{"article":{"id":265840,"heading":"Flashback to 2001: President Assad to Prime Minister Blair:'Stop bombing Afghan civilians'","author":"Cem Ert\u00fcr","created":"2014-09-19 12:51:16","modified":"2014-09-19 12:51:16","last_modified":"Fri, 19 Sep 2014 19:51:16","article":"



Flashback to 2001: President Assad to Prime Minister Blair: 'Stop bombing Afghan civilians'<\/span>



compiled by Cem Ertür

19 September 2014







<\/span>
Reading the\r\n transcript of a joint press conference by Syrian President Bashar \r\nal-Assad and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, which was held on the 25th day of the Anglo-American-led invasion of Afghanistan, makes it \r\nabundantly clear why another Anglo-American-led genocidal war had been \r\nlaunched against Syria nearly ten years later.
<\/span><\/div>

 

 






The Guardian, 1 November 2001



<\/span>
caption: \r\n[British Prime Minister] Tony Blair, in Syria to drum up support for\r\nthe 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
<\/span><\/div>

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________






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\r\nnote:  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.  <\/span>  <\/span>




[emphasis added]



PRESIDENT ASSAD <\/span><\/b>(via interpreter):<\/b>  I am welcoming Mr Tony Blair, the Prime Minister of Britain and the accompanying delegation in Syria and I\r\nwould like to indicate that it is the first visit of senior British\r\nofficials at this level since the independence of Syria in the 1940s<\/span>\r\nand certainly before then, decades before then, and this has many\r\nindications and many importance and many meanings and it indicates the\r\ndevelopment of the relations between Syria and Great Britain. <\/span><\/span>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Despite the fact that the visit is very short\r\nthe talks were very rich and we had time to discuss many issues and many\r\ntopics. We agreed on many of the analyses that we discussed in the talks and\r\nthere were many points of understanding and there was also some points that\r\neach undertook to the other.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

The main issues that we discussed during\r\nthese talks, of course we concentrated on the issue of terrorism and the peace\r\nprocess and the Middle East, of course. We talked quickly about the bi-lateral\r\nrelations and we agreed to consolidate these relations through the ideas which\r\nwere discussed between Syrian and British officials whether in Syria or in\r\nBritain. As for the issue of terrorism, there was a sound condemnation of what\r\nhad taken place on 11 September in the United States and, I think this goes\r\nwithout saying, I don’t think there is any country in the world that would say\r\nit agrees with terrorism. It is a principle for all countries. But the condemnation that Syria has announced\r\nwas not only a result of what had taken place on 11 September, but it is an\r\noutcome of our principles, all the principles throughout our history in Syria,\r\nsocial principles, it was an outcome to our religious principles that are here\r\nin our Arab region, whether as Arabs or as Muslims or as Christians. It is a\r\nresult of our suffering from terrorism, especially during the mid-1970s and the\r\nconsequent period, and of course, at the same time, we differentiated - and I\r\npersonally differentiated - between resistance and terrorism and between Islam\r\nand terrorism. There is a difference between resistance as a social right, as a\r\nreligious right, it’s a legal right, and it is a right that is safeguarded\r\nthrough the United Nations’ resolutions.<\/b> Of course Islam and all holy\r\nreligions have the same source and they were sent to people by the same God.\r\nThese religions were not sent for war but they were sent for peace and for the\r\ncombating of terrorism.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

We talked about the root causes of terrorism\r\nand I mentioned many causes. But I mentioned particularly one important cause\r\nof terrorism and it is a reason that many citizens in the Arab or Muslim\r\nregions feel; it is a feeling of the difference and the human value between the\r\ncitizen in this region and the human values of the citizen in the West. Especially as terrorism is there for a long\r\ntime in Syria, <\/b>since 1985, the late President Hafez Al-Assad sent Syrian senior\r\nofficials to Western European countries to ask for convening an international\r\nconference to combat terrorism. So the issue of combating terrorism is very old\r\nfor Syria<\/b>,<\/span> and although the\r\ncombating of terrorism came quite late, it is better late than never. <\/b>The\r\nimportant point is that combating terrorism should have started before, and many people in the region feel there is a\r\ngulf that the Western people should fill, that the human person is a human\r\nperson anywhere and terrorism is terrorism anywhere, whether it is in the\r\nMiddle East or Europe or in Asia and everywhere in the world.<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

