Charlie Rose: Do you consider chemical warfare equivalent to nuclear warfare?
President al-Assad: I dont know. We havent tried either.
Charlie Rose: But you know, youre a head of state, and you understand the consequences of weapons that dont discriminate.
President al-Assad: Technically, theyre not the same. But morally, its the same.
Charlie Rose: Morally, they are the same.
President al-Assad: They are the same, but at the end, killing is killing. Massacring is massacring. Sometimes you may kill tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands with very primitive armaments.
Charlie Rose: Then why do you have such a stockpile of chemical weapons?
President al-Assad: We dont discuss this issue in public because we never said that we have it, and we never said that we dont have it. Its a Syrian issue; its a military issue we never discuss in public with anyone.
Charlie Rose: This is from the New York Times this morning: Syrias leaders amassed one of the worlds largest stockpiles of chemical weapons with help from the Soviet Union and Iran as well as Western European suppliers, and even a handful of American companies. According to American diplomatic cables and declassified intelligence records, you have amassed one of the largest supplies of chemical weapons in the world.
President al-Assad: To have or not to have is a possibility, but to depend on what media says is nonsense, or to depend on some of the reports of the intelligence is nonsense and that was proven when they invaded Iraq ten years ago and they said Iraq has stockpiles of WMD and it was proven after the invasion that this was false; it was fraud. So, we cant depend on what one magazine wrote. But at the end, I said its something not to be discussed with anyone.
Charlie Rose: You accept that the world believes that you have a stockpile of chemical weapons?
President al-Assad: Who?
Charlie Rose: The world. The United States and other powers who also said that you have chemical weapons.
President al-Assad: It isnt about what they believe in, its about the reality that we have, and this reality, we own it, we dont have to discuss it.
Charlie Rose: Speaking of reality, what was the reality on August 21st? What happened in your judgment?
President al-Assad: Were not in the area where the alleged chemical attack happened. I said alleged. Were not sure that anything happened.
Charlie Rose: Even at this date, youre not sure that chemical weapons even though you have seen the video tape, even though youve seen the bodies, even though your own officials have been there.
President al-Assad: I havent finished. Our soldiers in another area were attacked chemically. Our soldiers - they went to the hospital as casualties because of chemical weapons, but in the area where they said the government used chemical weapons, we only had video and we only have pictures and allegations. Were not there; our forces, our police, our institutions dont exist there. How can you talk about what happened if you dont have evidence? Were not like the American administration, were not social media administration or government. We are a government that deals with reality. When we have evidence, well announce it.
Charlie Rose: Well, as you know, Secretary Kerry has said there is evidence and that they saw rockets that fired from a region controlled by your forces into a region controlled by the rebels. They have evidence from satellite photographs of that. They have evidence of a message that was intercepted about chemical weapons, and soon thereafter there were other intercepted messages, so Secretary Kerry has presented what he views as conclusive evidence.
Kerry reminds about the big lie that Collin Powell said in front of the world on satellites about the WMD in Iraq
President al-Assad: No, he presented his confidence and his convictions. Its not about confidence, its about evidence. The Russians have completely opposite evidence that the missiles were thrown from an area where the rebels control. This reminds me - what Kerry said - about the big lie that Collin Powell said in front of the world on satellites about the WMD in Iraq before going to war. He said this is our evidence. Actually, he gave false evidence. In this case, Kerry didnt even present any evidence. He talked we have evidence and he didnt present anything. Not yet, nothing so far; not a single shred of evidence.
Charlie Rose: Do you have some remorse for those bodies, those people, it is said to be up to at least a thousand or perhaps 1400, who were in Eastern Ghouta, who died?
President al-Assad: We feel pain for every Syrian victim.
Charlie Rose: What about the victims of this assault from chemical warfare?
President al-Assad: Dead is dead, killing is killing, crime is crime. When you feel pain, you feel pain about their family, about the loss that you have in your country, whether one person was killed or a hundred or a thousand. Its a loss, its a crime, its a moral issue. We have family that we sit with, family that loved their dear ones. Its not about how they are killed, it's about that they are dead now; this is the bad thing.
Charlie Rose: But has there been any remorse or sadness on behalf of the Syrian people for what happened?
President al-Assad: I think sadness prevails in Syria now. We dont feel anything else but sadness because we have this killing every day, whether with chemical or any other kind. Its not about how. We feel with it every day.
Charlie Rose: But this was indiscriminate, and children were killed, and people who said goodbye to their children in the morning didnt see them and will never see them again, in Ghouta.
President al-Assad: That is the case every day in Syria, thats why you have to stop the killing. Thats why we have to stop the killing. But what do you mean by indiscriminate that you are talking about?
Charlie Rose: Well, the fact that chemical warfare is indiscriminate in who it kills, innocents as well as combatants.
