Russians in Syria are ‘legitimate targets’ - key opposition group member

Russians are legitimate targets for military attacks in Syria, a member of the Syria’s National Opposition Coalition said. The Coalition is recognized by the US and a number of its allies as the only legitimate representative of the Syrian people.

­"Russia, like Iran, supports the Assad regime with weapons and ammunition, as well as in the political arena, so the citizens of these countries are legitimate targets for militants in Syria," Haitham al-Maleh, a member of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces told SW.

He claimed that the Geneva Convention allows attacks on civilians cooperating with enemy armed forces. However, he called on militants not to kidnap citizens of countries that “do not support the Assad regime.”

Three people were kidnapped in the coastal city of Latakia on Monday: An Italian engineer and two Russian citizens, all employees of the Syrian-owned Hmisho steel plant. The Russian Foreign Ministry has identified the two kidnapped Russian nationals as V. V. Gorelov and Abdessattar Hassoun – the latter has dual Syrian-Russian citizenship.

The kidnappers demanded a ransom payment as a condition of the workers’ release, the Russian Foreign Ministry said. Russian diplomats are reportedly taking measures to clarify the circumstances of the abduction, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said.

“We are now actively engaged and all the necessary steps are being taken in Syria, and in other countries that may have an impact on the situation,” Lavrov said on Tuesday.

Earlier, a group of gunmen who kidnapped Ukrainian journalist Ankhar Kochneva near the city of Homs in early October said they would target all Russians, Ukrainians and Iranians in Syrian territory. The kidnappers threatened to kill Kochneva if a $50 million ransom was not paid.

Syria has witnessed similar attacks before. The Free Syrian Army (FSA) kidnapped 48 Iranians in early August under the pretext that they were members of the elite Iranian Revolutionary Guards. The Iranian government denied the accusation, saying they were pilgrims on their way to visit a shrine in southeast Damascus. Tehran appealed to Qatar and Turkey to help free the hostages.  

The FSA brigade known as ‘Bar’a’ released a video in which it threatened to execute the hostages if the Assad government does not free rebel prisoners. The Free Syrian Army has previously taken hostages, but this was the first occasion where they threatened to execute their prisoners if their demands were not met.

Another group of hostages from Lebanon have been in captivity since May 2012. The kidnappers put forward a ransom demand, claiming that the hostages are members of the Lebanese political party Hezbolla. Family members of those kidnapped said they were pilgrims returning to Beirut from the city of Mashhad, Iran.

The newly established National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces was founded in Qatar in November. The US – in line with allies like Britain, France and several Arab states – recognized the National Coalition as Syria’s legitimate government, in opposition to the Assad regime.

The conflict in Syria began with protests, and escalated into large-scale fighting between the government and the armed opposition, which has continued for more than 21 months.

Parts for Patriot missile batteries arrive in Turkey

Parts for the Patriot surface-to-air missile batteries Istanbul requested from NATO have started to arrive in Turkey. They were accompanied by 39 German technicians, who will maintain the system

­“Some parts have started coming as of this morning,” the Bloomberg quotes the Turkish Ambassador to the US Namik Tan.

However, he could not confirm which pieces have been received or when the batteries would become operational.

Diplomat Namik Tan also restated Turkey’s official position that the Patriot batteries would only be used for self-defence and with NATO oversight.

"These will be used in a situation where Turkey is attacked," the diplomat was quoted by the US News & World Report.

Tan did not mention if the batteries would fire across the Syrian border.

The diplomat added that the Turkey is currently consulting with NATO allies about where the missile installations should be located.

German advanced military personnel have also arrived in Turkey to help set up the batteries. Colonel Manfred Stange reported Tuesday that 39 staff members were heading to the south-eastern city of Kahramanmaras, about 120 kilometers (75 miles) from the Syrian border.

The full Patriot missile complex is to be installed at the beginning of 2013. The batteries will be brought to Turkey from Germany by sea.

Germany’s Bundestag gave its approval to the deployment on December 14, but it remains unknown when all 400 soldiers, involved in maintaining the Patriot system will arrive. The mission is time-limited to January 2014.

The US military will also be involved, on Friday Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta signed an order to deploy two Patriot air-defense missile batteries to Turkey along with 400 troops.

"We will start to move personnel and equipment soon. We're anticipating the US systems and personnel being in place by mid-January, if all goes as planned," a  Defense Department spokesperson explained to News and World Report.

At the beginning of December, NATO foreign ministers agreed to the deployment of six Patriot missile batteries from Germany, Netherlands and the US on the Turkish-Syrian border.

This was in response to a request for assistance from Ankara, which fears more violence could spread across the border from its war-torn neighbour, including possible use of chemical weapons.

Turkey to Iran: Stop criticizing Patriot, put pressure on the Syrian regime

The deployment of Patriot missiles has heightened tensions between Turkey and Iran, which has been supportive of the Syrian regime since the beginning of the civil unrest.

The Islamic republic lashed out at Ankara arguing the move would only further aggravate the Syrian conflict.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu replied to Tehran Tuesday that “instead of criticizing the (Patriot) system’, it should “send a clear message” to Syria’s regime.

“Iran should say ‘stop’ to the Syrian regime that has been continuously oppressing its own people and provoking Turkey through border violations,” AFP cited the official.

Over the weekend Iran’s President Ahmadinejad cancelled his visit to Turkey’s Anatolian province in protest at the NATO reinforcement of the Turkish-Syrian border.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, who was in Moscow on Tuesday discuss the Syrian conflict, reiterated his country’s support for Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Amir-Abdollahian said he did not believe Assad and his government were about to fall.

The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that the Syrian issue can be resolved by political means, he said.

Iran sees the solution in a transitional government that must be formed with the inclusion of Bashar al-Assad as the legitimate President of Syria.

Russian Nationalists attack plans to build more mosques in Moscow

 

Muslims pray at the Moscow Congregational Mosque in central Moscow on the Feast of the Sacrifice.

Moscow city authorities are about to announce the allocation of plots of land for three new mosques in the city, but ethnic Russian nationalists have voiced their protests saying that no one asked local residents before passing this decision.

"

We need to ask local residents. We should follow the European practice of taking local opinion into account in everything.

” Aleksander Belov of the Russkiye movement told the press. In his opinion such practice would ensure that everything goes in a peaceful and calm manner.

Belov’s statement came as a comment to a newspaper article that stated that Moscow city authorities will soon allocate land for the new mosques. The Izvestia daily referred to a representative of a public movement called Spiritual Directorate of Muslims of European Russia who said that the exact sites are already fixed and thanked the city for paying attention to his co-believers.

