Search Result in All

[16 June 2014] Iran, P5+1 representatives meeting in Vienna for fresh nuclear talks - English

Recapping Session 20 | Imams in action | Building a Network of Representatives | English

Representatives of over 20 foreign embassies in Lebanon received a detailed account of Israeli espionage activity in the country. Lebanese ministers and lawmakers briefed the foreign representatives during a closed meeting at the Lebanese parliament. One of the revelations made was that even foreign embassies, in addition to the UN peacekeeping forces in Lebanon, are also victims of Israeli espionage.

The US House of Representatives have approved a bill that calls for suspension of American aid to the Palestinian Authority if it insists on carrying out a plan to gain UN recognition for its statehood declaration in September. The resolution had 320 co-sponsors out of the chamber's 435 voting members. The bill came one week after the US Senate unanimously approved a similar measure. In this edition of Press TV News Analysis, we ask that if Palestine is recognized internationally as a state, with a flag flying at the UN, would it level the playing field, and try to get some answers as to why the US and Israel are so dead set against this.

[02 Aug 2012] US bans on Iran act of frustration - English The US House of Representatives has repeated a Senate action in voting for additional illegal sanctions against Iran, pushed by the influential American pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC. Interview with Hamid Reza Emadi, political commentator

14th Organization of Islamic Cooperation, OIC, Trade Fair kicks off in Tehran. Representatives of trading companies from over 30 OIC member states, including Azerbaijan, Kuwait, Oman, Turkey, Pakistan and Indonesia attended the three day, biannual event to display their latest industrial achievements. Iran\'s First Vice President talked about the importance of OIC and its potentials. He stated that OIC through more cooperation among its member states can have a larger share of world trade.

A gathering to draw a road map for the future of natural gas in the global energy basket. Energy ministers and representatives of 17 countries gathered in Tehran for the 15th ministerial meeting of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum or the GECF. The Forum includes giant producers of natural gas such as Russia, Iran and Qatar as well as Oman and the United Arab Emirates. Other members are in Africa, the Caribbean, and Latin America.

Representatives from Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany will sit down for fresh talks in Geneva on Wednesday.

More than 200 high-ranking politicians, business- and government representatives came together in German capital to attend Berlin third Foreign Policy Forum. Experts discussed key questions of German and European foreign policy focusing on issues ranging rom transatlantic relations to the recent agreement on Iran\'s nuclear energy programmer reached in Geneva last weekend.

A panel resumes voting on the final draft of a new constitution for Egypt. The current panel includes representatives from civil society, political parties, the army, police, and the Coptic church. The new constitution is expected to spark controversy, as it will strengthen the army\'s hand. It will also forbid the formation of parties based on religious grounds. Egypt\'s interim authorities suspended the previous constitution written during Mohamed Morsi\'s presidency after his removal on July 3.

Representatives of the Russian Muslims came together at the Public Chamber in Moscow to discuss issues being faced by millions of their community members around the country.

Representatives of Pakistani Shia organizations have participated in the All Parties Shia Conference in Lahore to denounce targeted killings of Shia Muslims across the country.

Talks between representatives of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, experts from Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency to work out \"technical details\" of last month\'s landmark nuclear deal have started in Vienna.

This is the second year that Iran\'s industry, mines and trade ministry invites a number of representatives of foreign countries to meet with officials and experts in Iran\'s mining sector. The gathering takes place in the framework of a conference and exhibition on investment opportunities in Iran\'s mining & mining Industries. The aim is to encourage foreign investors to enter Iran\'s mining sector which up until today has remained mostly undeveloped.

Representatives from Iran and the permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany are in Geneva for another round of technical talks over Iran\'s nuclear program. The talks come after four days of similar talks in Vienna last week. Iran walked out of the last round after the US expanded its sanctions against Tehran. The added measures came as, under a landmark deal in Geneva last month, the West had promised not to slap new sanctions. Tehran says it\'s ready to pick up the talks after the E-U foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton assured it that the P-five-plus-one countries, specially the U-S, would continue the talks in goodwill. Meanwhile, France\'s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who had previously blocked a deal under the influence of Israel, has already cast doubt on the chances of a final agreement in Geneva.