20130910-065057.jpg
President al-Assad: Yeah, but youre not talking about evidence, youre not talking about facts, we are talking about allegations. So, were not sure that if theres chemical weapon used and who used it. We cant talk about virtual things, we have to talk about facts.
Charlie Rose: It is said that your government delayed the United Nations observers from getting to Ghouta and that you denied and delayed the Red Cross then the Red Crescent from getting there to make observations and to help.
President al-Assad: The opposite happened, your government delayed because we asked for a delegation in March 2013 when the first attack happened in Aleppo in the north of Syria; they delayed it till just a few days before al-Ghouta when they sent those team, and the team itself said in its report that he did everything as he wanted. There was not a single obstacle.
Charlie Rose: But they said they were delayed in getting there, that they wanted to be there earlier.
President al-Assad: No, no, no; there was a conflict, there was fighting, they were shooting. Thats it. We didnt prevent them from going anywhere. We asked them to come; why to delay them? Even if you want to take the American story, they say we used chemical weapons the same day the team or the investigation team came to Syria; is it logical? Its not logical. Even if a country or army wanted to use such weapon, they should have waited a few days till the investigation finished its work. Its not logical, the whole story doesnt even hold together.
Charlie Rose: Well come back to it. If your government did not do it, despite the evidence, who did it?
President al-Assad: We have to be there to get the evidence like what happened in Aleppo when we had evidence. And because the United States didnt send the team, we sent the evidence to the Russians.
Charlie Rose: But dont you want to know the answer, if you dont accept the evidence so far, as to who did this?
President al-Assad: The question is who threw chemicals on the same day on our soldiers. Thats the same question. Technically, not the soldiers. Soldiers dont throw missiles on themselves. So, either the rebels, the terrorists, or a third party. We dont have any clue yet. We have to be there to collect the evidences then we can give answer.
Charlie Rose: Well, the argument is made that the rebels dont have their capability of using chemical weapons, they do not have the rockets and they do not have the supply of chemical weapons that you have, so therefore they could not have done it.
President al-Assad: First of all, they have rockets, and theyve been throwing rockets on Damascus for months.
Charlie Rose: That carry chemical weapons?
President al-Assad: Rockets in general. They have the means - first. Second, the sarin gas that theyve been talking about for the last weeks is a very primitive gas. You can have it done in the backyard of a house; its a very primitive gas. So, its not something complicated.
Charlie Rose: But this was not primitive. This was a terrible use of chemical weapons.
President al-Assad: Third, they used it in Aleppo in the north of Syria. Fourth, theres a video on YouTube where the terrorists clearly make trials on a rabbit and kill the rabbit and said this is how were going to kill the Syrian people. Fifth, theres a new video about one of those women who they consider as rebel or fighter who worked with those terrorists and she said they didnt tell us how to use the chemical weapons and one of those weapons exploded in one of the tunnels and killed twelve. Thats what she said. Those are the evidence that we have. Anyway, the party who accused is the one who has to bring evidences. The United States accused Syria, and because you accused you have to bring evidence, this first of all. We have to find evidences when we are there.
Charlie Rose: What evidence would be sufficient for you?
President al-Assad: For example, in Aleppo we had the missile itself, and the material, and the sample from the sand, from the soil, and samples from the blood.
Charlie Rose: But the argument is made that your forces bombarded Ghouta soon thereafter with the intent of covering up evidence.
President al-Assad: How could bombardment cover the evidence? Technically, it doesnt work. How? This is stupid to be frank, this is very stupid.
Charlie Rose: But you acknowledge the bombardment?
President al-Assad: Of course, there was a fight. That happens every day; now you can have it. But, lets talk
we have indications, let me just finish this point, because how can use WMD while your troops are only 100 meters away from it? Is it logical? It doesnt happen. It cannot be used like this. Anyone whos not military knows this fact. Why do you use chemical weapons while youre advancing? Last year was much more difficult than this year, and we didnt use it.
Charlie Rose: There is this question too; if it was not you, does that mean that you dont have control of your own chemical weapons and that perhaps they have fallen into the hands of other people who might want to use them?
President al-Assad: That implies that we have chemical weapons, first. That implies that its being used, second. So we cannot answer this question until we answer the first part and the second part. Third, lets presume that a country or army has this weapon; this kind of armaments cannot be used by infantry for example or by anyone. This kind of armament should be used by specialized units, so it cannot be in the hand of anyone.
Charlie Rose: Well, exactly, thats the point.
President al-Assad: Which is controlled centrally.
Charlie Rose: Ah, so you are saying that if in fact, your government did it, you would know about it and you would have approved it.
President al-Assad: Im talking about a general case.
Charlie Rose: In general, you say if in fact it happened, I would have known about it and approved it. Thats the nature of centralized power.
President al-Assad: Generally, in every country, yes. Im talking about the general rules, because I cannot discuss this point with you in detail unless Im telling you what we have and what we dont have, something Im not going to discuss as I said at the very beginning, because this is a military issue that could not be discussed.
