Flashback to 2001: President Assad to Prime Minister Blair: 'Stop bombing Afghan civilians'
compiled by Cem Ertür
19 September 2014
Reading the
transcript of a joint press conference by Syrian President Bashar
al-Assad and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, which was held on the 25th day of the Anglo-American-led invasion of Afghanistan, makes it
abundantly clear why another Anglo-American-led genocidal war had been
launched against Syria nearly ten years later.
The Guardian, 1 November 2001
caption:
[British Prime Minister] Tony Blair, in Syria to drum up support for
the US-led war [on Afghanistan], listens to [Syrian]
President Bashar al-Assad at their press conference criticise western attitudes to terrorism and the bombing of Afghanistan
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Press conference: PM and President Assad of Syria
[transcript of the joint press conference in Damascus by Syria's President Assad and British Prime Minister Tony Blair on October 31, 2001]
Number10.gov.uk (official website of the British government) via European Security & Defence website
Editorial
note: This press conference was held 24 days after the launch of the Anglo-American-led invasion of Afghanistan.
The day after his visit to Damascus, Mr Blair met Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.
[emphasis added]
PRESIDENT ASSAD (via interpreter): I am welcoming Mr Tony Blair, the Prime Minister of Britain and the accompanying delegation in Syria and I
would like to indicate that it is the first visit of senior British
officials at this level since the independence of Syria in the 1940s
and certainly before then, decades before then, and this has many
indications and many importance and many meanings and it indicates the
development of the relations between Syria and Great Britain.
Despite the fact that the visit is very short
the talks were very rich and we had time to discuss many issues and many
topics. We agreed on many of the analyses that we discussed in the talks and
there were many points of understanding and there was also some points that
each undertook to the other.
The main issues that we discussed during
these talks, of course we concentrated on the issue of terrorism and the peace
process and the Middle East, of course. We talked quickly about the bi-lateral
relations and we agreed to consolidate these relations through the ideas which
were discussed between Syrian and British officials whether in Syria or in
Britain. As for the issue of terrorism, there was a sound condemnation of what
had taken place on 11 September in the United States and, I think this goes
without saying, I don’t think there is any country in the world that would say
it agrees with terrorism. It is a principle for all countries. But the condemnation that Syria has announced
was not only a result of what had taken place on 11 September, but it is an
outcome of our principles, all the principles throughout our history in Syria,
social principles, it was an outcome to our religious principles that are here
in our Arab region, whether as Arabs or as Muslims or as Christians. It is a
result of our suffering from terrorism, especially during the mid-1970s and the
consequent period, and of course, at the same time, we differentiated - and I
personally differentiated - between resistance and terrorism and between Islam
and terrorism. There is a difference between resistance as a social right, as a
religious right, it’s a legal right, and it is a right that is safeguarded
through the United Nations’ resolutions. Of course Islam and all holy
religions have the same source and they were sent to people by the same God.
These religions were not sent for war but they were sent for peace and for the
combating of terrorism.
We talked about the root causes of terrorism
and I mentioned many causes. But I mentioned particularly one important cause
of terrorism and it is a reason that many citizens in the Arab or Muslim
regions feel; it is a feeling of the difference and the human value between the
citizen in this region and the human values of the citizen in the West. Especially as terrorism is there for a long
time in Syria, since 1985, the late President Hafez Al-Assad sent Syrian senior
officials to Western European countries to ask for convening an international
conference to combat terrorism. So the issue of combating terrorism is very old
for Syria, and although the
combating of terrorism came quite late, it is better late than never. The
important point is that combating terrorism should have started before, and many people in the region feel there is a
gulf that the Western people should fill, that the human person is a human
person anywhere and terrorism is terrorism anywhere, whether it is in the
Middle East or Europe or in Asia and everywhere in the world.
We spoke about combating terrorism and I said
that combating terrorism should start by defining this again. We can’t fight an
enemy without knowing who this enemy is, what shape is he, where is he, is he
North, East, West or South. We have to define our enemy first and we have to
specify its appearance and its existence and then we have to analyse the
reasons which brought this terrorism. Therefore, in order to combat terrorism,
we have to address the root causes and not the effect. Until now only the
effects of terrorism are being addressed but the root causes are not being
addressed or it is at the beginning of being addressed. Addressing the root
causes of terrorism, as I have said, should be first political, it should be
cultural, it should be media, informative, security and intelligence addressed.