In the same article the newspaper quoted top city officials who doubted the efficiency of the step. Mayor Sergey Sobyanin said that the city needs no new mosques, adding that the majority of those who attend Muslim sites are unregistered labor migrants and once they are dealt with the need for new sites would disappear. The Speaker of the Moscow City Legislature Vladimir Platonov noted hat apart from discussing new places of worship with religious representatives, those responsible must poll local residents and base the decisions on the local mood.

Interestingly, after news agencies spread the report, the city authorities refuted it. The head of the city department for investment in construction wrote a letter saying that the land plots for new mosques have not yet been negotiated. The official added that the mayor’s office has a special working group determining the need for various religions in the city’s many districts, but this group has not yet taken any decisions whatsoever regarding mosques.

According to the latest poll, the proportion of Muslims among Russians has reached seven percent this year compared to just four percent in 2009. The share of Russian Orthodox Christians is now 74 percent compared to 80 percent in 2009.

Moscow fires warning shot across bow of US naval-based ABM

The guided missile cruiser USS Lake Champlain

A top Russian official says a US missile defense system near Russia’s border is strategically destabilizing and may prompt an arms race.

Speaking to SW on the threat of mobile naval-based elements of the US missile defense system  “suddenly appearing” on Russia’s coastline, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said such an event would trigger “the harshest reaction from Russia."

"We must consider the effective protection of our strategic nuclear forces," Rogozin said in an interview with the magazine Voyenny Parade (‘Military Parade’).

Rogozin, while not elaborating on what Russia’s response would be, noted that Russia is taking definite steps to counter American ships “equipped with the Aegis integrated naval weapons system.”

Russia has warned its US and NATO partners on numerous occasions that unless the two sides can reach an acceptable agreement over NATO plans to unilaterally build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, another arms race is inevitable.

Ironically, it was US President Barack Obama – the same American leader who pushed for a “reset” with Moscow – who introduced the current missile defense plans that may include stationing Aegis missiles aboard US warships in the Black Sea.

Washington says the missile defense system, which is capable of intercepting short- to intermediate-range ballistic missiles, is vital for protecting Eastern Europe from “rogue states,” like Iran and North Korea. At the same time, however, the western military alliance ignores Moscow’s concern the strategic balance may be upset. In fact, NATO even refuses to provide Moscow with written, legal guarantees that the system will not in the future target Russian territory.

Judging by Rogozin’s strong words, it seems that another arms race has already begun.

"U.S. missile defense in its current form is obviously destabilizing and prompting an arms race between Russia and the U.S. and NATO," Rogozin noted.

Russia is considering ways of “suppressing and penetrating” the missile defense system in ways that will guarantee “unacceptable damage to any aggressor, and force it to resist the temptation to test Russia's strength,” the Deputy Prime Minister added.

Rogozin, who served in a previous capacity as Russia’s NATO envoy, explained his use of blunt language.

"We must be frank about this. I was the Russian envoy to NATO for four years and I know what language they understand best of all," he said.

US seeks ‘world supremacy’ through advanced weapons - Security Chief

 A RIM-7P NATO Sea Sparrow Missile being launched from the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) during a stream raid shoot exercise.

The Secretary of the Security Council of Russia has provided his views on a number of national security issues, including the importance of preserving Russia’s nuclear arsenal against potential adversaries.

­Nikolay Patrushev, commenting on how atomic weapons play more of a political role than a military one, said the consequences of even a “limited nuclear intervention” are so catastrophic that it makes the usage of such weapons absolutely impossible. 

Nuclear arsenals therefore continue to serve as an effective deterrent against any possible large-scale war, Patrushev told Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper in an interview.

Patrushev spoke candidly on the nature and source of threats to Russian security, and what those challenges mean for the country.

“We…understand that the atomic weapons of leading western counties are aimed mainly against Russia,” he said. “In these conditions – and given the insufficient strength of Russia’s conventional armed forces – the preservation of the nuclear potential is a priority task.”

While ruling out the possibility of total nuclear disarmament, Patrushev nevertheless explained that a new generation of weapon systems – including anti-ballistic missiles – is changing the nuclear calculus.

Earlier, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin spoke on the threat mobile, naval-based elements of the US missile defense system “suddenly appearing” on Russia’s coastline. Such an event would trigger “the harshest reaction from Russia," he warned.

Rogozin said that Russia is now taking definite steps to counter US warships “equipped with the Aegis integrated naval weapons system.”

Moscow has frequently warned of “another arms race” unless a bilateral agreement is reached on NATO’s plans for missile defense near the Russian border.

Patrushev continued that theme in his interview, underlining the technological advances that have changed the face of war.

Not long ago, any state that possessed nuclear weapons was undoubtedly a “dominating force” in the international arena, he noted. However, in a clear reference to US plans for a naval-based missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, Patrushev mentioned that a new generation of weapons is being developed, and that “the United States has proven successful in this field of research.”

Patrushev explained that Russia, which has seen success in developing state-of-the-art technology, had not given enough attention to that field of research. As new weaponry appears, the US appears to be reconsidering the role of strategic nuclear arms in the fulfillment of a “geopolitical idea of world supremacy,” the security official added.

US Navy pulls two aircraft carriers from Syria shores

Two aircraft carriers stationed off the Syrian coast were sent back to the US this week in a move that the Obama administration thought would ease tensions, but angered Turkish officials who hoped for significant US military presence in the region. 

The USS Eisenhower aircraft carrier and the USS Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group and its 2,500 marines were recalled after being stationed on the Syrian coast, allegedly in preparation of potential military invasion. 

The USS Eisenhower, which has the capacity to hold thousands of men, joined the other warship during the first week of December, ready to launch an American-led military intervention “within days” if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad were to use chemical weapons against the opposition, Time reported. But as the violence escalated in the past few days, the warships took off and headed back to the US.

The US usually has two aircraft carriers stationed in the Persian Gulf at all times, but will only have one deployed this month –  the USS John C. Stennis, which is stationed nowhere near Syria. By recalling the USS Eisenhower and the USS Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group, the US simply outraged its key ally in the region – Turkey. 

An unnamed senior Turkish officer told Israel's DEBKAfile that America’s removal of the aircraft carriers is “hard to understand and unacceptable to Ankara.” Turkey became one of the main opponents of the Assad regime on the international stage and fears that the Syrian missiles with chemical weapons might be used against it. Syria never recognized that it has a chemical stockpile. Nevertheless Syrian officials repeatedly said that their country would never use such weapons "even if they had them." 

None of Syria’s neighbors, which include Turkey, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel, have officially criticized the Obama administration for its recall of its naval forces, but unnamed officials told DEBKAfile that Turkish officials are very upset about the move. 

According to the Israeli news outlet, Washington hoped to “to appease the Turks” by sending to the region US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to sign a deployment order for the Patriot Air and Missile Defense System, which would be stationed at the Syrian border. While Panetta visited Turkey on Friday, the defense secretary allegedly visited an air base where US strike aircraft are stationed alongside Turkish warplanes. 