Charlie Rose: Do you question the New York Times article I read to you, saying you had a stockpile of chemical weapons? Youre not denying that.
President al-Assad: No, we dont say yes, we dont say no, because as long as this is classified, it shouldnt be discussed.
Charlie Rose: The United States is prepared to launch a strike against your country because they believe chemical weapons are so abhorrent, that anybody who uses them crosses a red line, and that therefore, if they do that, they have to be taught a lesson so that they will not do it again.
President al-Assad: What red line? Who drew it?
Charlie Rose: The President says that its not just him, that the world has drawn it in their revulsion against the use of chemical weapons, that the world has drawn this red line.
We have our red lines: our sovereignty, our independence
President al-Assad: Not the world, because Obama drew that line, and Obama can draw lines for himself and his country, not for other countries. We have our red lines, like our sovereignty, our independence, while if you want to talk about world red lines, the United States used depleted uranium in Iraq, Israel used white phosphorus in Gaza, and nobody said anything. What about the red lines? We dont see red lines. Its political red lines.
Charlie Rose: The President is prepared to strike, and perhaps hell get the authorization of Congress or not. The question then is would you give up chemical weapons if it would prevent the President from authorizing a strike? Is that a deal you would accept?
President al-Assad: Again, you always imply that we have chemical weapons.
Charlie Rose: I have to, because that is the assumption of the President. That is his assumption, and he is the one that will order the strike.
President al-Assad: Its his problem if he has an assumption, but for us in Syria, we have principles. Wed do anything to prevent the region from another crazy war. Its not only Syria because it will start in Syria.
Charlie Rose: Youd do anything to prevent the region from having another crazy war?
President al-Assad: The region, yes.
Charlie Rose: You realize the consequences for you if there is a strike?
President al-Assad: Its not about me. Its about the region.
Charlie Rose: Its about your country, its about your people.
President al-Assad: Of course, my country and me, we are part of this region, were not separated. We cannot discuss it as Syria or as me; it should be as part, as a whole, as comprehensive. Thats how we have to look at it.
Charlie Rose: Some ask why would you do it? Its a stupid thing to do if youre going to bring a strike down on your head by using chemical weapons. Others say youd do it because A: youre desperate, or the alternative, you do it because you want other people to fear you, because these are such fearful weapons that if the world knows you have them, and specifically your opponents in Syria, the rebels, then you have gotten away with it and they will live in fear, and that therefore, the President has to do something.
President al-Assad: You cannot be desperate when the army is making advances. That should have happened if we take into consideration that this presumption is correct and this is reality you use it when youre in a desperate situation. So, our position is much better than before. So, this is not correct.
Charlie Rose: You think youre winning the war.
President al-Assad: Winning is a subjective word, but we are making advancement. This is the correct word, because winning for some people is when you finish completely.
Charlie Rose: Then the argument is made that if youre winning, it is because of the recent help you have got from Iran and from Hezbollah and additional supplies that have come to your side. People from outside Syria supporting you in the effort against the rebels.
President al-Assad: Iran doesnt have any soldier in Syria, so how could Iran help me?
Charlie Rose: Supplies, weaponry?
President al-Assad: Thats all before the crisis. We always have this kind of cooperation.
Charlie Rose: Hezbollah, Hezbollah fighters have been here.
President al-Assad: Hezbollah fighters are on the borders with Lebanon where the terrorists attacked them. On the borders with Lebanon, this is where Hezbollah retaliated, and this is where we have cooperation, and thats good.
Charlie Rose: Hezbollah forces are in Syria today?
President al-Assad: On the border area with Lebanon where they want to protect themselves and cooperate with us, but they dont exist all over Syria. They cannot exist all over Syria anyway, for many reasons, but they exist on the borders.
Charlie Rose: What advice are you getting from the Russians?
President al-Assad: About?
Charlie Rose: About this war, about how to end this war.
Every friend of Syria is looking for peaceful solution
President al-Assad: Every friend of Syria is looking for peaceful solution, and we are convinced about that. We have this advice, and without this advice we are convinced about it.
Charlie Rose: Do you have a plan to end the war?
President al-Assad: Of course.
Charlie Rose: Which is?
President al-Assad: At the very beginning, it was fully political. When you have these terrorists, the first part of the same plan which is political should start with stopping the smuggling of terrorists coming from abroad, stopping the logistic support, the money, all kinds of support coming to these terrorists. This is the first part. Second, we can have national dialogue where different Syrian parties sit and discuss the future of Syria. Third, you can have interim government or transitional government. Then you have final elections, parliamentary elections, and youre going to have presidential elections.
Charlie Rose: But the question is: would you meet with rebels today to discuss a negotiated settlement?
President al-Assad: In the initiative that we issued at the beginning of this year we said every party with no exceptions as long as they give up their armaments.