And the terrorism works as a network; it doesn’t have a certain head whether it
is a person or an organisation. It is a network, terrorism is a network that
could be found anywhere, and therefore combating terrorism and fighting its
causes should come through international co-operation and not through having
one side or one country that fights terrorism. Terrorism is there everywhere
and therefore combating terrorism should be done by every country in the world.
We spoke about peace in the Middle East. As
we say always, Syria did not change its stand towards peace. Reaching a just
and comprehensive peace in the region was always our principle, despite all the
difficult circumstances, despite all the setbacks that the peace process has
suffered from, the Syrian stand towards peace has not changed because it is a
strategic position and not a tactical position, but Israel as far as we are
concerned, is proving every day that it is against this peace, and therefore
the desire for peace cannot coincide with the desire for killing. The list for
assassinations cannot be an expression of a desire to reach peace and stability
in this region.
We also spoke in the peace process about the
international consensus in the world, especially after 11 September events,
about the necessity of achieving peace in the Middle Eastern region, and I said
that this international consensus is a golden opportunity that might not be
repeated in the future. It is an opportunity for the world, but it is to a
large extent an opportunity for the American administration that could move
without taking into account the domestic pressure that might influence its
neutral role as co-sponsor of the peace process.
We did not differentiate in our talk
(inaudible) that peace and terrorism. Some
people linked the issue of the Middle East to terrorism directly and it is
understood as if the Middle East is a source of terrorism, and this is not
correct. Despite our point of view as Arabs, because Israel is practising the state terrorism regularly and this is definite,
but the Middle Eastern region often influences activating terrorism, because
terrorists always need a cover. This cover could be a national issue, it could
be a pan-national issue, it could be a social issue, and therefore closing the
hot areas in the world will deprive these terrorists of the cover they always
seek.
Of course we — and the last point I would
like to say about peace is that in Syria
we cannot see with one eye as some people see. We cannot separate the issue of
terrorism that we see every day and we live every day that Israel is practising
against the Palestinians. We cannot separate between this kind of terrorism and
the terrorism that is taking place in the world, and we can’t really look with
one eye. Some people see with one eye, some people see with closed eyes and
we cannot, we look at the issues with wide-open eyes in order to see what has
taken place, and in order to see things from a very realistic perspective.
And therefore no one can say small details
can see small details without seeing the big issues, and the closer issues. People in the Arab region, and in the
Muslim world cannot see the international terrorism without seeing Israeli
terrorism, and therefore addressing this kind of terrorism is one.
Some people say that achieving peace will
make a big step for combating terrorism, this is correct. But also combating
terrorism in Israel would help to reach (5 second break in audio) highly
appreciate what I have heard from Mr Prime Minister, because of his high
appreciation and his great respect to Islam as a religion, and his high respect
to the Muslim people in Britain. I am going to leave the floor to Mr Prime
Minister to address you.
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Mr President, first of all can I thank you for
hosting me here in Syria, and say how much I welcome the talks that we have had
this morning and I know we will continue later.
And as you said right at the very outset this
is candid dialogue. But it is a dialogue I would like to think could be pursued
by us both as people trying to reach an understanding of each other’s
perspectives. And trying to work together as partners for the greater good of the
wider world.
And there are two main issues obviously that
we discussed. The first was the attacks of the 11 September in the United
States of America. And I very much welcomed the strong statement of
condemnation that you have made to me, and repeated again now Mr President. I
think that is important that the entire world knows that the world community is
united in condemning what happened on the 11 September as an atrocity.
The second thing is that that attack was
carried out by extremists who do not represent in any way, shape or form, the
true faith or voice of Islam. And your strong statement to that effect is also
most welcome.
I believe it is important therefore that we
send out a very clear message and signal that there is a strong international
coalition against terrorism. And in Syria, and indeed the countries in this
entire region are united as part of that coalition.
In respect of the Middle East peace process,
whatever the differences of perspective, we both understand the importance of
restarting the Middle East peace process properly, of getting back to a
situation in which differences are resolved by a process of talking and
dialogue. And that in that regard violence from whatever quarter is equally
unhelpful, and what we require is the space and the time to get people talking
together again.
And the objective that we seek, and I believe
again this is shared by you, and shared by people in this region, is a
situation where Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side in peace
together. That is in the end the only possible long-term solution.
So Mr President I thank you for inviting me
here today, I have very much welcomed the talks together. I know that for you
as you were saying to me earlier, there is a relationship not just between
Britain and Syria that is part of our history, but a personal relationship for
you, since you have lived and worked in Britain.