But the US attempt to ease tensions and calm Turkey had little effect: Turkish officials remain outraged at the US abandonment at a time when violence with its neighbor has escalated and relations with Iran and Syria are at its worst. 

Meanwhile  the deployment of the Patriot missile interceptors has escalated tensions between Turkey and Iran. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad canceled a trip to Turkey for an annual ceremony this week, claiming the missile interceptors might lead to a “world war.”

Libya declares emergency law in southern regions

Black smoke billows as fighting takes place in the southern oasis city of Kufra, located in a triangle where the borders of Egypt, Chad and Sudan meet, on June 12, 2012, as members of Libya's Toubou minority and government forces clash’

Libya has temporarily shut down its borders with its southern neighbors and declared emergency law in seven southern regions citing mounting unrest there. This comes as Tripoli struggles to bring the entire country under its full control.

"The provinces of Ghadames, Ghat, Obari, Al-Shati, Sebha, Murzuq and Kufra are considered as closed military zones to be ruled under emergency law," the country’s National Assembly said in a decree released by the official LANA news agency. The assembly ordered to temporally close borders with Chad, Niger, Sudan and Algeria.

"Upsurge in violence and drug trafficking, and the presence of armed groups that act with complete impunity," was cited as the reason for the move by Assembly member Suad Ganurt, AFP reports.

She also said there was an "increase in the flow of illegal immigrants in the expectation of eventual international military action in Mali" against Al Qaeda-linked rebels, who have seized much of the north of the country.

The emergency law gives the defense ministry powers to appoint a military governor authorized to arrest criminals and detain and deport illegal immigrants in the affected areas.

The instability in the south comes as the central authorities in Tripoli still struggle to bring the whole country under complete control, following the ousting of Gaddafi’s regime last year. With a conventional national army still lacking in Libya, many of its provinces effectively rule themselves.

Tripoli also struggles with a separatist movement in the oil-rich east of the country. Earlier this month over a thousand demonstrators rallied for autonomy in the cradle of the last year’s uprising, Benghazi.

Global powers will keep pouring oil on the fire in Syria - Hezbollah

Ammar Al-Mussawi, the head of Hezbollah's International Relations

There is no compromise on Syria alone – the entire Middle East is at stake and all the world powers have their interests there, Hezbollah’s Ammar Al-Mussawi told SW.

Ammar Al-Mussawi, the head of Hezbollah's International Relations shared his views on the grounds for the Syrian conflict and the possible ways to settle it in an interview with RT’s Nadezhda Kevorkova. Hezbollah believes the Syrian crisis is not a revolution but a case of international intervention and a way to punish Syria for its support of the Palestinians. Its leadership says the conflict has a political solution only, even while all its players want a bitter military escalation.

Q: What is your assessment of the current situation in Syria?

AM: What we are seeing is the escalation of foreign involvement and it’s hard to accept that it’s all being done to protect human rights and democracy. What they have in store for Syria could cause chaos across the Middle East. Different forces have drawn radicals and extremists into the fight, they have been supporting and exploiting them. They assure their nations that they are fighting against terrorists while here they are working hand in hand with terrorists.

Q: What do you make of Russia’s stance on this difficult issue?

AM: We believe that Russia has taken a responsible stance and is acting in line with international law. There’ve been attempts to distort Russia’s position and make it look like it is pursuing its own selfish ends in Syria. We’ve been watching the developments in Syria for two years now and what we see is that Russia has stayed true to the key principles it announced. The main one is non-interference.

If those who promote the right to interfere get the upper hand, then they would be able to destroy any country and inflict pain on any nation. Russia was initially concerned with the escalation of violence. Now we see what this violence has led to. So Russia was right.

Q: What is your forecast for the conflict in Syria?

AM: The regime is still strong, but destructive consequences of the crisis have been felt throughout the country. We fear that violence can spill over beyond Syria. The longer the crisis, the more chaos we see, the more factors there are that make these clashes look legitimate. The conflict in Syria has gone beyond a simple domestic political dispute. You have the same tension in Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey, Jordan. The Gulf countries will not remain safe havens in case this conflict will spill over. As we see it, the West wants to keep the situation in Lebanon stable so far to keep the spotlight on Syria. But sooner or later, violence may sweep across Lebanon.

Already today there are a total of 100,000 Syrian refugees in Lebabon and hundreds of rebels fighting for the Free Syrian Army. Some of them are armed, and the latest events in Tripoli prove my point. The Lebanese are divided over what’s happening in Syria. Some, like us, think it’s a conspiracy by the West that wants to intervene. Others believe it’s a revolution and their duty is to support it.

Q: Do you think there is a potential solution?

AM: We agree that the crisis cannot be resolved through force. A political solution is the only way forward. The communique adopted in Geneva was expected to become the platform for a transition period when such a solution could be found, no conditions are mentioned there. But the West said that Assad must go before it will be implemented. So at the moment we do not see any serious opportunities for a political solution.

It was possible to turn the tide before the conference of the so-called Friends of Syria. Now they have a chance to achieve what they want through the use of force. Those who reject talks have only one goal in mind – they want the conflict that has brought death and destruction to continue. Those who have accused the regime of killing Syrians seem to forget that they are supporting rebel fighters and are only adding fuel to fire. That’s why we believe they want to destroy the Syrian society and rip the country apart. After that they will define new goals for new proxy players.

Q: Why has Syria been chosen as a target?

For many decades, Syria has been the only country in the region has played a positive role in the Palestinian issue. That’s why the West wants to remove Syria. The oil and gas deposits found in the Eastern Mediterranean are a factor, too. The one who wins in Syria will get the right to develop them.

Also, Qatar, which is small in territory and population, is seeking to play a big role in the region. They want to supply gas to Europe, and Syria will allow them to do this if the current regime is crushed.

Any sane person understands that Russia doesn’t have imperialistic ambitions like some others. As far as relations with Russia are concerned, you don’t have to say ‘no’ to your own interests, you don’t have to sacrifice your own country. Some say that Russia will start losing its influence and popularity. But these people are Americanized Arabs, who cannot speak for the whole Arab world. If we held a referendum among Arabs right now and asked them to express their opinion of Russia, I can promise you – over 50% would give Russia their approval, US policies lead to destruction. Some Western ambassadors have been using Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya as examples of democratic changes. But what’s happening in those countries is not a good example, this is the worst scenario possible. So we don’t have a choice – we need to stay strong and resist.

Q:What do you think of the March 14 alliance in Lebanon?