We spoke about combating terrorism and I said\r\nthat combating terrorism should start by defining this again. We can’t fight an\r\nenemy without knowing who this enemy is, what shape is he, where is he, is he\r\nNorth, East, West or South. We have to define our enemy first and we have to\r\nspecify its appearance and its existence and then we have to analyse the\r\nreasons which brought this terrorism. Therefore, in order to combat terrorism,\r\nwe have to address the root causes and not the effect. Until now only the\r\neffects of terrorism are being addressed but the root causes are not being\r\naddressed or it is at the beginning of being addressed. Addressing the root\r\ncauses of terrorism, as I have said, should be first political, it should be\r\ncultural, it should be media, informative, security and intelligence addressed.\r\nAnd the terrorism works as a network; it doesn’t have a certain head whether it\r\nis a person or an organisation. It is a network, terrorism is a network that\r\ncould be found anywhere, and therefore combating terrorism and fighting its\r\ncauses should come through international co-operation and not through having\r\none side or one country that fights terrorism. Terrorism is there everywhere\r\nand therefore combating terrorism should be done by every country in the world.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

We spoke about peace in the Middle East. As\r\nwe say always, Syria did not change its stand towards peace. Reaching a just\r\nand comprehensive peace in the region was always our principle, despite all the\r\ndifficult circumstances, despite all the setbacks that the peace process has\r\nsuffered from, the Syrian stand towards peace has not changed because it is a\r\nstrategic position and not a tactical position, but Israel as far as we are\r\nconcerned, is proving every day that it is against this peace, and therefore\r\nthe desire for peace cannot coincide with the desire for killing. The list for\r\nassassinations cannot be an expression of a desire to reach peace and stability\r\nin this region.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

We also spoke in the peace process about the\r\ninternational consensus in the world, especially after 11 September events,\r\nabout the necessity of achieving peace in the Middle Eastern region, and I said\r\nthat this international consensus is a golden opportunity that might not be\r\nrepeated in the future. It is an opportunity for the world, but it is to a\r\nlarge extent an opportunity for the American administration that could move\r\nwithout taking into account the domestic pressure that might influence its\r\nneutral role as co-sponsor of the peace process.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

We did not differentiate in our talk\r\n(inaudible) that peace and terrorism. Some\r\npeople linked the issue of the Middle East to terrorism directly and it is\r\nunderstood as if the Middle East is a source of terrorism, and this is not\r\ncorrect.<\/b> Despite our point of view as Arabs, because Israel is practising the state terrorism regularly and this is definite<\/b>,\r\nbut the Middle Eastern region often influences activating terrorism, because\r\nterrorists always need a cover. This cover could be a national issue, it could\r\nbe a pan-national issue, it could be a social issue, and therefore closing the\r\nhot areas in the world will deprive these terrorists of the cover they always\r\nseek.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Of course we — and the last point I would\r\nlike to say about peace is that in Syria\r\nwe cannot see with one eye as some people see. We cannot separate the issue of\r\nterrorism that we see every day and we live every day that Israel is practising\r\nagainst the Palestinians. We cannot separate between this kind of terrorism and\r\nthe terrorism that is taking place in the world, and we can’t really look with\r\none eye. <\/b>Some people see with one eye, some people see with closed eyes and\r\nwe cannot, we look at the issues with wide-open eyes in order to see what has\r\ntaken place, and in order to see things from a very realistic perspective.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And therefore no one can say small details\r\ncan see small details without seeing the big issues, and the closer issues. People in the Arab region, and in the\r\nMuslim world cannot see the international terrorism without seeing Israeli\r\nterrorism, and therefore addressing this kind of terrorism is one.<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Some people say that achieving peace will\r\nmake a big step for combating terrorism, this is correct. But also combating\r\nterrorism in Israel would help to reach (5 second break in audio) highly\r\nappreciate what I have heard from Mr Prime Minister, because of his high\r\nappreciation and his great respect to Islam as a religion, and his high respect\r\nto the Muslim people in Britain. I am going to leave the floor to Mr Prime\r\nMinister to address you.<\/span>
<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>: <\/span><\/b> Mr President, first of all can I thank you for\r\nhosting me here in Syria, and say how much I welcome the talks that we have had\r\nthis morning and I know we will continue later.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And as you said right at the very outset this\r\nis candid dialogue. But it is a dialogue I would like to think could be pursued\r\nby us both as people trying to reach an understanding of each other’s\r\nperspectives. And trying to work together as partners for the greater good of the\r\nwider world.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And there are two main issues obviously that\r\nwe discussed. The first was the attacks of the 11 September in the United\r\nStates of America. And I very much welcomed the strong statement of\r\ncondemnation that you have made to me, and repeated again now Mr President. I\r\nthink that is important that the entire world knows that the world community is\r\nunited in condemning what happened on the 11 September as an atrocity.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