Representatives from the US, Russia, China, Syria and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons are to meet in Moscow to discuss ways of safely destroying Syria\\\'s chemical arms. The meeting will be held behind closed doors. This, as a Russian official says Syria\\\'s chemical weapons will be taken out of the country through its maritime borders. The Arab country agreed to the destruction of its chemical arsenal after the August 21 deadly gas attack near Damascus. The Syrian government and Russia have repeatedly said that the attack was carried out by insurgents to provoke Western governments, particularly the U-S into a military intervention in Syria.

Leaders of Syria\'s internal opposition are in Moscow ahead of the Geneva-2 peace talks. Representatives from the so-called People\'s Front for Change and Liberation say they want to discuss the upcoming conference with Russia\'s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Talks between Syria\'s foreign-backed opposition and government representatives in Geneva continue. The United Nations-backed conference was organized to end the Syria conflict. It opened on the 22nd of January in Switzerland after months of preparations. However, deep divisions exist between the two sides. So far, the talks have only resulted in an agreement on the free passage of women and children out of the besieged city of Homs.

Representatives from the Syrian government and the foreign-backed opposition will resume meetings in February. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has confirmed the February talks. The confirmation comes as the two sides prepare to wrap up the Geneva negotiations on Friday which were mediated by UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi. The two sides remained deadlocked on Thursday over the issue of terrorism in Syria. They blame each other for the ongoing violence.

The fresh round of talks between the representatives of the Syrian government and the foreign-backed opposition has got off to a rough start with few signs of progress. Brahimi-- who was making the remarks after a joint meeting with the two sides-- added that there is a need for cooperation between the negotiating parties and the support of the international community for talks to be fruitful. The U-N-Arab League mediator also confirmed that there he will have a joint meeting with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov, and U-S undersecretary of state for political affairs Wendy Sherman on Friday. Brahimi is due to report to U-N Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the Security Council within the next few weeks.

The enemy accuses the Islamic Republic of being isolationist and cutting ties with the rest of the world? Is that true? The Leader speaks.

Who is the Iranian nation? Do you even recognize this nation? Do you care to know who represents the Islamic Iran? Imam Khamenei speaks. A few hundred cowards, ill-informed, misguided, westoxified individuals come out on the streets every now and then and the zionist controlled \'mainstream media\' latch on to give them coverage and magnify these meaningless \"protests\". Do these low-lives represent the great Iranian nation? If you want to know who the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran are, look at the massive turnouts that flood the streets of Iran every time the Islamic Resistance and the Islamic System needs support. For reference, check out Al-Quds Day rallies, 22 Bahman rallies, Shaheed Hojaji rallies, Shaheed Soleimani rallies. Shame on the treacherous western media to hide the real presence of the Iranians while it highlights those couple of hundred notorious elements paid by the CIA to create chaos in the country.

Teacher : Shaykh Miqdad Rajabali

Promoting Shia Sunni Unity...