And I hope that the candid dialogue that we
have begun today can strengthen over time. Because there are huge differences
in understanding between West and Islam, between west and the Arab world.
And yet if one can come out of the terrible
events of the 11 September, it is an attempt to bridge that gulf of
misunderstanding, and create the right circumstances for partnership in the
future, and I believe that that is possible.
And so I hope that the dialogue we have begun
today can continue over time, so that we achieve the objectives we both want to
achieve. Which is an end to terrorism in all its forms, wherever it exists, and
a proper and lasting peace and solution for the province of the Middle East.
Thank you.
QUESTION: Could I ask (inaudible) if they discussed the current
action in Afghanistan during their talks? Whether any pledges, promises,
guarantees, anything of that nature were sought by President Assad, and given
or not by Prime Minister Blair.
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Well of course we have discussed the current
situation in Afghanistan. And I think that the most important thing to
emphasise is that people accept that what happened on the 11 September was
wrong, and that it is necessary for the international community to act.
Now we are acting in Afghanistan, we have set
out our objectives there very, very clearly. And I think that the desire of
everyone is to make sure that we bring that action to a successful conclusion
as swiftly as possible. That is our desire I think that is the desire of all
people in this region and elsewhere.
PRESIDENT
ASSAD (via interpreter): As far as we are concerned in Syria
we (inaudible) appreciate that we
announced our stand right from the beginning. A very clear stand that we
condemn terrorism, and with an international coalition for combating terrorism.
But we should differentiate between combating terrorism, and between war.
We did
not say we support an international coalition for launching a war, we are
always against war, it is a point of principle, because wars have always a
negative effect on societies. And we
believe that combating terrorism cannot be done through war, but it can be done
through political cultural intelligence cooperation amongst relevant countries.
And therefore, at least we do not like to see more wars taking place in the world, because we
have suffered from many wars, especially as we see some civilians, innocent
civilians falling every day.
QUESTION: And Mr Prime Minister Tony Blair, and the American
President George Bush, and your Excellency have announced your support to
establishing a Palestinian, independent Palestinian state to establish the
ability in the region. How do you see the execution of the (inaudible) in the
light of the dangerous (inaudible) of pulling down houses, expanding
settlements, and ignore all international requests, including your request, and
the request of the American administration.
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: What is necessary if we are going to restart the
peace process in the Middle East is that two things happen. First of all we
have got to agree what the fixed points of principle are. And those fixed
points of principle to my mind are that Israel is entitled to exist, has its
right to exist, and be confident of its own peace and security within its own
borders.
And secondly that alongside the state of
Israeli there is a Palestinian state where there is justice and equality for
people. Now I believe that based on that, based on the United Nations
resolutions, it is possible to restart a proper process that can achieve those
aims.
The second thing however that is necessary,
as well as agreement on those fixed points of principle, is that we have an end
to violence of all sorts, in order to give space and time for a peace process
to begin again. Because whilst violence is continuing, of whatever nature, it
is difficult for the political process to work, and if I can say to you,
certainly to borrow from the process of peace in Northern Ireland, which, in a
very different context, has some similarities in terms of divided communities
and great bitterness and hostility, it is vital, in order for the political
process to work, that violence ends, of all types, because it is the people of
violence that want to displace the political process, and what I would like to
see is, based on those six points of principle, based on the United Nations
Resolution, a peace process begin again that allows us to take back control of
the situation for politics and not for violence.
QUESTION: Can I ask the Prime Minister whether you did discuss
the situation of the terrorist groups which the Americans believe were
operating in this country, whether you asked the President to restrain them,
and may I ask the President whether you are prepared to take action against
those groups, in particular the one that has claimed responsibility for the
recent assassination in Israel?
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: First of all, if I can say that, as I just made clear
a moment or two ago, it is our belief that all groups involved in violence must
cease their activities, so that the political process is given a chance to
work. Now, there are going to be differences in perspective and views about the
issue, both of the Middle East peace process, about the action that we take in
respect of Afghanistan. But what I think is important is to recognise that
unless we can bring about the situation in which the violence really does cease
in the Middle East and the political process begin to work, then it is very
difficult to see how we are going to get a just, negotiated solution to the
problems that we face, and as I say, whatever the differences in perspective
are - and we said it was a candid dialogue - whatever the differences in
perspective, I think that is accepted by both of us. We both want to see a
situation where the violence ends and ends completely, on all sides, so that
the peace process can get started again.