Charlie Rose: But youll meet with the rebels and anybody whos fighting against you if they give up their weapons?
President al-Assad: We dont have a problem.
Charlie Rose: Then they will say you are not giving up your weapons, why should we give up our weapons?
President al-Assad: Does a government give up its weapons? Have you heard about that before?
Charlie Rose: No, but rebels dont normally give up their weapons either during the negotiations; they do that after a successful
President al-Assad: The armament of the government is legal armament. Any other armament is not legal. So how can you compare? Its completely different.
Charlie Rose: Theres an intense discussion going on about all the things were talking about in Washington, where if theres a strike, it will emanate from the United States decision to do this. What do you want to say, in this very important week, in America, and in Washington, to the American people, the members of Congress, to the President of the United States?
President al-Assad: I think the most important part of this now is, lets say the American people, but the polls show that the majority now dont want a war, anywhere, not only against Syria, but the Congress is going to vote about this in a few days, and I think the Congress is elected by people, it represents the people, and works for their interest. The first question that they should ask themselves: what do wars give America, since Vietnam till now? Nothing. No political gain, no economic gain, no good reputation. The United States credibility is at an all-time low. So, this war is against the interest of the Untied States. Why? First, this war is going to support Al-Qaeda and the same people that killed Americans in the 11th of September. The second thing that we want to tell Congress, that they should ask and that what we expect them to ask this administration about the evidence that they have regarding the chemical story and allegations that they presented.
I wouldnt tell the President or any other official, because we are disappointed by their behavior recently, because we expected this administration to be different from Bushs administration. They are adopting the same doctrine with different accessories. Thats it. So if we want to expect something from this administration, it is not to be weak, to be strong to say that we dont have evidence, that we have to obey the international law, that we have to go back to the Security Council and the United Nations.
Charlie Rose: The question remains; what can you say to the President who believes chemical weapons were used by your government; that this will not happen again.
President al-Assad: I will tell him very simply: present what you have as evidence to the public, be transparent.
Charlie Rose: And if he does? If he presents that evidence?
President al-Assad: This is where we can discuss the evidence, but he doesnt have it. He didnt present it because he doesnt have it, Kerry doesnt have it. No one in your administration has it. If they had it, they would have presented it to you as media from the first day.
Charlie Rose: They have presented it to the Congress.
President al-Assad: Nothing. Nothing was presented.
20130910-065134.jpg
Charlie Rose: Theyve shown the Congress what they have, and the evidence they have, from satellite intercepted messages and the like.
President al-Assad: Nothing has been presented so far.
Charlie Rose: They have presented it to the Congress, sir.
President al-Assad: You are a reporter. Get this evidence and show it to the public in your country.
Charlie Rose: Theyre presenting it to the public representative. You dont show your evidence and what youre doing and your plans to people within your own council. Theyre showing it to the peoples representative who have to vote on an authorization to strike, and if they dont find the evidence sufficient
President al-Assad: First of all, we have the precedent of Collin Powell ten years ago, when he showed the evidence, it was false, and it was forged. This is first. Second, you want me to believe American evidence and dont want me to believe the indications that we have. We live here, this is our reality.
Charlie Rose: Your indications are what?
President al-Assad: That the rebels or the terrorists used the chemical weapons in northern Aleppo five months ago.
Charlie Rose: And on August 21st?
President al-Assad: No, no, no. That was before. On the 21st, again they used it against our soldiers in our area where we control it, and our soldiers went to the hospital, you can see them if you want.
Charlie Rose: But Ghouta is not controlled by your forces, its controlled by the rebel forces. The area where that attack took place is controlled by rebel forces.
President al-Assad: What if they have stockpiles and they exploded because of the bombardment? What if they used the missile by mistake and attacked themselves by mistake?
Charlie Rose: Let me move to the question of whether a strike happens, and I touched on this before. You have had fair warning. Have you prepared by moving possible targets, are you moving targets within civilian populations, all the things that you might have done if you have time to do that and you have had clear warning that this might be coming?
President al-Assad: Syria is in a state of war since its land was occupied for more than four decades, and the nature of the frontier in Syria implies that most of the army is in inhabited areas, most of the centers are in inhabited areas. You hardly find any military base in distant areas from the cities unless its an airport or something like this, but most of the military bases or centers within inhabited areas.
Charlie Rose: Will there be attacks against American bases in the Middle East if theres an airstrike?
President al-Assad: You should expect everything. Not necessarily through the government, the governments are not the only player in this region. You have different parties, different factions, you have different ideologies; you have everything in this region now. So, you have to expect that.
Charlie Rose: Tell me what you mean by expect everything.
President al-Assad: Expect every action.
Charlie Rose: Including chemical warfare?
President al-Assad: That depends. If the rebels or the terrorists in this region or any other group have it, this could happen, I dont know. Im not a fortuneteller to tell you whats going to happen.