AM: This organization hopes that the Syrian regime will be overthrown. In that case they will take power in Lebanon. They consider Hezbollah, General Michel Aoun and the Amal Movement to be the echo of the situation in Syria. Their problem is that they cannot fulfill their mission, but keep giving empty promises to their partners. For the sake of argument let’s say the regime in Syria falls (which is impossible), wouldn’t it be replaced by another regime? This is not realistic. If the fist that keeps everything together loosens its grip, there will be chaos in all countries and Syria will fall apart. Syria will have to deal with serious problems for many years to come. The March 14 alliance will not be able to implement its political projects in Syria. Hezbollah is not an anti-March 14 alliance force. Our allies have enough power to keep the balance of forces inside Lebanon. Hezbollah is an anti-Israel force, it is not our objective to stand against the March 14 alliance.

Q:Some experts say that Israel wants Assad to stay in power, others think that chaos in the country would benefit the Israelis. What do you think?

AM: What is happening in Syria benefits Israel, because they hope that Syria is getting weaker. Let’s have a closer look at the situation. In the past years, President Assad has proven to be a strong supporter of Lebanese and Palestinian anti-Israel forces. Israelis like to say, “Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know.” Now they are saying that what happens after this regime falls, will be more acceptable than Assad staying in power.

Israel openly admits that it wants the Syrian regime to fall, and they even give exact dates when it is going to happen. There was a scandal involving Israeli intelligence. They want a weak country with weak leadership, focused on domestic problems. And if this new power decided to fire a few rockets at the Golan Heights from Katyusha launchers – that’s a price Israel is willing to pay. Israel views the Syrian regime as the link connecting Palestinian and Lebanese anti-Israel forces and their supporters in Iran. The frontline that runs from Iran to Gaza through Baghdad, Damascus, and Beirut, poses a challenge to American interests and Israeli domination in the region.

The latest events in Gaza confirm it. It was not easy to launch rockets into Tel-Aviv. Throughout the whole history of Israel, Tel-Aviv was one of the most secure cities. Now Fajr-5 rockets can reach Tel-Aviv, and these rockets are not small. Such threats define Israel’s approach to Syria. They consider Assad part of the anti-Israel strategy.

After the Camp David Accords, the Syrian and Iraqi armies were the only two forces in the region not equipped by the US. Americans didn’t control these two armies. They were equipped and trained by the Soviet Union. In 2003, the US managed to destroy Iraq’s forces. Now they intend to do the same in Syria.

Q: There are about half a million Palestinian refugees in Syria. Do you know anything about their involvement in the conflict?

AM: We don’t have much information about it. But many Syrians support the Palestinians and their cause. As for the Palestinian refugees – out of all Arab countries, including Lebanon, Syria offers them the best conditions. Syria has always supported the Palestinian cause at all political platforms and on the international arena. They have always kept their doors open for all Palestinian political movements, even when other countries, including the ones in the Arab world, closed theirs. So it wouldn’t be right for Palestinians to take Syria’s support for granted. So we hope that Palestinians will not take sides in the Syrian conflict.

But we also know of cases when external forces turned Palestinians against Syria. The recent events in the Yarmouk camp near Damascus is one of them. If you know the area, you will understand how the armed rebels were able to penetrate and bomb it. But leaders of different Palestinian movements are being wise and making sure that Palestinians do not get involved in this conflict.

Q: Can the Syrian crisis be resolved through force?

AM: This problem can only be solved through political means. But when you have armed groups and they are supplied with weapons from the outside, the regime has no other choice but to fight back. The West is distancing itself from explosions and terrorist attacks. This is dangerous. If you’ve chosen to keep them, then don’t blame anyone but yourself when these blasts start happening in your country. Those who are trying to rationalize terrorism shouldn’t be surprised if the terror strikes back at them.

Syria must take a firm stand against terrorism and all its allies should be on its side. We are not just dealing with hooligans and a few armed guys. This is a war against an international coalition. We have to seek all the means possible to make sure the current Syrian regime stays.

Q: Your party runs many hospitals and charities that take care of the handicapped. Can you tell us more about it?

AM: Hezbollah was founded in 1982, after the Israeli aggression, and we didn’t participate in the civil war. We enjoyed a broad grassroots support. We don’t barter – you give us support, and we will give you aid. We are just trying to help people where the state is not able to.

We started out by simply supporting people and families in need. And then we put our work on a regular and large-scale level. We set up infirmaries, hospitals, centers for underprivileged families, families of those who were killed, special schools and centers for war veterans.

We’re not saying that we have got it 100% covered or that all of our people’s needs are taken care of. Our facility for the handicapped was completely destroyed by Israel during the war in 2006, and we have only recently managed to re-build it. We extend help to all confessions and all social groups including our Palestinian brothers.

Today, we’re working hard to help Syrian refugees, and we are helping all of them, not only those who support President Assad. We are helping everyone regardless of their political views. You always have to put a human attitude above politics. We have accommodated some wounded Syrians from the opposition in our hospitals. They are no longer taking part in combat operations and must be treated humanely and provided with medical care.

We know that 11 Lebanese nationals are being held as POWs in Syria. They are not members of Hezbollah but we share similar views. We could easily apprehend and turn to POW status over 500 people from the so-called Free Syrian Army in order to liberate those 11 Lebanese nationals in a swap. But we choose not to use such methods. It’s a matter of principle.

Q: How do you think the situation will unfold?

AM: If you want to know my personal view, I feel that this war in Syria is going to last for quite a while.

We’ve already discussed the factors driving this crisis, but there’re much deeper causes behind it. The whole world is fighting in Syria, it seems, with all the countries having their interests in the conflict. Politics and oil are very much connected, tensions are high, and all the stakeholders are interested in further escalation.

There’s only thing that the parties to the conflict have so far succeeded in achieving: they have defined some rules of their involvement and drew the red lines which they think they are not going cross.

The world powers are not willing to get fully involved in the situation. No one wants to do that, neither Americans, nor the French, nor Turkey, nor Iran. They are all involved in the conflict but they don’t want to battle it out on the ground. Therefore, they are all going to keep pouring oil on that fire. I do not see there is a solution. But I very much hope I’m wrong about it. I don’t think that any party would agree to be the losing side. And even if we talk about a compromise, we all understand that such a compromise will have to be reached on so much more than just Syria. It will be about the entire Middle East and all the world powers. Working out a compromise is a very challenging and complicated task. Each of the parties will keep score of possible benefits they can obtain and threats they will run, so it is a very complex equation. This is a conflict with a very deep hidden agenda and so far it has not exhausted itself.

Tunisia in turmoil: Stones thrown at president, unrest 2 years after Arab Spring

Inhabitants of Sidi Bouzid shout slogans before hurling rocks at Tunisia's President Moncef Marzouki and parliamentary speaker Mustapha Ben Jaafar on December 17, 2012, in the central town of Sidi Bouzid 

Tunisian protesters in Sidi Bouzid, the epicenter of the country's Arab Spring uprising, threw rocks at visiting President Moncef Marzouki and other top leaders in a show of protest. Two years after the revolution, Tunisia is still gripped by unrest.