PRESIDENT ASSAD (via
interpreter): I would like
to give a comment about this question. Of course the issue of the Middle East
issue is for the countries concerned and one of the first countries who are
concerned and we are more capable to decide the nature of the organisations and
the people who are in the region. As I said in the beginning, resisting occupation is an international
right nobody can deny, and therefore we have many organisations, many people
who support the liberation and who support the resistance fighters who seek to
liberate their lands. The act of resistance is very different from the act of
terrorism. As I said, we differentiate. In the west you have one example in
France, for example, one of the most important personalities or one of the
symbols is President de Gaulle, who fought for liberating the French land. Can
any one of you accuse President de Gaulle of being a terrorist? No way, because
what President de Gaulle did is the same thing that’s being done by the
resistance fighters in this region, and therefore it’s the same measure that
should be applied.
QUESTION: Mr Prime Minister Tony Blair, the peace process was
started ten years ago and peace has not been achieved at a time when violence
was not there in the region, and the peace was not achieved due to the Israeli
policies. Is there any initiative or intention by the Europeans or by
international community to restart the peace process (inaudible) according to
the United Nations Resolution and the land for peace principles (inaudible) for
the region’s (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Well of course there’s an intention to do that. It’s
precisely what we want to achieve. We want the process to begin again so that
there is the possibility, through dialogue, of resolving the issues in the
Middle East. But in order for that to happen, what is important is that there
is an end to all forms of violence, where there is restraint, an end to
violence, and the opportunity then to get people to talk about the issues, and
over the last ten years, as you know, there have been many, many attempts to
get the peace process moving ahead. Now those attempts have not yet succeeded,
but my message to people in whatever part of the region I will be over the next
couple of days is there is no alternative. When all the killing and the
bloodshed stops, people will have to come back and try and resolve their
differences through dialogue. There is no alternative to that, just as there is
no realistic alternative to a situation where the right of Israel to exist,
confident in its own security, and the right of the Palestinians to their own
state, is accepted as the basic principles of that dialogue.
Now I believe that can happen, but it needs
the space and the time, as I say, to do it and even before the 11 September —
sometimes I know in this part of the world it has been said that people like
myself and President Bush were only interested in the issue of the peace
process in the Middle East once the 11 September had occurred. This is not
true. When I met President Arafat a few days ago in London, that was my
eleventh meeting with him. Before the 11 September we already had the Tenet (?)
Plan, the Mitchell Plan; as you know the Americans were preparing a new process
in order to try and restore some momentum to the Middle East peace process. So
we have, right from the very beginning, understood the importance of this
issue, but we need the help of everybody, of all countries in this region, in
order to get it done, and the single most important thing that will allow us to
get it done is an end to violence from whatever quarter, in whatever form.
QUESTION: It seems that the focus now is to implement the
Mitchell Plan and the Tenet Plan to cement the shaky ceasefire between the
Palestinians and the Israelis. Do you think that’s a good start? Is it enough
of a start? And would you, at some point, encourage what you perceive as
legitimate resistance to halt their attacks to give the Mitchell Plan a chance?
PRESIDENT ASSAD (via
interpreter): We have
our perspective about the Mitchell Report. We did not participate in it and
Syria was not consulted about it, but the failure of many attempts did not take
into account the necessary requirements for the peace (inaudible) including the
rights of the Palestinian people, and the people in the region have proven that
our perspective, our point of view, was correct, so the right thing is that the
ceasefire, agreement for a ceasefire, but it is not the terms of reference for
a peace process. The terms of reference for a peace process is the Security
Council Resolution and the Madrid terms of reference. When we speak about
initiatives regardless of the names of these initiatives, or when we speak
about negotiations, all these are the means, but the important thing is
justice; justice is peace.
We have to put one rule for the elements and
for the objective, in order to achieve this objective. When we want to say — or
let us assume that there’s an initiative, and the Palestinian citizen is going
to ask, "What is the objective of this initiative? Is it to stop
violence?" Stopping violence is perhaps necessary to reach peace, but it
is not everything; the more important thing is what this citizen is going to
achieve, what are the rights he is going to achieve when the peace process
ends, when — any initiative depends on United Nations Resolutions, on Madrid
terms of reference, and so directing the peace process, or the co-sponsor
should be neutral, should be an honest broker, and this is what was not
achieved during the last ten years, and that’s why peace has failed, and that’s
why all the attempts have failed. If you don’t have the right way to conduct
the peace process through the means and through the objectives we are going to
meet in press conferences with other senior officials ten years from now to
speak about launching a peace process.