Press conference by Iranian President Dr. Ahmadinejad in New York SEPT 2010 - English. In response to a question of a journalist saying that it was heard there have been some negotiations between the representative of Iran and US, the president stressed: "In this travel there has been no negotiation between the representatives of the two countries. In response to a question that Mr. Obama posed some words regarding the talks with Iran "What is your view on them?" Dr. Ahmadinejad on the last day of his travel to New York said; The Islamic Republic of Iran has not cut his relations with US, and in this regard we have no responsibility. The president continued: "As I mentioned before, apart from the Zionistic regime, we want to have relations with other countries .If US plans to talk he must change his rhetoric and this dialog must be under equal and fair conditions. On another question he pointed out: "Based on the previously planned programs a representative will talk with one of the 5+1 members under the agreed contexts in October. The president added the 5+1 group has cut his talk unilaterally and issued a resolution against our country, this is not the first time it has done such things, and when they run short logic, they precede such actions. On a question regarding the compromise negotiations and Palestine's issue and the position of Iran towards this case, the president mentioned: "This is the people of Palestine to decide for themselves in which no other country has right to interfere. He said that the destiny of Palestine must be determined by the people of Palestine. The nation of Palestine must decide about the kind of their government in a referendum. Experiences show that when Palestinians hasn't participated in decision-makings, the negotiation results were not successful. On another question quoting from some reports that there have been negotiations between Iran and US ,Dr.Ahmadinejad stressed: "There were No Negotiations between Iran and US representatives ,of course our relations with the nation of US is always available .In this travel I have had meetings with four groups of the US people .On a question regarding the claims of journalists denoting double regulations in Iran and imprisonment of some journalists and freedom of religions ,the president remarked : "The defiant of government are freely living in Iran. They slander and disagree and they are completely free ,of course maybe one or two journalists left the country but there are tens of thousands of journalists working freely in Iran, and hundreds of newspapers are being published. The president added: "The opposing heads issue declarations to the government of Iran and express their disagreements freely. On the freedom of religions in Iran, The president said: "The constitution in Iran ascertained the legal religions and these religions under the context of the same regulation can be practiced, of course if a person wants to advertise through illegal methods, regulations will stop him.

Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech to Basijis 21/11/2012 The following is the full text of the speech delivered on November 21, 2012 by Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in a meeting with Basijis and Salehin activists. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful Thankfully, an event similar to the great event of Ashura - which has been narrated for us - took place in our own times. During the Sacred Defense Era, many men, women and young people who were trying to achieve their noble goals, laid down their lives and wealth and forgot about the material aspects of their lives. Today we are benefiting from the blessings of this event. The coincidence of this event with the great event of Ashura is a lesson for us. The Islamic Ummah should never forget the event of Ashura which is a lesson and a source of guidance for us. Definitely Islam is alive because of the event of Ashura and the efforts of Hussein ibn Ali (a.s.). \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And I am from Hussein.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This narration means that Hussein (a.s.) continued the path of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.) and he continued to promote Islam after him. If it had not been for the event of Ashura and if these great sacrifices had not been made in the history of Islam, this valuable experience and this practical lesson would not have been bestowed on the Islamic Ummah and Islam would have definitely deviated from its path - as many religions before Islam did - and nothing would have remained from it. The greatness of Ashura is because of this. Of course, the pain and suffering which Imam Hussein (a.s.) and his followers endured on the day of Ashura were too agonizing and the harm which was inflicted was very serious. The life of Hussein ibn Ali (a.s.) is more valuable than everything in the world. The pure and sacred lives of those followers of Imam Hussein (a.s.), the lives of those youth and those members of Imam Hussein\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s (a.s.) household are not comparable to the life of other people. Their bodies were covered in blood and dirt. They made sacrifices and they laid down their lives. The households of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.) and Imam Ali (a.s.) were imprisoned. Those events are very tragic and very difficult to tolerate. But what was achieved on the day of Ashura was so great and glorious that it made it easy for Imam Hussein (a.s.), his followers and his household to endure the sufferings. This has been narrated by prominent figures. The late Hajj Mirza Javad Agha Maleki (may God bestow paradise on him) stressed in his book \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Muraqibaat\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" - what he has said in this book is certainly true - that the greater the sufferings grew on the day of Ashura, the brighter and more cheerful the face of Hussein ibn Ali (a.s.) would become. You should always keep in mind these important and extraordinary facts about Ashura. In our own times, we have seen similar examples of these sacrifices. We have seen similar examples of sacrifices which we have read about in history books. One significant and remarkable example of these sacrifices is what Basij did before the start of the imposed war, during the Sacred Defense Era and after it ended. We have enormously benefited from the blessings of Basij and by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, these blessings should and will continue to benefit us. An important point about Basij is that during the Sacred Defense Era, we could see that Basij enjoyed great purity. We should preserve this purity in Basij. The present situation is more complicated. It is dangerous to go to war, kill, fight and take on responsibilities which may result in martyrdom or disability. It is still dangerous even if nothing happens to you, but being present in a military confrontation is not complicated. The present situation in which you are faced with the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plots and attacks has certain complications. The confrontation between you and the enemy has certain complications. The dangers that our soldiers were exposed to may not exist today, but the present situation has more complications. An advantage of the military confrontation we experienced was that whoever entered it showed great purity of intention. Entering the arena of war was a life and death situation. It was not a joke. It needed courage, selfless efforts, faith and reliance on God, but our soldiers went to war and they were martyred. Today we still need that kind of courage and faith in different arenas, but it is possible that certain people call themselves basijis without having these characteristics. You should be vigilant about this. First, we should guard ourselves against this and second, we should guard Basij against this. This is the duty of all members of Basij. You should strengthen the basiji spirit in Basij organizations including Salehin organizations which you manage. We should make sure that Basij has purity in everything it does. This is difficult to some extent. One reason why practicing self-restraint and paying attention to spiritual matters is called \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"greater jihad\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is the difficulty of this task. In a military confrontation with the enemy, one can easily measure one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s and other people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s purity. It is easier to do this in the case of a military confrontation, but in the arena of practicing self-restraint this is not very easy. In latter case, you may make a mistake in judging how pure your actions are and others may also misjudge what kind of person you are. Another point is that we should avoid negative qualities such as arrogance, pretension and hypocrisy. These qualities are very destructive. If we make an achievement, we should be thankful to God and we should know that our achievement has been made with the help of God and we should ask God to help us continue making these achievements. It is very important not to be arrogant and not be over-confident. We should not think that we have made achievements on our own and we should rely on God Almighty. It is a fact that there is no power except the power of God Almighty. Everything is done by God. Our achievements, our capabilities, our enthusiasm, our faith and our love all come from God. We should know this and we should be thankful to God. We should ask God Almighty to increase these qualities in our characters. This is an important issue. I noticed an important point in the statements of the dear people who spoke in this meeting. That point is the high quality of organizations which form the basis of Basij. What is damaging is superficiality in our beliefs, our understanding of different matters and our principles. Superficiality is damaging. It is like a precarious stack of things which is easily blown down by a strong wind. We should give depth to our beliefs. Thankfully, you pay attention to these issues. Salehin organizations were created with a view to giving depth to the thoughts and the spirits of young basijis in spiritual and educational matters. Generally, Basij is one of the miracles of the Revolution. Basij reflects the innovation of our magnanimous Imam (r.a.). It shows his understanding, his wisdom and it reflects the connection between his enlightened heart and the source of divine wisdom. Basij provided a solid foundation