The second thing is that that attack was\r\ncarried out by extremists who do not represent in any way, shape or form, the\r\ntrue faith or voice of Islam. And your strong statement to that effect is also\r\nmost welcome.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

I believe it is important therefore that we\r\nsend out a very clear message and signal that there is a strong international\r\ncoalition against terrorism. And in Syria, and indeed the countries in this\r\nentire region are united as part of that coalition.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

In respect of the Middle East peace process,\r\nwhatever the differences of perspective, we both understand the importance of\r\nrestarting the Middle East peace process properly, of getting back to a\r\nsituation in which differences are resolved by a process of talking and\r\ndialogue. And that in that regard violence from whatever quarter is equally\r\nunhelpful, and what we require is the space and the time to get people talking\r\ntogether again.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And the objective that we seek, and I believe\r\nagain this is shared by you, and shared by people in this region, is a\r\nsituation where Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side in peace\r\ntogether. That is in the end the only possible long-term solution.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

So Mr President I thank you for inviting me\r\nhere today, I have very much welcomed the talks together. I know that for you\r\nas you were saying to me earlier, there is a relationship not just between\r\nBritain and Syria that is part of our history, but a personal relationship for\r\nyou, since you have lived and worked in Britain.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And I hope that the candid dialogue that we\r\nhave begun today can strengthen over time. Because there are huge differences\r\nin understanding between West and Islam, between west and the Arab world.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And yet if one can come out of the terrible\r\nevents of the 11 September, it is an attempt to bridge that gulf of\r\nmisunderstanding, and create the right circumstances for partnership in the\r\nfuture, and I believe that that is possible.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And so I hope that the dialogue we have begun\r\ntoday can continue over time, so that we achieve the objectives we both want to\r\nachieve. Which is an end to terrorism in all its forms, wherever it exists, and\r\na proper and lasting peace and solution for the province of the Middle East.\r\nThank you.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>Could I ask (inaudible) if they discussed the current\r\naction in Afghanistan during their talks? Whether any pledges, promises,\r\nguarantees, anything of that nature were sought by President Assad, and given\r\nor not by Prime Minister Blair.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  Well of course we have discussed the current\r\nsituation in Afghanistan. And I think that the most important thing to\r\nemphasise is that people accept that what happened on the 11 September was\r\nwrong, and that it is necessary for the international community to act.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Now we are acting in Afghanistan, we have set\r\nout our objectives there very, very clearly. And I think that the desire of\r\neveryone is to make sure that we bring that action to a successful conclusion\r\nas swiftly as possible. That is our desire I think that is the desire of all\r\npeople in this region and elsewhere.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRESIDENT\r\nASSAD <\/span><\/b>(via interpreter): <\/b> As far as we are concerned in Syria\r\nwe (inaudible) appreciate that we\r\nannounced our stand right from the beginning. A very clear stand that we\r\ncondemn terrorism, and with an international coalition for combating terrorism.\r\nBut we should differentiate between combating terrorism, and between war.<\/b> <\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

We did\r\nnot say we support an international coalition for launching a war, we are\r\nalways against war, it is a point of principle, because wars have always a\r\nnegative effect on societies.<\/span><\/b> And we\r\nbelieve that combating terrorism cannot be done through war, but it can be done\r\nthrough political cultural intelligence cooperation amongst relevant countries.\r\n<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And therefore, at least we do not like to see more wars taking place in the world, because we\r\nhave suffered from many wars, especially as we see some civilians, innocent\r\ncivilians falling every day.<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>And Mr Prime Minister Tony Blair, and the American\r\nPresident George Bush, and your Excellency have announced your support to\r\nestablishing a Palestinian, independent Palestinian state to establish the\r\nability in the region. How do you see the execution of the (inaudible) in the\r\nlight of the dangerous (inaudible) of pulling down houses, expanding\r\nsettlements, and ignore all international requests, including your request, and\r\nthe request of the American administration.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  What is necessary if we are going to restart the\r\npeace process in the Middle East is that two things happen. First of all we\r\nhave got to agree what the fixed points of principle are. And those fixed\r\npoints of principle to my mind are that Israel is entitled to exist, has its\r\nright to exist, and be confident of its own peace and security within its own\r\nborders.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