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: I’d like to just respond to that if I might, for a
moment. Sorry, let me just respond to that for a moment please. I think the
President said something that is very important there, that the Tenet and the
Mitchell plans are valid plans in order to bring about a different security
situation and end the violence. But I agree that is the first step, it is not
the end of the process. What must then happen is that we resolve the actual
issues that are outstanding. And I think that what he said there too, in
respect of the UN resolutions and the Madrid conclusions is also important. And
I hope very much there will come a point in time when Syria is able to resume
negotiations also with Israel in order to get the outstanding issues between
them sorted out.
So I agree with the fact that the end to
violence is the context in which the key issues can be resolved. It’s not the
resolution of the issues themselves. So we’ve got to end the violence and then
go on to resolve those key issues. And I think that if there is agreement on
that and if there is an agreement, as I say, on those two fixed points of
reference - on Israel and on the Palestinian state - I think that we could
start to make a great deal more progress. Sorry, sir.
QUESTION: Mr Prime Minister, Tony Blair, many Arabs and Moslems
feel a kind of frustration and oppression and injustice because of the
non-implementation of Israel into the United Nations resolution and because of
the double standards. Do you, Mr Prime Minister, have a plan, especially the
European Union, to address this issue - this very sensitive issue — and which
really is the source of tension in the region? Thank you.
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Well, first of all, I want to say this very directly
to public opinion here - and we should never forget, coming from my country,
that public opinion in your country may be in a different place from public
opinion in Britain or Europe or the United States of America - but I hope
whatever part of the world we’re in we can agree on this: what happened on 11
September cannot be excused and neither can those that carried out the 11
September attack, in which, I may say, thousands of innocent people —
Christians, Jews, Moslems, people of no faith at all — died. That cannot be
excused on the basis of any court and, as the President said a moment or two
ago, there are always people — the extremists always want to use a cause as
cover for the extremist acts that they carry out.
Now, it is also important — so I hope that
condemnation is accepted by everyone and that no one should think that the
people that carried out the 11 September attack represent, in any shape or
form, true Arab or Moslem opinion. And that’s an important statement. But of
course we understand that there is legitimate concern about the breakdown of
the Middle East Peace Process and a desire to get that started again. And we
understand that and what you have got to understand from us is that we know
there is a serious issue here that must be resolved. And we are willing to put
all our energy and ability into trying to resolve it.
Now it’s not for me to come here and issue
plans and so on but it is for me to come here and say to people very clearly,
"We want to try and resolve this issue. We want to get the Middle East
Peace Process started again. Give us the opportunity of doing that by making
sure that the conditions in which people can talk again, and of which dialogue
is the way forward, can be created." And that’s why I say to you that the
violence from whatever quarter has to end. And I understand the different
perspectives there will be between Syria and Britain or between Syria,
obviously, and Israel. There will be fundamental differences of perspectives.
But we both, in the end, know there is no alternative but to us sitting down
and working out these differences, not by violence or by terrorism of whatever
form but by partnership and by trying to resolve the issues constructively. And
I think that can happen. And one of the reasons for us coming here - and I say
this to you again, absolutely openly - it is difficult because of the history
and the differences to come here, to have a press conference such as this but I
happen to believe that if anything good can come out of the terrible events of
the 11 September, it is an attempt to find new understanding and a new way
forward to resolve the differences that we have. Now maybe we won’t be able to
but let’s at least try. And let’s at least try doing so, understanding the
perspective from which the other person comes.
Okay? Yeah, I don’t mind. Yeah — I can take another
one, if you want. Well, this lady here. I should say this is the generosity of
the president that is allowing this! (laughter)
QUESTION: Mr Prime Minister, I was very interested in what you
said about the military action in Afghanistan. Are you now requesting, British
Prime Minister, to stop the military action and would you go so far as to define it, in a way, as a form of terrorism?