for the Revolution. See how active Basij is in the area of scientific matters, in the area of practical matters, in the area of technological matters, in the area of spiritual matters, in the area of social services, in the area of formulating theories on different parts of social life, and in different other areas. If one day something happens which makes our people arm themselves against the enemy for the purpose of defending their country, these youth, these basijis, these brave youth of our dear nation will once more prove the courage of the Iranian nation, the resistance of the Iranian nation, the power of the Iranian nation and the invincibility of the Iranian nation to the enemy. Other groups of people and other countries which have tried to tread the enlightened path of Islam will follow our example. We have a valuable experience in this regard. We should perform well because it will make Basij a living and dynamic role model in the world of Islam. Today this has almost happened. Therefore strengthening Basij, making all its members as pure and spiritual as possible, expanding its activities to all areas of life are among the tasks which should be carried out by the people in charge of Basij, member of Basij and everyone connected with Basij. Islam has advised us to start from ourselves. All of us, at all levels, should start from ourselves. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"He who considers himself the leader of people should educate himself before educating others.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Nahjul Balaghah, Saying 73] This piece of advice is true at all levels. We should start from ourselves. We should establish this idea in Basij. The Islamic view of lifestyle can be a standard for self-evaluation in Basij. I am not saying that organizations which are higher in rank should evaluate our behavior. I am saying that we should be the people who evaluate our own behavior. How is our behavior in our workplace? How is our behavior towards our wife and children? How is our behavior at home and in social environments? How is our behavior towards people who stand below us in rank? How is our behavior towards people who stand above us in rank? How is our behavior towards the enemy? In Islam, there are certain criteria for all of these. We should evaluate ourselves. This is self-evaluation. This can lay a firm foundation for our lives and for the work we should do in all areas - especially the work we should do in Basij, which is the topic of our discussion. Anyway, our country, our nation, our Revolution and our history need Basij and Basij needs to improve itself on a daily basis in terms of quality. What you dear brothers and sisters are doing - in Salehin organizations - is very good and outstanding and it perfectly complements Basij. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, we should improve Basij on a daily basis. We should raise quality in Basij. Of course, quality should be given more significance than quantity, but increasing the quantity of work as well as the quality of work is also important. That is to say, we should both increase the volume of our work and add depth to it. Both should be taken into consideration. Today the world of Islam needs this movement by Basij. The savage attack on Gaza over the past week, which is truly shocking, should awaken the world of Islam and it should give fresh impetus to the movement of Muslim peoples. The enemy is not sitting idle. This effort by the Zionist regime has several dimensions. First, it shows the extreme brutality of the Zionist regime. How savage these people are. They have no conscience at all. You become shocked when you see how savagely they attack innocent people and civilians. They have no human qualities. They are against the world of Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran. These creatures who have no human qualities want to challenge the Islamic Republic of Iran at international meetings. This is one aspect of the issue which is very important. Another shocking aspect of the issue is that the leaders of global arrogance behave so shamelessly in this crisis. They not only do not frown at the brutal Zionist regime and they not only do not prevent it from doing what it is doing, but they rather support and encourage it. America explicitly supported the Zionists. England supported them. France supported them. These are the leaders of global arrogance. Muslim peoples do not have enemies who are as hated and brutal as these people. All these people explicitly supported them. The recent event shows how willing the leaders of global arrogance are to observe morality. They are very far away from human qualities. Now that they give political support to the Zionist regime for the purpose of safeguarding their corrupt political interests, why do they claim that they support human rights? Does America - which not only fails to condemn this violent and savage attack in Gaza, but also supports it - have the right to claim that it supports human rights? Does it have the right to put itself in the position of prosecutors of other nations and governments in the name of defending human rights? This is a shameless claim. The same is true of France and England. Muslim nations have not forgotten their past behavior in the world of Islam, the crimes that they committed, the killings that were carried out and the pressures that they exerted on Muslim peoples in different countries. And today they support the actions of a brutal regime, namely the Zionist regime. This is another aspect of the issue. Another aspect of the issue is the behavior of Arab and Islamic governments regarding the event of Gaza which was not acceptable. Some of them only condemned the Zionists in words and some others did not even condemn the Zionists in words. Those who call Muslim nations to unity and claim to be the leaders of the Islamic Ummah should prove themselves in such situations. They are very outspoken on issues which suit their political agenda, but in this case - because they have to face America and England - they refuse to condemn the Zionists in an outspoken and genuine way or they merely offer verbal support, which is of little value and is not very effective. Today the world of Islam, especially Arab countries, should join hands to defend the people of Gaza and make the enemy lift the siege. They should try to help the innocent people of Gaza. Of course, God Almighty has bestowed on the people of Gaza the blessing to resist and stand up against this violent and savage enemy. The people of Gaza saw the result of their resistance: they managed to preserve their dignity. They proved that by relying on resistance and hard work it is possible - even with a small number of people - to defeat large and heavily armed groups that are supported by the arrogant powers. Today the Zionists, who have occupied Palestine, are looking for a ceasefire more desperately than the people and the officials of Gaza. Although they committed these crimes and brutal actions, they were harmed more. This happened because of the resistance of the small number of Muslim people and youth in Gaza. There is no other way to defeat the enemies. This is a message to the world of Islam. If the world of Islam wants to be invulnerable to the attacks, machinations and plots of the enemy, it should defend itself strongly. It should strengthen itself, both spiritually - strengthening one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s faith and determination - and materially. Material strength includes making scientific and technological progress, gaining experience and making advances in the area of building weapons and in other areas. The world of Islam