And secondly that alongside the state of\r\nIsraeli there is a Palestinian state where there is justice and equality for\r\npeople. Now I believe that based on that, based on the United Nations\r\nresolutions, it is possible to restart a proper process that can achieve those\r\naims.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

The second thing however that is necessary,\r\nas well as agreement on those fixed points of principle, is that we have an end\r\nto violence of all sorts, in order to give space and time for a peace process\r\nto begin again. Because whilst violence is continuing, of whatever nature, it\r\nis difficult for the political process to work, and if I can say to you,\r\ncertainly to borrow from the process of peace in Northern Ireland, which, in a\r\nvery different context, has some similarities in terms of divided communities\r\nand great bitterness and hostility, it is vital, in order for the political\r\nprocess to work, that violence ends, of all types, because it is the people of\r\nviolence that want to displace the political process, and what I would like to\r\nsee is, based on those six points of principle, based on the United Nations\r\nResolution, a peace process begin again that allows us to take back control of\r\nthe situation for politics and not for violence.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>Can I ask the Prime Minister whether you did discuss\r\nthe situation of the terrorist groups which the Americans believe were\r\noperating in this country, whether you asked the President to restrain them,\r\nand may I ask the President whether you are prepared to take action against\r\nthose groups, in particular the one that has claimed responsibility for the\r\nrecent assassination in Israel?<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  First of all, if I can say that, as I just made clear\r\na moment or two ago, it is our belief that all groups involved in violence must\r\ncease their activities, so that the political process is given a chance to\r\nwork. Now, there are going to be differences in perspective and views about the\r\nissue, both of the Middle East peace process, about the action that we take in\r\nrespect of Afghanistan. But what I think is important is to recognise that\r\nunless we can bring about the situation in which the violence really does cease\r\nin the Middle East and the political process begin to work, then it is very\r\ndifficult to see how we are going to get a just, negotiated solution to the\r\nproblems that we face, and as I say, whatever the differences in perspective\r\nare - and we said it was a candid dialogue - whatever the differences in\r\nperspective, I think that is accepted by both of us. We both want to see a\r\nsituation where the violence ends and ends completely, on all sides, so that\r\nthe peace process can get started again.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRESIDENT ASSAD <\/span><\/strong>(via\r\ninterpreter)<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  I would like\r\nto give a comment about this question. Of course the issue of the Middle East\r\nissue is for the countries concerned and one of the first countries who are\r\nconcerned and we are more capable to decide the nature of the organisations and\r\nthe people who are in the region. As I said in the beginning, resisting occupation is an international\r\nright nobody can deny, and therefore we have many organisations, many people\r\nwho support the liberation and who support the resistance fighters who seek to\r\nliberate their lands. The act of resistance is very different from the act of\r\nterrorism. As I said, we differentiate. In the west you have one example in\r\nFrance, for example, one of the most important personalities or one of the\r\nsymbols is President de Gaulle, who fought for liberating the French land. Can\r\nany one of you accuse President de Gaulle of being a terrorist? No way, because\r\nwhat President de Gaulle did is the same thing that’s being done by the\r\nresistance fighters in this region, and therefore it’s the same measure that\r\nshould be applied.<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>Mr Prime Minister Tony Blair, the peace process was\r\nstarted ten years ago and peace has not been achieved at a time when violence\r\nwas not there in the region, and the peace was not achieved due to the Israeli\r\npolicies. Is there any initiative or intention by the Europeans or by\r\ninternational community to restart the peace process (inaudible) according to\r\nthe United Nations Resolution and the land for peace principles (inaudible) for\r\nthe region’s (inaudible)?<\/span>
<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  Well of course there’s an intention to do that. It’s\r\nprecisely what we want to achieve. We want the process to begin again so that\r\nthere is the possibility, through dialogue, of resolving the issues in the\r\nMiddle East. But in order for that to happen, what is important is that there\r\nis an end to all forms of violence, where there is restraint, an end to\r\nviolence, and the opportunity then to get people to talk about the issues, and\r\nover the last ten years, as you know, there have been many, many attempts to\r\nget the peace process moving ahead. Now those attempts have not yet succeeded,\r\nbut my message to people in whatever part of the region I will be over the next\r\ncouple of days is there is no alternative. When all the killing and the\r\nbloodshed stops, people will have to come back and try and resolve their\r\ndifferences through dialogue. There is no alternative to that, just as there is\r\nno realistic alternative to a situation where the right of Israel to exist,\r\nconfident in its own security, and the right of the Palestinians to their own\r\nstate, is accepted as the basic principles of that dialogue.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Now I believe that can happen, but it needs\r\nthe space and the time, as I say, to do it and even before the 11 September —\r\nsometimes I know in this part of the world it has been said that people like\r\nmyself and President Bush were only interested in the issue of the peace\r\nprocess in the Middle East once the 11 September had occurred. This is not\r\ntrue. When I met President Arafat a few days ago in London, that was my\r\neleventh meeting with him. Before the 11 September we already had the Tenet (?)\r\nPlan, the Mitchell Plan; as you know the Americans were preparing a new process\r\nin order to try and restore some momentum to the Middle East peace process. So\r\nwe have, right from the very beginning, understood the importance of this\r\nissue, but we need the help of everybody, of all countries in this region, in\r\norder to get it done, and the single most important thing that will allow us to\r\nget it done is an end to violence from whatever quarter, in whatever form.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>It seems that the focus now is to implement the\r\nMitchell Plan and the Tenet Plan to cement the shaky ceasefire between the\r\nPalestinians and the Israelis. Do you think that’s a good start? Is it enough\r\nof a start? And would you, at some point, encourage what you perceive as\r\nlegitimate resistance to halt their attacks to give the Mitchell Plan a chance?<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRESIDENT ASSAD <\/span><\/strong>(via\r\ninterpreter<\/span><\/strong>):  We have\r\nour perspective about the Mitchell Report. We did not participate in it and\r\nSyria was not consulted about it, but the failure of many attempts did not take\r\ninto account the necessary requirements for the peace (inaudible) including the\r\nrights of the Palestinian people, and the people in the region have proven that\r\nour perspective, our point of view, was correct, so the right thing is that the\r\nceasefire, agreement for a ceasefire, but it is not the terms of reference for\r\na peace process. The terms of reference for a peace process is the Security\r\nCouncil Resolution and the Madrid terms of reference. When we speak about\r\ninitiatives regardless of the names of these initiatives, or when we speak\r\nabout negotiations, all these are the means, but the important thing is\r\njustice; justice is peace.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