In late 2010, a 26-year-old university graduate lit himself on fire in Sidi Bouzid. Protests broke out across Tunisia on December 17, 2010, and were then repeated across North Africa and the Middle East. Tunisian President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali was the first ruler to be ousted in the Arab Spring uprisings, following months of violent unrest. 

One week ago – nearly two years after Ben Ali was deposed by the popular uprising – tens of thousands of protesters turned out in a mass strike planned by the country’s most powerful labor union, aimed at the stagnant economy and police brutality.

Two weeks earlier, another protest saw over 200 people wounded in clashes between Tunisian security forces and thousands of protesters in the impoverished town of Siliana. Fighting there raged on for several days, according to local medics. 

The unrest comes during a period of record unemployment in Tunisia. In November, the World Bank approved a $500 million loan to alleviate the country’s economic woes; another $700 million came from other donors. It was the second loan approved by the World Bank since the Arab Spring swept Ben Ali from power.

Most activists say that the Arab Spring brought about the exact opposite of what the demonstrators intended.

“The situation is worse right now in comparison to years before the revolution. Personally, I don’t feel safe anymore. When you see all the violence of the police of the salafis. Even the police are attacked sometimes. And there’s less freedom. I received so many messages from girls who say they were harassed on the street, even by police, who didn’t tolerate the way they dress,” Tunis-based activist and blogger Lina Ben Mhenni told SW.

The turmoil in Tunisia mirrors similar structures across the region. Experts say that the policies the newly elected leaders enact are not far from those of their predecessors.

In Egypt, opposition groups are urging a mass protest on Tuesday over alleged vote rigging during the national referendum on a controversial draft of the constitution. On Sunday, the Muslim Brotherhood announced the first results, prompting anger and accusations of electoral fraud. The next vote in the referendum is scheduled for the coming weekend.

“Those who voted for the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt did so because they wanted economic changes, not just getting rid of Mubarak and letting Morsi in. And Morsi, even though he’s obviously a very different political figure to Mubarak in terms of his ideology, has carried on much the same policies in terms of economic policy,” journalist and broadcaster Neil Clark told SW.

“I think it has to be a different type of a democratic system. The democracy that the US would like to impose upon Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco and other countries throughout the region, even Libya, where war was waged last year to topple the Qaddafi government, is not suitable to the people inside of that region,” Detroit's Pan-African News Wire editor Abayomi Azikiwe said to SW.

Egypt's Morsi: 'Farce of Israeli aggression' against Gaza will end today

The “farce” of Israeli aggression will end on Tuesday, Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi said, expressing certainty that Israelis and Palestinians will shortly reach a ceasefire.

“The efforts to reach a ceasefire between the Palestinians and Israelis will produce positive results within a few hours," state news agency Mena quoted Morsi as saying.

However, President Morsi did not provide any evidence or cite any sources to support his assertions.

The announcement comes ahead of several crucial talks on the Israeli-Gaza conflict held by high-profile international officials.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has arrived in Israel for peace talks on Tuesday. Later, the UN chief is expected to travel to Gaza to assess the humanitarian situation.

On Tuesday night, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is due in Israel for talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She is also expected to meet with officials from the Palestinian Authority, but not from Hamas, which is considered terrorist organization by the US.

Meanwhile, a delegation of top Arab officials led by Arab League chief Nabil Arabi is in Gaza in a show of solidarity with Palestinians. The delegates arrived through the Rafah border crossing near Egypt, and are set to meet with the Hamas government.

The delegation include representatives from more than 10 countries, including Egypt, Iraq, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia and Turkey, Hamas officials said.

Anyone stockpiling nuclear weapons is mentally retarded' – Ahmadinejad

During a meeting in Indonesia, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejiad said that the era of nuclear deterrence “is over,” and nations that stockpile nuclear weapons are “mentally retarded.”

­He also reiterated his long-running stance that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, nor does it seek to build one, as the nation does not need atomic weapons to defend itself.

"The period and era of using nuclear weapons is over. … Nuclear bombs are not anymore helpful and those who are stockpiling nuclear weapons, politically they are backward, and they are mentally retarded," Ahmadinejad said during a democracy forum in Bali, Indonesia.

The Iranian president added that any government or agency was free to inspect Iran’s nuclear sites. That statement contradicts Tehran’s recent policy of preventing International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) observers from accessing some of its nuclear sites.

The US and its allies have long accused ing its nuclear facilities as a cover for developing atomic weapons, a claim which Tehran has repeatedly denied.

The subject has been an ongoing source of tension between Iran and countries that remain skeptical of its nuclear ambitions – the US and Israel being the most vocal critics.

Israel has hinted at taking military action against Iran’s program for some time. Last week, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said that the country and its allies will have to make a decision on military action against Iran in “eight to ten months.”

In September, General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, a senior commander in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, warned that Tehran would strike US bases in the region if Israel attacked Iran.

“We will enter a confrontation with both parties and will definitely be at war with American bases should a war break out," he told Al-Alam TV.

The US has publicly maintained its preference for a diplomatic solution to the tensions, and has imposed multiple rounds of economic sanctions against Iran in the hopes of forcing Tehran to end its nuclear program.

Tens of thousands rally for Argentina's biggest protest in years

Thousands of pot-banging, flag-waving, banner-hoisting demonstrators massed in Buenos Aires for Argentina’s largest anti-government protest in years. Common themes at the protest included the nation's high levels of crime, corruption and inflation.

The demonstration, which lasted nearly four hours, was aimed at the government of President Cristina Fernandez de Kircher. Police officials said at least 30,000 people participated, while local media reported that hundreds of thousands turned out.

Protesters angry at the nation’s current state banged pots and pans as Argentinians young and old rallied until almost midnight.

A column of demonstrators carried a 200-meter-long flag. As they marched through the city, they were greeted with noisy pans, tambourines, and honking car horns.

Protesters chanted, “We’re not afraiid!" as they swarmed into the Plaza de Mayo and surrounding area, right in front of the presidential palace.

They shouted, whistled, and held banners that read "Constitution is written with C, not K," referring to the ‘K dictatorship’ of Fernandez de Kircher’s government.

Another sign read, “Stop the wave of Argentines killed by crime, enough with corruption and say no to the constitutional reform.”

The sign referred to a widely held fear that President Fernandez will attempt to stay in office for a third term through a constitutional reform ending presidential term limits.

The protesters rattled off a long list of complaints about the current government: The country’s soaring inflation, violent crime rates and high-profile corruption.