PRESIDENT ASSAD (via
interpreter): We are not
asking for anything and we are not a party to it in order to ask for putting an
end to it but we have a perspective, we have a point of view, a general point
of view about this war and about any other war. The history of Syria stretches
for 6,000 years, 4,000 years before Christ, and the Assyrians were great
fighters and that then since that time until no, there is a defence of Syrian
territory. But there was — that Syria
was never an aggressor or an occupier of any other country or killing of any
innocent citizens. This is a principle, a Syrian principle. But, at the same
time, we cannot accept what we see every day on television screens, killing the
innocent civilians [in Afghanistan]. There are hundreds now who are dying every day. I don’t
think anybody in the West accepts or agrees to that.
QUESTION: (Several inaudible words) Mr Prime Minister, some
voices in Europe after 11 September are asking for closing the frontier in the
way of Arabs and Moslems. How do you see these races called and what are you
doing towards them?
PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Well, as you probably know, just as Syria has some 2
million Christians, we have many, many Moslems in Britain. Millions of Moslems
live in Europe and we defend, absolutely and totally, their rights to exist
free from racism or stigmatising of any kind at all. There are many, many
Moslems indeed, who live in the United States of America and I think what is
important is that one of the common values that we should stand for in the
aftermath of the 11 September is a complete rejection of all forms of racism,
of religious intolerance, of discrimination against people, whatever their race
or religion or creed.
Just to say, in respect of the action in
Afghanistan, we understand as well the issue and opinion here about the nature
of the action we take but I would just like to say this to you: the action that we take is designed,
in so far as we possibly can, to minimise civilian casualties. The action that
was taken on the 11 September was action designed to maximise the number of
civilian casualties. So whatever the differences again of perspective there, we
too want to see this action brought to an end as swiftly as possible but it can
be done at any point in time that the Taliban regime and the al-Qaida network
shut down the network of terror there.
PRESIDENT ASSAD (via
interpreter): We thank
you very much and, as I said to Mr Prime Minister at the end of our meeting,
however bloody the picture might be, we can extract some light out of it if we
enjoin (?) the will (?) and the media can participate in that directly and in a
helpful way, particularly in the West, so we would like the media in the West
to play a very effective role in this crisis. Thank you very much.
____________________________________
"[British
Prime Minister Tony Blair] has not only embarrassed himself, but he has
also made life difficult for moderate Arab leaders like President
Mubarak of Egypt. [...] I think the decision to have a public
press conference in Damascus was extremely ill-advised, because the
outcome was entirely predictable. You cannot have a public press
conference with [Syrian] President Assad in Damascus without him using
it as an opportunity to attack Britain and to attack the West. London
must have known in advance. They should have conducted these matters as
they did in Saudi Arabia, as a much more private session."
[Former British Defence Minister (1992–1995) and Foreign Minister (1995–1997) Malcolm Rifkind, 2 November 2001]
source: Rifkind attacks Blair's 'unwise' mission to the Middle East, Daily Telegraph, 3 November 2001
____________________________________
Flashback to 2003:
"[W]e
have maintained the understanding that in bad days the two allies need
to act shoulder-to-shoulder. Turkey has indeed been alongside the
United States in nearly every major military conflict, from Korea to
the Gulf War, from Bosnia to Somalia, Kosovo and Afghanistan. (*)
Based
on an urgent U.S. request on March 19, [2003] we reapplied to the
National Assembly [i.e. Turkey's parliament] to get authorization for
the opening of Turkish air space to the coalition forces led by the
U.S. The Assembly approved this request on March 20, the day the
war began in Iraq. Turkish airspace was made available to the coalition
forces on the very next day."
[Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, My Country Is Your Faithful Ally and Friend , Wall Street Journal, 31 March 2003.
Mr Erdogan's article was published 11 days after the launch of the Anglo-American-led invasion of Iraq.]
(*)
Mr Erdogan refers to Turkey's participation in U.S.-led wars
against Korea (1950), Iraq (1991-), Bosnia (1994),
Somalia (1993), Serbia
(1999) and Afghanistan (2001-)
____________________________________
Related:
Propaganda alert: Cameron: 'British air strikes on Syria would be legally justified'
by Cem Ertür, Indybay, 7 September 2014
President Bashar al-Assad sworn in for a new term, addresses Syrians in milestone speech
[transcript of the inauguration speech by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad]
SANA, 17 July 2014
Flashback to 2003: "Major combat in Iraq is over, U.S. warns rogue Syria"
propaganda alert by Cem Ertür, Indybay, 16 April 2014
Flashback to 2003: President Assad: US seeks war on Iraq in order to redraw the map of Middle East
by Cem Ertür, Indybay, 20 June 2014
____________________________________