We have to put one rule for the elements and\r\nfor the objective, in order to achieve this objective. When we want to say — or\r\nlet us assume that there’s an initiative, and the Palestinian citizen is going\r\nto ask, \"What is the objective of this initiative? Is it to stop\r\nviolence?\" Stopping violence is perhaps necessary to reach peace, but it\r\nis not everything; the more important thing is what this citizen is going to\r\nachieve, what are the rights he is going to achieve when the peace process\r\nends, when — any initiative depends on United Nations Resolutions, on Madrid\r\nterms of reference, and so directing the peace process, or the co-sponsor\r\nshould be neutral, should be an honest broker, and this is what was not\r\nachieved during the last ten years, and that’s why peace has failed, and that’s\r\nwhy all the attempts have failed. If you don’t have the right way to conduct\r\nthe peace process through the means and through the objectives we are going to\r\nmeet in press conferences with other senior officials ten years from now to\r\nspeak about launching a peace process.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  I’d like to just respond to that if I might, for a\r\nmoment. Sorry, let me just respond to that for a moment please. I think the\r\nPresident said something that is very important there, that the Tenet and the\r\nMitchell plans are valid plans in order to bring about a different security\r\nsituation and end the violence. But I agree that is the first step, it is not\r\nthe end of the process. What must then happen is that we resolve the actual\r\nissues that are outstanding. And I think that what he said there too, in\r\nrespect of the UN resolutions and the Madrid conclusions is also important. And\r\nI hope very much there will come a point in time when Syria is able to resume\r\nnegotiations also with Israel in order to get the outstanding issues between\r\nthem sorted out.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