"I came to protest everything that I don't like about this government and I don't like a single thing starting with [the president's] arrogance…they're killing policemen like dogs, and the president doesn't even open her mouth. This government is just a bunch of hooligans and corrupters,” 74-year-old retiree Marta Morosini told AP.

Protests took place in other cities throughout Argentina, including the major cities of Cordoba, Mendoza and La Plata.

In countries elsewhere around the world, demonstrators gathered in front of Argentinean embassies and consulates.

Around 50 angry demonstrators gathered in front of the consulate in Rome shouting,“Cristina, go away.”

In Madrid, another group of about 200 protesters braved the rain to bang pots outside the Argentinean consulate.

"In Argentina, there's no separation of power and it cannot be considered a democracy…Cristina is not respecting the constitution. The presidency is not a blank check and she must govern for those who are for her and against her,” Marcelo Gimenez, a 40-year-old Argentinean who currently resides in Spain said.

During a speech on Thursday, Fernandez did not directly address the protests, but instead defended her government’s policies and affirmed her dedication to the job.

"Never let go, not even in the worst moments," she said."Because it's in the worst moments when the true colors of a leader of a country comes out."

Fernandez won a second term last year with 54 percent of the vote.

Her administration has been accused of alienating large sections of the middle class, and has drawn criticism for limiting imports and imposing controls on foreign currency exchanges, making it difficult for Argentines to travel abroad.

As Russia See Syria

Assad: Not a civil war, terrorism my enemy, no regrets for now (EXCLUSIVE)

In an exclusive interview with RT, President Bashar Assad said that the conflict in Syria is not a civil war, but proxy terrorism by Syrians and foreign fighters. He also accused the Turkish PM of eyeing Syria with imperial ambitions.

Assad told RT that the West creates scapegoats as enemies – from communism, to Islam, to Saddam Hussein. He accused Western countries of aiming to turn him into their next enemy.

While mainstream media outlets generally report on the crisis as a battle between Assad and Syrian opposition groups, the president claims that his country has been infiltrated by numerous terrorist proxy groups fighting on behalf of other powers.

In the event of a foreign invasion of Syria, Assad warned, the fallout would be too dire for the world to bear.

­

‘My enemy is terrorism and instability in Syria’

­RT: President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, thank very much for talking to us today.

Bashar Assad: You are most welcome in Damascus.

RT: There are many people who were convinced a year ago that you would not make it this far. Here again you are sitting in a newly renovated presidential palace and recording this interview. Who exactly is your enemy at this point?

BA: My enemy is terrorism and instability in Syria. This is our enemy in Syria. It is not about the people, it is not about persons. The whole issue is not about me staying or leaving. It is about the country being safe or not. So, this is the enemy we have been fighting as Syria.

RT: I have been here for the last two days and I had the chance to talk to a couple of people in Damascus. Some of them say that whether you stay or go at this point does not really matter anymore. What do you say about this?

BA: I think for the president to stay or leave is a popular issue. It is related to the opinion of some people and the only way can be done through the ballot boxes. So, it is not about what we hear. It is about what we can get through that box and that box will tell any president to stay or leave very simply.

RT: I think what they meant was that at this point you are not the target anymore; Syria is the target.

BA: I was not the target; I was not the problem anyway. The West creates enemies; in the past it was the communism then it became Islam, and then it became Saddam Hussein for a different reason. Now, they want to create a new enemy represented by Bashar. That's why they say that the problem is the president so he has to leave. That is why we have to focus of the real problem, not to waste our time listening to what they say.

­

‘The fight now is not the president’s fight – it is Syrians’ fight to defend their country’

­RT: Do you personally still believe that you are the only man who can hold Syria together and the only man who can put an end to what the world calls a ‘civil war’?

BA: We have to look at it from two aspects. The first aspect is the constitution and I have my authority under the constitution. According to this authority and the constitution, I have to be able to solve the problem. But if we mean it that you do not have any other Syrian who can be a president, no, any Syrian could be a president. We have many Syrians who are eligible to be in that position. You cannot always link the whole country only to one person.

RT: But you are fighting for your country. Do you believe that you are the man who can put an end to the conflict and restore peace?

BA: I have to be the man who can do that and I hope so, but it is not about the power of the President; it is about the whole society. We have to be precise about this. The president cannot do anything without the institutions and without the support of the people. So, the fight now is not a President’s fight; it is Syrians’ fight. Every Syrian is involved in defending his country now.

RT: It is and a lot of civilians are dying as well in the fighting. So, if you were to win this war, how would you reconcile with your people after everything that has happened?

BA: Let’s be precise once again. The problem is not between me and the people; I do not have a problem with the people because the United States is against me and the West is against me and many other Arab countries, including Turkey which is not Arab of course, are against me. If the Syrian people are against me, how can I be here?!

‘Syria faces not a civil war, but terrorism by proxies’

­RT: They are not against you?

BA: If the whole world, or let us say a big part of the world, including your people, are against you, are you a superman?! You are just a human being. So, this is not logical. It is not about reconciling with the people and it is not about reconciliation between the Syrians and the Syrians; we do not have a civil war. It is about terrorism and the support coming from abroad to terrorists to destabilize Syria. This is our war.

RT: Do you still not believe it is a civil war because I know there are a lot who think that there are terrorist acts which everyone believes take place in Syria, and there are also a lot of sectarian-based conflicts. For example we all heard about the mother who has two sons; one son is fighting for the government forces and the other son is fighting for the rebel forces, how this is not a civil war?

BA: You have divisions, but division does not mean civil war. It is completely different. Civil wars should be based on ethnic problems or sectarian problems. Sometimes you may have ethnic or sectarian tensions but this do not make them problem. So, if you have division in the same family or in a bigger tribe or whatever or in the same city, it does not mean a civil war. This is completely different and that is normal. We should expect that.

RT: When I asked about reconciling with your people, this is what I meant: I heard you say on many different occasions that the only thing you care about is what the Syrian people think of you and what Syrian people feel towards you and whether you should be a president or not. Are you not afraid that there has been so much damage done for whatever reason that at the end of the day Syrians won’t care about the truth; they will just blame you for the carnage that they have suffered?

BA: This is a hypothetical question because what the people think is the right thing, and regarding what they think, we have to ask them. But I don’t have this information right now. So, I am not afraid about what some people think; I am afraid about my country. We have to be focused on that.

RT: For years there have been so many stories about almighty Syrian army, important and strong Syrian secret services, but then we see that, you know, the government forces are not able to crush the enemy like people expected it would, and we see terrorist attacks take place in the middle of Damascus almost every day. Were those myths about the Syrian army and about the strong Syrian secret services?