Charlie Rose: But wed like to know more, I think the President would like to know, the American people would like to know. If there is an attack, what might be the repercussions and who might be engaged in those repercussions?
President al-Assad: Okay, before the 11th of September, in my discussions with many officials of the United States, some of them are Congressmen, I used to say that dont deal with terrorists as playing games. Its a different story. Youre going to pay the price if youre not wise in dealing with terrorists. We said youre going to be repercussions of the mistaken way of dealing with it, of treating the terrorism, but nobody expected 11th of September. So, you cannot expect. It is difficult for anyone to tell you what is going to happen. Its an area where everything is on the brink of explosion. You have to expect everything.
Charlie Rose: Lets talk about the war today. A hundred thousand people dead. A million refugees. A country being destroyed. Do you take some responsibility for that?
President al-Assad: That depends on the decision that I took. From the first day I took the decision as President to defend my country. So, who killed? Thats another question. Actually, the terrorists have been killing our people since the beginning of this crisis two years and a half ago, and the Syrian people wanted the government and the state institutions and the army and the police to defend them, and thats what happened. So were talking about the responsibility, my responsibility according to the Syrian constitution that said we have to defend ourselves.
Charlie Rose: Mr. President, you constantly say its terrorists. Most people look at the rebels and they say that Al-Qaeda and other forces from outside Syria are no more than 15 or 20 percent of the forces on the ground. The other 80% are Syrians, are defectors from your government, and defectors from your military. They are people who are Syrians who believe that their country should not be run by a dictator, should not be run by one family, and that they want a different government in their country. Thats 80% of the people fighting against you, not terrorists.
President al-Assad: We didnt say that 80%, for example, or the majority or the vast majority, are foreigners. We said the vast majority are Al-Qaeda or Al-Qaeda offshoot organizations in this region. When you talk about Al-Qaeda it doesnt matter if hes Syrian or American or from Europe or from Asia or Africa. Al-Qaeda has one ideology and they go back to the same leadership in Afghanistan or in Syria or in Iraq. Thats the question. You have tens of thousands of foreigners, thats definitely correct. We are fighting them on the ground and we know this.
Charlie Rose: But thats 15 or 20% of this. Thats a realistic look at how many.
President al-Assad: Nobody knows because when they are dead and they are killed, they dont have any ID. You look at their faces, they look foreigners, but where are they coming from? How precise this estimate is difficult to tell, but definitely the majority are Al-Qaeda. This is what concerns us, not the nationality. If you have Syrian Al-Qaeda, or Pakistani Al-Qaeda or Saudi Al-Qaeda, whats the difference? What does it matter? The most important thing is that the majority are Al-Qaeda. We never said that the majority are not Syrians, but we said that the minority is what they call free Syrian army. Thats what we said.
Charlie Rose: Do you believe this is becoming a religious war?
President al-Assad: It started partly as a sectarian war in some areas, but now its not, because when you talk about sectarian war or religious war, you should have a very clear line between the sects and religions in Syria according to the geography and the demography in Syria, something we dont have. So, its not religious war, but Al-Qaeda always use religions, Islam - actually, as a pretext and as a cover and as a mantle for their war and for their terrorism and for their killing and beheading and so on.
Charlie Rose: Why has this war lasted two and a half years?
President al-Assad: Because of the external interference, because there is an external agenda supported by, or lets say led by the United States, the West, the petrodollar countries, mainly Saudi Arabia, and before was Qatar, and Turkey. Thats why it lasted two years and a half.
Charlie Rose: But what are they doing, those countries you cited?
The West wanted to undermine the Syrian positions
President al-Assad: They have different agendas. For the West, they wanted to undermine the Syrian positions. For the petrodollar countries like Saudi Arabia, theyre thinking undermining Syria will undermine Iran on sectarian basis. For Turkey, they think that if the Muslim Brotherhood take over the rest of the region, they will be very comfortable, they will be very happy, they will make sure that their political future is guaranteed. So they have different agendas and different goals.
Charlie Rose: But at the same time, as I said, you used Hezbollah and got support from Iran, from Russia. So, what is happening here. Is this a kind of war that exists because of support from outside Syria on both sides?
President al-Assad: This is cooperation, I dont know what you mean by support. We have cooperation with countries for decades. Why talk about this cooperation now?
Charlie Rose: Then you tell me, what are you receiving from Iran?
President al-Assad: Political support. We have agreements with many countries including Iran, including Russia, including other countries that are about different things including armament. Its cooperation like any cooperation between any two countries, which is normal. Its not related to the crisis. You dont call it support, because you pay money for what you get. So, you dont call it support, its cooperation, call it whatever you want, but the word support is not precise. From Russia for example, we have political support, which is different from the cooperation. We have cooperation for 60 years now, but now we have political support.