So I agree with the fact that the end to\r\nviolence is the context in which the key issues can be resolved. It’s not the\r\nresolution of the issues themselves. So we’ve got to end the violence and then\r\ngo on to resolve those key issues. And I think that if there is agreement on\r\nthat and if there is an agreement, as I say, on those two fixed points of\r\nreference - on Israel and on the Palestinian state - I think that we could\r\nstart to make a great deal more progress. Sorry, sir.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>Mr Prime Minister, Tony Blair, many Arabs and Moslems\r\nfeel a kind of frustration and oppression and injustice because of the\r\nnon-implementation of Israel into the United Nations resolution and because of\r\nthe double standards. Do you, Mr Prime Minister, have a plan, especially the\r\nEuropean Union, to address this issue - this very sensitive issue — and which\r\nreally is the source of tension in the region? Thank you.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  Well, first of all, I want to say this very directly\r\nto public opinion here - and we should never forget, coming from my country,\r\nthat public opinion in your country may be in a different place from public\r\nopinion in Britain or Europe or the United States of America - but I hope\r\nwhatever part of the world we’re in we can agree on this: what happened on 11\r\nSeptember cannot be excused and neither can those that carried out the 11\r\nSeptember attack, in which, I may say, thousands of innocent people —\r\nChristians, Jews, Moslems, people of no faith at all — died. That cannot be\r\nexcused on the basis of any court and, as the President said a moment or two\r\nago, there are always people — the extremists always want to use a cause as\r\ncover for the extremist acts that they carry out.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Now, it is also important — so I hope that\r\ncondemnation is accepted by everyone and that no one should think that the\r\npeople that carried out the 11 September attack represent, in any shape or\r\nform, true Arab or Moslem opinion. And that’s an important statement. But of\r\ncourse we understand that there is legitimate concern about the breakdown of\r\nthe Middle East Peace Process and a desire to get that started again. And we\r\nunderstand that and what you have got to understand from us is that we know\r\nthere is a serious issue here that must be resolved. And we are willing to put\r\nall our energy and ability into trying to resolve it.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Now it’s not for me to come here and issue\r\nplans and so on but it is for me to come here and say to people very clearly,\r\n\"We want to try and resolve this issue. We want to get the Middle East\r\nPeace Process started again. Give us the opportunity of doing that by making\r\nsure that the conditions in which people can talk again, and of which dialogue\r\nis the way forward, can be created.\" And that’s why I say to you that the\r\nviolence from whatever quarter has to end. And I understand the different\r\nperspectives there will be between Syria and Britain or between Syria,\r\nobviously, and Israel. There will be fundamental differences of perspectives.\r\nBut we both, in the end, know there is no alternative but to us sitting down\r\nand working out these differences, not by violence or by terrorism of whatever\r\nform but by partnership and by trying to resolve the issues constructively. And\r\nI think that can happen. And one of the reasons for us coming here - and I say\r\nthis to you again, absolutely openly - it is difficult because of the history\r\nand the differences to come here, to have a press conference such as this but I\r\nhappen to believe that if anything good can come out of the terrible events of\r\nthe 11 September, it is an attempt to find new understanding and a new way\r\nforward to resolve the differences that we have. Now maybe we won’t be able to\r\nbut let’s at least try. And let’s at least try doing so, understanding the\r\nperspective from which the other person comes. <\/span><\/span><\/p>

Okay? Yeah, I don’t mind. Yeah — I can take another\r\none, if you want. Well, this lady here. I should say this is the generosity of\r\nthe president that is allowing this! (laughter)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>Mr Prime Minister, I was very interested in what you\r\nsaid about the military action in Afghanistan. Are you now requesting, British\r\nPrime Minister, to stop the military action and would you go so far as to define it, in a way, as a form of terrorism?<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRESIDENT ASSAD <\/span><\/strong>(via\r\ninterpreter)<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  We are not\r\nasking for anything and we are not a party to it in order to ask for putting an\r\nend to it but we have a perspective, we have a point of view, a general point\r\nof view about this war and about any other war. The history of Syria stretches\r\nfor 6,000 years, 4,000 years before Christ, and the Assyrians were great\r\nfighters and that then since that time until no, there is a defence of Syrian\r\nterritory. But there was — that Syria\r\nwas never an aggressor or an occupier of any other country or killing of any\r\ninnocent citizens. This is a principle, a Syrian principle. But, at the same\r\ntime, we cannot accept what we see every day on television screens, killing the\r\ninnocent civilians [in Afghanistan]. There are hundreds now who are dying every day. I don’t\r\nthink anybody in the West accepts or agrees to that. <\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