BA: Usually, in normal circumstances when you have the army and the secret services and the intelligence, we focus on the external enemy even if we have an internal enemy, like terrorism because the society is helping us at least not to provide terrorist’s incubator. Now in this case, it is a new kind of war; terrorism through proxies, either Syrians living in Syria or foreign fighters coming from abroad. So, it is a new style of war, this is first and you have to adapt to this style and it takes time, it is not easy. And to say this is as easy as the normal or, let us say, the traditional or regular war, no, it is much more difficult. Second, the support that has been offered to those terrorists in every aspect, including armaments, money and political aspect is unprecedented. So, you have to expect that it is going to be a tough war and a difficult war. You do not expect a small country like Syria to defeat all those countries that have been fighting us through proxies just in days or weeks.

RT: Yes, but when you look at it, I mean on one hand, you have one leader with an army, and he orders this army go straight, go left, go right and the army obeys. On the other hand, you have fractions of terrorists who are not unified and have no one unified strategy to fight you. So, how does that really happen when it comes to fighting each other?

BA: This is not the problem. The problem is that those terrorists are fighting from within the cities, and in the cities you have civilians. When you fight this kind of terrorists, you have to be aware that you should do the minimum damage to the infrastructure and minimum damage to the civilians because you have civilians and you have to fight, you cannot leave terrorists just killing and destroying. So, this is the difficulty in this kind of war.

­

Without foreign rebel fighters and smuggled weapons, ‘we could finish everything in weeks’

­RT: You know that the infrastructure and economy are suffering; it is almost as if Syria is going to be fall into decay very soon and the time is against you. In your opinion, how much time do you need to crush the enemy?

BA: You cannot answer this question because no one claimed that he had the answer about when to end the war unless when we have the answer to when they are going to stop smuggling foreign fighters from different parts of the world especially the Middle East and the Islamic world, and when they are going to stop sending armaments to those terrorists. If they stop, this is when I can answer you; I can tell that in weeks we can finish everything. This is not a big problem. But as long as you have continuous supply in terrorists, armaments, logistics and everything else, it is going to be a long-term war.

RT: Also, when you think about it, you have 4,000 km of loosely controlled borders, so you have your enemy that can at any time cross over into Jordan or Turkey to be rearmed, get medical care and come back to fight you!

BA: No country in the world can seal the border. Sometime they use this word which is not correct, even the United Stated cannot seal its border with Mexico for example. The same can be applied to Russia which is a big country. So, no country can seal the border. You can only have a better situation on the border when you have good relations with your neighbor and this is something we do not have at least with Turkey now. Turkey supports more than any other country the smuggling of terrorists and armaments.

­

‘The Syrian Army has no orders to shell Turkish land’

­RT: Can I say to you something? I have been in Turkey recently and people there are actually very worried that a war will happen between Syria and Turkey. Do you think a war with Turkey is a realistic scenario?

BA: Rationally, no I do not think so – for two reasons. The war needs public support and the majority of the Turkish people do not need this war. So, I do not think any rational official would think of going against the will of the public in his country and the same for the Syrian people. So, the conflict or difference is not between the Turkish people and the Syrian people; it is about the government and officials, it is between our officials and their officials because of their politics. So, I do not see any war between Syria and Turkey on the horizon.

RT: When was the last time you spoke to Erdogan and how did the talk end?

BA: May 2011, after he won the election.

RT: So, you just congratulated him, and it was the last time

BA: Yes and it was the last time.

RT:  Who is shelling Turkey? Is it the government forces or the rebels?

BA: In order to find the answer, you need a joint committee between the two armies in order to know who shells who because on the borders you have a lot of terrorists who have mortars; so, they can do the same. You have to go and investigate the bomb in that place itself and that did not happen. We asked the Turkish government to have this committee but they refused; so, you cannot have the answer. But when you have these terrorists on your borders, you do not exclude them from doing so because the Syrian army does not have any order to shell the Turkish land because we do not find any interest in this, and we do not have any enmity with the Turkish people. We consider them as brothers, so why do it; unless that happened by mistake, then it needs investigation.

RT:  Do you accept that it may be mistakenly from the government forces?

BA: That could happen. This is a possibility and in every war you have mistakes. You know in Afghanistan, they always talk about friendly fire if you kill your soldier; this means that it could happen in every war, but we cannot say yes.

 ­

‘Erdogan thinks he is a Caliph’

­RT:  Why has Turkey, which you call a friendly nation, become a foothold for the opposition?

BA: Not Turkey, but only Erdogan’s government in order to be precise. Turkish people need good relations with the Syrian people. Erdogan thinks that if Muslim Brotherhood takes over in the region and especially in Syria, he can guarantee his political future, this is one reason. The other reason, he personally thinks that he is the new sultan of the Ottoman and he can control the region as it was during the Ottoman Empire under a new umbrella. In his heart he thinks he is a caliph. These are the main two reasons for him to shift his policy from zero problems to zero friends.

RT:  But it is not just the West that opposes you at this point; there are so many enemies in the Arab world and that is to say like two years ago when someone heard you name in the Arab world they would straighten their ties, and now in the first occasion they betrayed you, why do you have so many enemies in the Arab world?

BA: They are not enemies. The majority of Arab governments support Syria in their heart but they do not dare to say that explicitly.

RT: Why not?

BA: Under pressure by the West, and sometimes under pressure of the petrodollars in the Arab world.

RT:  Who supports you from the Arab world?

BA: Many countries support Syria by their hearts but they do not dare to say that explicitly. First of all, Iraq which played a very active role in supporting Syria during the crisis because it is a neighboring country and they understand and recognize that if you have a war inside Syria you will have war in the neighboring countries including Iraq. I think there are other countries which have good position like Algeria, and Oman mainly and there are other countries I would not count all of them now but I would say they have positive position without taking actions.

RT: Saudi Arabia and Qatar, why are they so adamant about you resigning and how would an unstable Middle East fit their agenda?

BA: Let’s be frank, I cannot answer on their behalf. They have to answer this question but I could say that the problem between Syria and many countries whether in the Arab world or in the region or in the West, is that we kept saying no when we think that we have to say no, that is the problem. And some countries believe that they can control Syria through orders, through money or petrodollars and this is impossible in Syria, this is the problem. May be they want to play a role. We do not have a problem, they can play a role whether they deserve this or not, they can play a role but not to play a role at the expense of our interests.

RT: Is it about controlling Syria or about exporting their vision of Islam to Syria?

BA: You cannot put it as a government policy sometimes. Sometimes you have institutions in certain country, sometime you have persons who try to promote this but they do not announce it as an official policy. So, they did not ask us to promote their, let’s say, extremist attitude of their institutions but that happened in reality whether through indirect support of their government or through the foundation from institutions and personnel. So, this is part of the problem, but when I want to talk as a government, I have to talk about the announced policy. The announced policy is like any other policy; it is about the interest, it is about playing a role, but we cannot ignore what you mentioned.