Charlie Rose: Well, the Russians said they have ongoing support for you, but beyond just political cooperation. I mean they have treaties that existed with Syria.
President al-Assad: Exactly.
Charlie Rose: And they provide all kinds of defensive weapons.
President al-Assad: You said treaties, and a Russian official said; we have not agreement
contracts, that we have to fulfill, and those contracts are like any country; you buy armaments, you buy anything you want.
Charlie Rose: But do you believe this has become a conflict of Sunni vs. Shiaa?
President al-Assad: No, not yet. This is in the mind of the Saudis, and this is in the minds of the Wahabists.
Charlie Rose: And in the minds of the Iranians?
President al-Assad: No, no, actually what they are doing is the opposite. They tried to open channels with the Saudi, with many other Islamic entities in the region in order to talk about Islamic society, not Sunni and Shiite societies.
Charlie Rose: Was there a moment for you, when you saw the Arab spring approaching Syria, that you said Ive seen what happened in Libya, Ive seen what happened in Tunisia, Ive seen what happened in Egypt, its not gonna happen to Bashar al-al-Assad. I will fight anybody that tries to overthrow my regime with everything I have.
President al-Assad: No, for one reason; because the first question that I ask: do I have public support or not. That is the first question that I asked as President. If I dont have the public support, whether theres the so-called Arab spring its not spring, anyway but whether we have this or we dont, if you dont have public support, you have to quit, you have to leave. If you have public support, in any circumstances you have to stay. Thats your mission, you have to help the people, you have to serve the people.
Charlie Rose: When you say public support people point to Syria and say a minority sect, Alawites, control a majority Sunni population, and they say dictatorship and they do it because it because of the force of their own instruments of power. Thats what you have, not public support, for this war against other Syrians.
President al-Assad: Now, its been two years and a half, ok? Two years and a half and Syria is still withstanding against the United States, the West, Saudi Arabia, the richest countries in this area, including Turkey, and, taking into consideration what your question implies, that even the big part or the bigger part of the Syrian population is against me, how can I withstand till today? Am I the superhuman or Superman, which is not the case!
Charlie Rose: Or you have a powerful army.
President al-Assad: The army is made of the people; it cannot be made of robots. Its made of people.
Charlie Rose: Surely youre not suggesting that this army is not at your will and the will of your family.
President al-Assad: What do you mean by will of the family?
Charlie Rose: The will of your family. Your brother is in the military. The military has been
every observer of Syria believes that this is a country controlled by your family and controlled by the Alawites who are your allies. Thats the control.
President al-Assad: If that situation was correct - what youre mentioning - we wouldnt have withstood for two years and a half. We would have disintegration of the army, disintegration of the whole institution in the state; we would have disintegration of Syria if that was the case. It cant be tolerated in Syria. Im talking about the normal reaction of the people. If its not a national army, it cannot have the support, and if it doesnt have the public support of every sect, it cannot do its job and advance recently. It cannot. The army of the family doesnt make national war.
Charlie Rose: Some will argue that you didnt have this support because in fact the rebels were winning before you got the support of Hezbollah and an enlarged support from the Iranians, that you were losing and then they came in and gave you support so that you were able to at least start winning and produce at least a stalemate.
President al-Assad: No, the context is wrong, because talking about winning and losing is like if youre talking about two armies fighting on two territories, which is not the case. Those are gangs, coming from abroad, infiltrate inhabited areas, kill the people, take their houses, and shoot at the army. The army cannot do the same, and the army doesnt exist everywhere.
Charlie Rose: But they control a large part of your country.
President al-Assad: No, they went to every part theres no army in it, and the army went to clean and get rid of them. They dont go to attack the army in an area where the army occupied that area and took it from it. Its completely different, its not correct, or its not precise what youre talking about. So, its completely different. What the army is doing is cleaning those areas, and the indication that the army is strong is that its making advancement in that area. It never went to one area and couldnt enter to it - thats an indication. How could that army do that if its a family army or a sect army? What about the rest of the country who support the government? Its not realistic, it doesnt happen. Otherwise, the whole country will collapse.
Charlie Rose: One small point about American involvement here, the Presidents gotten significant criticism because he has not supported the rebels more. As you know, there was an argument within his own counsels from Secretary of State Clinton, from CIA Director David Petraeus, from the Defense Department, Leon Penetta, Secretary of Defense, and others, that they should have helped the rebels two years ago, and we would be in a very different place, so the President has not given enough support to the rebels in the view of many people, and theres criticism that when he made a recent decision to give support, it has not gotten to the rebels, because they worry about the composition.
President al-Assad: If the American administration want to support Al-Qaeda - go ahead. Thats what we have to tell them, go ahead and support Al-Qaeda, but dont talk about rebels and free Syrian army. The majority of fighters now are Al-Qaeda. If you want to support them, you are supporting Al-Qaeda, you are creating havoc in the region, and if this region is not stable, the whole world cannot be stable.