QUESTION:  <\/span><\/strong>(Several inaudible words) Mr Prime Minister, some\r\nvoices in Europe after 11 September are asking for closing the frontier in the\r\nway of Arabs and Moslems. How do you see these races called and what are you\r\ndoing towards them?<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/span>


PRIME MINISTER BLAIR<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  Well, as you probably know, just as Syria has some 2\r\nmillion Christians, we have many, many Moslems in Britain. Millions of Moslems\r\nlive in Europe and we defend, absolutely and totally, their rights to exist\r\nfree from racism or stigmatising of any kind at all. There are many, many\r\nMoslems indeed, who live in the United States of America and I think what is\r\nimportant is that one of the common values that we should stand for in the\r\naftermath of the 11 September is a complete rejection of all forms of racism,\r\nof religious intolerance, of discrimination against people, whatever their race\r\nor <\/span>religion<\/span> or creed.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n<\/span>

Just to say, in respect of the action in\r\nAfghanistan, we understand as well the issue and opinion here about the nature\r\nof the action we take but I would just like to say this to you:<\/b> the action that we take is designed,\r\nin so far as we possibly can, to minimise civilian casualties. The action that\r\nwas taken on the 11 September was action designed to maximise the number of\r\ncivilian casualties. So whatever the differences again of perspective there, we\r\ntoo want to see this action brought to an end as swiftly as possible but it can\r\nbe done at any point in time that the Taliban regime and the al-Qaida network\r\nshut down the network of terror there.<\/span>
<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>


PRESIDENT ASSAD <\/span><\/strong>(via\r\ninterpreter)<\/span><\/strong>:<\/span><\/b>  We thank\r\nyou very much and, as I said to Mr Prime Minister at the end of our meeting,\r\nhowever bloody the picture might be, we can extract some light out of it if we\r\nenjoin (?) the will (?) and the media can participate in that directly and in a\r\nhelpful way, particularly in the West, so we would like the media in the West\r\nto play a very effective role in this crisis. Thank you very much.<\/span><\/span><\/p>


<\/span><\/p>


<\/span>____________________________________
<\/span><\/p>



<\/span>

\"[British\r\nPrime Minister Tony Blair] has not only embarrassed himself, but he has\r\nalso made life difficult for moderate Arab leaders like President\r\nMubarak of Egypt. [...]  I think the decision to have a public\r\npress conference in Damascus was extremely ill-advised, because the\r\noutcome was entirely predictable. You cannot have a public press\r\nconference with [Syrian] President Assad in Damascus without him using\r\nit as an opportunity to attack Britain and to attack the West. London\r\nmust have known in advance. They should have conducted these matters as\r\nthey 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<\/span>]<\/span><\/div>


source:  Rifkind attacks Blair's 'unwise' mission to the Middle East, Daily Telegraph, 3 November 2001



____________________________________




Flashback to 2003:<\/b>



<\/span>
\"[W]e\r\nhave maintained the understanding that in bad days the two allies need\r\nto act shoulder-to-shoulder. Turkey has indeed been alongside the\r\nUnited States in nearly every major military conflict, from Korea to\r\nthe Gulf War, from Bosnia to Somalia, Kosovo and Afghanistan.  (*)

Based\r\non an urgent U.S. request on March 19, [2003] we reapplied to the\r\nNational Assembly [i.e. Turkey's parliament] to get authorization for\r\nthe opening of Turkish air space to the coalition forces led by the\r\nU.S. The Assembly approved this request on March 20, the day the\r\nwar began in Iraq. Turkish airspace was made available to the coalition\r\nforces on the very next day.\"


[Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, <\/span>My Country Is Your Faithful Ally and Friend , Wall Street Journal, 31 March 2003. <\/span>

Mr Erdogan's article was published 11 days after the launch of the Anglo-American-led invasion of Iraq.<\/span>]
<\/span><\/div>



(*)\r\n Mr Erdogan refers to Turkey's participation in U.S.-led wars\r\nagainst Korea (1950), Iraq (1991-), Bosnia (1994),\r\nSomalia (1993), Serbia\r\n(1999) and Afghanistan (2001-)



____________________________________




Related:<\/span>


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


____________________________________

<\/span><\/div>\n","contact":"cem.ertur@gmail.com","link":"https:\/\/www.indybay.org\/newsitems\/2014\/09\/19\/18761806.php","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/html","summary":"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.\r\n\r\n","numcomment":0,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2014\/09\/265840.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[]}