RT:  Iran which is a very close ally also is exposed to economic sanctions, also facing a threat of military invasion. If you were faced with an option to cut ties with Iran in exchange for peace in your country, would you go for it?

BA: We do not have contradicting options in this regard because we had good relations with Iran since 1979 till today, and it is getting better every day, but at the same time we are moving towards peace. We had peace process and we had peace negotiations. Iran was not a factor against peace. So, this is misinformation they try to promote in the West that if we need peace, we do not have to have good relation with Iran. There is no relation; it is two completely different subjects. Iran supported Syria, supported our cause, the cause of the occupied land and we have to support them in their cause. This is very simple. Iran is a very important country in the region. If we are looking for stability, we need good relations with Iran. You cannot talk about stability while you have bad relations with Iran, Turkey and your neighbors and so on. This is it.

­

‘Al-Qaeda’s final aim is an Islamic emirate in Syria’

­RT:  Do you have any information that the Western intelligence is financing rebel fighters here in Syria?

BA: No, so far what we know is that they are offering the know-how support for the terrorists through Turkey and sometimes through Lebanon mainly. But there is other intelligence, not the Western, but the regional intelligence which is very active and more active than the Western one under the supervision of the Western intelligence.

RT: What is the role of Al-Qaeda in Syria at this point? Are they controlling any of the rebel coalition forces?

BA: No, I do not think they are looking to control; they are looking to create their own kingdoms or emirates in their language, but they mainly try now to scare the people through explosions, assassinations, suicide bombers and things like this to push the people towards desperation and to accept them as reality. So, they go step by step but their final aim is to have this, let’s say, Islamic Emirate in Syria where they can promote their own ideology in the rest of the world.

RT: From those who are fighting you and those who are against you, who would you talk to?

BA: We talk to anyone who has genuine will to help Syria, but we do not waste our time with anyone who wants to use our crisis for his own personal interests.

RT:  There has been many times…not you but the government forces have been accused for many times of war crimes against your own civilians, do you accept that the government forces have committed war crimes against their own civilians?

BA: We are fighting terrorism. We are implementing our constitution by protecting the Syrian people. Let’s go back to what happened in Russia more than a decade ago when you faced terrorism in Chechnya and other places; they attacked people in theaters and schools and so on, and the army in Russia protected the people, would you call it war crimes?! No, you would not. Two days ago, Amnesty International recognized the crimes that were committed few days ago by the armed groups when they captured soldiers and executed them. Also Human Rights Watch recognized this. Human Rights Watch recognized more than once the crimes of those terrorist groups and few days ago it described these crimes as war crimes, this is the first point. The second point, if you have an army that committed a crime against its own people, this is devoid of logic because the Syrian Army is made up of Syrian people. If you want to commit a crime against your people, then the army will divide, will disintegrate. So, you cannot have a strong army while you are killing your people. Third, the army cannot withstand for twenty months in these difficult circumstances without having the embrace of the public in Syria. So, how could you have this embracement while you are killing your people?! This is a contradiction. So, this is the answer.

­

‘I must live in Syria and die in Syria’

­RT: When was the last time you spoke to a Western leader?

BA: It was before the crisis.

RT:  Was there any time at which they try to give you conditions that if you left the post of presidency then there will be peace in Syria or no?

BA: No, they did not propose it directly, no, but whether they propose that directly or indirectly, it is a matter of sovereignty; only the Syrian people will talk about this. Whoever talks about this in the media or in a statement directly or indirectly has no meaning and has no weight in Syria.

RT: Do you even have a choice because from what it seems from the outside that would not have anywhere to go. Where would you go if you want to leave?

BA: To Syria. I would go from Syria to Syria. This is the only place where we can live. I am not a puppet. I was not made by the West to go to the West or to any other country. I am Syrian, I was made in Syria, I have to live in Syria and die in Syria.

­

‘I believe in democracy and dialogue – but we must be realistic’

­RT: Do you think that at this point there is any chance for diplomacy or talks or only the army can get it done?

BA: I always believe in diplomacy and I always believe in dialogue even with those who do not understand or believe in it. We have to keep trying. I think that we will always achieve a partial success. We have to look for this partial success before we achieve the complete success. But we have to be realistic. You do not think that only dialogue can make you achieve something because those people who committed these acts they are of two kinds: one of them does not believe in dialogue, especially the extremists, and you have the outlaws who have been convicted by the court years ago before the crisis and their natural enemy is the government because they are going to be detained if we have a normal situation in Syria. The other part of them is the people who have been supplied by the outside, and they can only be committed to the governments which paid them the money and supplied them with the armament; they do not have a choice because they do not own their own decision. So, you have to be realistic. And you have the third part of the people whether militants or politicians who can accept the dialogue. That’s why we have been in this dialogue for months now even with militants and many of them gave up their armaments and they went back to their normal life.

‘The price of a foreign invasion will be more than the world can afford’

­RT:  Do you think a foreign invasion is imminent?

BA: I think the price of this invasion if it happened is going to be more than the whole world can afford because if you have a problem in Syria, and we are the last stronghold of secularism and stability in the region and coexistence, let’s say, it will have a domino effect that will affect the world from the Atlantic to the Pacific and you know the implication on the rest of the world. I do not think the West is going in that direction, but if they do so, nobody can tell what is next.

RT:  Mr. President, do you blame yourself for anything?

BA: Normally you have to find mistakes you do with every decision, otherwise you are not human.

RT: What is your biggest mistake?

BA: I do not remember now to be frank. But I always, even before taking the decision, consider that part of it will be wrong but you cannot tell about your mistakes now. Sometimes, especially during crisis, you do not see what is right and what is wrong until you overcome the situation that you are in. I would not be objective to talk about mistakes now because we still in the middle of the crisis.

RT:  So, you do not have regrets yet?

BA: Not now. When everything is clear, you can talk about your mistakes, and definitely you have mistakes and that is normal.

RT:  If today was March 15, 2011, that is when the protest started to escalate and grow, what would you do differently?

BA: I would do what I did on March 15.

RT: Exactly the same?

BA: Exactly the same: ask different parties to have dialogue and stand against terrorists because that is how it started. It did not start as marches; the umbrella or cover was the marches, but within those marches you had militants who started shooting civilians and the army at the same time. May be on the tactical level, you could have done something different but as a president you are not tactical, you always take the decision on a strategic level which is something different.

RT: President al-Assad, how do you see yourself in ten-years’ time?

BA: I see myself through my country; I cannot see myself but my country in ten-years’ time. This is where I can see myself.

RT: Do you see yourself in Syria?

BA: Definitely, I have to be in Syria. It is not about the position. I do not see myself whether a president or not. This is not my interest. I can see myself in this country as safe country, stable country and more prosperous country.

RT:  President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, thank you for talking to RT.

BA: Thank you for coming to Syria, again.