Charlie Rose: With respect, sir, most people dont believe the majority of forces are Al-Qaeda. Yes, there is a number of people who are Al-Qaeda affiliates and who are here who subscribe to the principles of Al-Qaeda, but thats not the majority of the forces as you know. You know that the composition differs within the regions of Syria as to the forces that are fighting against your regime.
The American officials should learn to deal with reality
President al-Assad: The American officials should learn to deal with reality. Why did the United States fail in most of its wars? Because it always based its wars on the wrong information. So, whether they believe or not, this is not reality. I have to be very clear and very honest. Im not asking them to believe if they dont want to believe. This is reality, Im telling you the reality from our country. We live here, we know what is happening, and they have to listen to people here. They cannot listen only to their media or to their research centers. They dont live here; no one lives here but us. So, this is reality. If they want to believe, thats good, that will help them understand the region and be more successful in their policies.
Charlie Rose: Many people think this is not a sustainable position here; that this war cannot continue, because the cost for Syria is too high. Too many deaths - a hundred thousand and counting, too many refugees, too much destruction; the soul of a country at risk. If it was for the good of the country, would you step down?
President al-Assad: That depends on the relation of me staying in this position and the conflict. We cannot discuss it just to say you have to step down. Step down, why, and what is the expected result? This is first. Second, when youre in the middle of a storm, leaving your country just because you have to leave without any reasonable reason, it means youre quitting your country and this is treason.
Charlie Rose: You say it would be treason for you to step down right now because of your obligation to the country?
President al-Assad: Unless the public wants you to quit.
Charlie Rose: And how will you determine that?
President al-Assad: By the two years and a half withstanding. Without the public support, we cannot withstand two years and a half. Look at the other countries, look what happened in Libya, in Tunisia and in Egypt.
Charlie Rose: You worry about that, what happened to Gaddafi?
President al-Assad: No, we are worried that rebels are taking control in many countries, and look at the results now. Are you satisfied as an American? What are the results? Nothing. Very bad - nothing good.
Charlie Rose: There was a report recently that you had talked about, or someone representing you had talked about some kind of deal in which you and your family would leave the country if you were guaranteed safe passage, if you were guaranteed that there would be no criminal prosecution. Youre aware of these reports?
President al-Assad: We had this guarantee from the first day of the crisis.
Charlie Rose: Because of the way you acted?
President al-Assad: No, because of the agenda that I talked about. Some of these agendas wanted me to quit, very simply, so they said we have all the guarantees if you want to leave, and all the money and everything you want. Of course, you just ignore that.
Charlie Rose: So, youve been offered that opportunity?
President al-Assad: Yeah, but its not about me, again, this fight is not my fight, its not the fight of the government; its the fight of the country, of the Syrian people. Thats how we look at it. Its not about me.
Charlie Rose: Its not about you?
President al-Assad: Its about every Syrian.
Charlie Rose: How will this war end? I referred to this question earlier. Whats the endgame?
President al-Assad: Its very simple; once the Western countries stop supporting those terrorists and making pressure on their puppet countries and client states like Saudi Arabia and Turkey and others, youll have no problem in Syria. It will be solved easily, because those fighters, the Syrian part that youre talking about, lost its natural incubators in the Syrian society - they dont have incubators anymore; thats why they have incubators abroad. They need money from abroad, they need moral support and political support from abroad. They dont have any grassroots, any incubator. So, when you stop the smuggling, we dont have problems.
Charlie Rose: Yeah, but at the same time, as Ive said before, you have support from abroad. There are those who say you will not be able to survive without the support of Russia and Iran. Your government would not be able to survive.
President al-Assad: No, its not me, I dont have support. Not me; all Syria. Every agreement is between every class and every sector in Syria; government, people, trade, military, culture, everything; its like the cooperation between your country and any other country in the world. Its the same cooperation. Its not about me; its not support for the crisis.
Charlie Rose: I mean about your government. You say that the rebels only survive because they have support from Saudi Arabia and Turkey and the United States, and Qatar perhaps, and Im saying you only survive because you have the support of Russia and Iran and Hezbollah.
External support can never substitute internal support
President al-Assad: No, the external support can never substitute internal support, it can never, for sure. And the example that we have to look at very well is Egypt and Tunisia; they have all the support from the West and from the Gulf and from most of the countries of the world. When they dont have support within their country, they couldnt continue more than how many weeks? - three weeks. So, the only reason we stand here for two years and a half is because we have internal support, public support. So, any external support, if you want to call it support, lets use this world, is
how to say
its going to be additional, but its not the base to depend on more than the Syrian support.
Charlie Rose: You and I talked about this before; we remember Hama and your father, Hafez al-Assad. He
ruthlessly
set out to eliminate the Muslim Brotherhood. Are you simply being your fathers son here?
President al-Assad: I dont know what you mean by ruthlessly, Ive never heard of soft war. Have you heard about soft war? Theres no soft war. War is war. Any war is ruthless. When you fight terrorists, you fight them like any other war.
Charlie Rose: So, the lessons you have here are the lessons you learned from your father and what he did in Hama, which, it is said, influenced you greatly in terms of your understanding of what you have to do.
President al-Assad: The question: what would you do as an American if the terrorists are invading your country from different areas and started killing tens of thousands of Americans?
Charlie Rose: You refer to them as terrorists, but in fact it is a popular revolution, people believe, against you, that was part of the Arab spring that influenced some of the other countries.
President al-Assad: Revolution should be Syrian, cannot be revolution imported from abroad.
Charlie Rose: It didnt start from abroad; it started here.
President al-Assad: These people that started here, they support the government now against those rebels, thats what you dont know. What you dont know as an American you dont know as a reporter. Thats why talking about what happened at the very beginning is completely different from what is happening now - its not the same. Theres very high dynamic, things are changing on daily basis. Its a completely different image. Those people who wanted revolution, they are cooperating with us.
Charlie Rose: Im asking you again, is it in fact youre being your fathers son and you believe that the only way to drive out people is to eliminate them the same way your father did?
President al-Assad: In being independent? Yes. In fighting terrorists? Yes. In defending the Syrian people and the country? Yes.
Charlie Rose: When I first interviewed you, there was talk of Bashar al-al-Assad
hes the hope, hes the reform. Thats not what theyre saying anymore.
President al-Assad: Who?
Charlie Rose: People who write about you, people who talk about you, people who analyze Syria and your regime.
President al-Assad: Exactly, the hope for an American is different from the hope of a Syrian. For me, I should be the hope of the Syrian, not any other one, not American, neither French, nor anyone in the world. Im President to help the Syrian people. So, this question should start from the hope of the Syrian people, and if there is any change regarding that hope, we should ask the Syrian people, not anyone else in the world.
Charlie Rose: But now they say their words a butcher. Comparisons to the worst dictators that ever walked on the face of the Earth, comparing you to them. Using weapons that go beyond warfare. Everything they could say bad about a dictator, theyre now saying about you.
President al-Assad: First of all, when you have a doctor who cut the leg to prevent the patient from the gangrene if you have to, we dont call butcher; you call him a doctor, and thank you for saving the lives. When you have terrorism, you have a war. When you have a war, you always have innocent lives that could be the victim of any war, so, we dont have to discuss what the image in the west before discussing the image in Syria. Thats the question.
Charlie Rose: Its not just the West. I mean its the East, and the Middle East, and, I mean, you know, the eyes of the world have been on Syria. We have seen atrocities on both sides, but on your side as well. They have seen brutality by a dictator that they say put you in a category with the worst.
President al-Assad: So we have to allow the terrorists to come and kill the Syrians and destroy the country much, much more. This is where you can be a good President? Thats what you imply.
Charlie Rose: But you cant allow the idea that theres opposition to your government from within Syria. That is not possible for you to imagine.
President al-Assad: To have opposition? We have it, and you can go and meet with them. We have some of them within the government, we have some of them outside the government. They are opposition. We have it.
Charlie Rose: But those are the people who have been fighting against you.
President al-Assad: Opposition is different from terrorism. Opposition is a political movement. Opposition doesnt mean to take arms and kill people and destroy everything. Do you call the people in Los Angeles in the nineties - do you call them rebels or opposition? What did the British call the rebels less than two years ago in London? Did they call them opposition or rebels? Why should we call them opposition? They are rebels. They are not rebels even, they are beheading. This opposition, opposing country or government, by beheading? By barbecuing heads? By eating the hearts of your victim? Is that opposition? What do you call the people who attacked the two towers on the 11th of September? Opposition? Even if theyre not Americans, I know this, but some of them I think have nationality - I think one of them has American nationality. Do you call him opposition or terrorist? Why should you use a term in the United States and England and maybe other countries and use another term in Syria? This is a double standard that we dont accept.
Charlie Rose: I once asked you what you fear the most and you said the end of Syria as a secular state. Is that end already here?
President al-Assad: According to what weve been seeing recently in the area where the terrorists control, where they ban people from going to schools, ban young men from shaving their beards, and women have to be covered from head to toe, and lets say in brief they live the Taliban style in Afghanistan, completely the same style. With the time, yes we can be worried, because the secular state should reflect secular society, and this secular society, with the time, if you dont get rid of those terrorists and these extremists and the Wahabi style, of course it will influence at least the new and the coming generations. So, we dont say that we dont have it, were still secular in Syria, but with the time, this secularism will be eroded.
Charlie Rose: Mr. President, thank you for allowing us to have this conversation about Syria and the war that is within as well as the future of the country. Thank you.
President al-Assad: Thank you for coming to Syria.