and Islamic societies should equip themselves with these. If they do this, then every district even as small as Gaza can inflict as much harm on the enemy as the people of Gaza did. As I said before, what the people of Gaza did made the enemy look for a ceasefire more desperately than the people and the officials in Gaza although they went through pain and suffering and a number of them were martyred. This is a lesson for the world of Islam and of course we learned this lesson during the Sacred Defense Era. Thankfully, our people, our youth, our scientists and our experts have made progress in this regard. We have made progress in theoretical and practical areas. We have become fully aware of the fact that we should stand on our own feet which is one of the requirements for resistance. Another point is the issue of unity among the Islamic Ummah and among the people of each country. The unity among the people and the political parties of each country is important. The same is true of our nation. The reason I repeatedly point out that political parties, our dear officials, people who can address the public - including newspapers, websites, executive and other organizations in charge of our media - writers and people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s representatives should preserve unity among themselves, is that unity is very important in essence. Fortunately our country has managed to preserve its unity and cohesion. Fortunately the recent disagreements between the officials have not shattered the unity of our nation. The fact that there are differences of opinion between the officials creates no problems as long as these differences do not result in major disputes. In the eyes of the enemy, our country has been very powerful since the start of the Revolution and this has happened because of our unity. Today they have the same opinion. Some time ago I advised the officials to preserve unity among themselves. Fortunately the esteemed officials of the three branches of government listened to my advice. This is very valuable. It is necessary to thank these people. The officials and the heads of the three branches of government listened to my advice. They stressed that they will preserve their unity in different areas although they have differences of opinion. We welcome this positive move made by these dear brothers and esteemed officials and we believe that it was a wise move and they should continue to be careful about what they say. What the MPs are doing in the Majlis is one of the things that has certain praiseworthy aspects. You dear brothers and sisters and the honorable people of Iran should know that asking questions of our government officials, whether the President or other executive officials, is a positive move because of two reasons. One reason is that it shows the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s representatives in the legislative branch have a sense of responsibility towards issues of the country. This is positive. Another reason is that the executive branch announced with confidence and with praiseworthy courage that it is prepared for answering the questions posed by the MPs. This is positive too. The legislative branch carries out its responsibility and our executive officials show that they have confidence in their decisions and sincerity. What else do we expect? This is the best situation. This decision has been made: the Majlis has announced that it wants to summon the President for questioning which shows their sense of responsibility, and the executive branch has announced that it is prepared to answer the questions with confidence - they said this to me too. This too is praiseworthy. These two moves made by the Majlis and the executive branch are both good. But I believe that the efforts should not be continued. They should end the issue immediately. This was a good test for both the Majlis and the executive branch. The people are also insightful and wise. Continuing this issue is exactly what the enemies want. The enemies want to pitch the two branches against each other. The enemies want to provoke people on each side to give in to their feelings and create uproar through newspapers, websites and other such things. Our country needs tranquility. All the officials, no matter which branch of government they belong to, need tranquility to do their duties and the people also want tranquility. The Majlis did its duty and in response to the decision of the Majlis, the executive branch showed that it has the necessary self-confidence to defend its actions. What these two branches of government did is satisfactory. Now I ask the brothers who made this decision in the Majlis to end this issue and show that government officials in the executive, legislative and judiciary branches of government respect unity and tranquility more than anything else. I thank all the brothers and sisters in Basij. I hope that Allah the Exalted bestows success on all of you. I thank all the brothers and sisters who spoke in this meeting. I hope that God Almighty bestows great rewards on them. I also thank the dear brother who gave me his medal. I have accepted this medal, but I would like to give it back to him as gift. It is better for him to keep the medal because it will evoke the memory of his championship and something to remember me by. I hope that Allah the Exalted bestows success on you. Source : http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1727&Itemid=4

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday, Following is the full text of the interview: Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President. President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness? President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else. Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example. President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces. Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria? President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir. Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel. President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference? President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else. Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command? President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance. Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance? President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now? President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak? President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change. Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game? President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan. Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do? President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons. Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles? President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis? President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names. Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups? President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves. Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month? President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend. Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options. President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see. Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions? President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear. Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term? President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government. Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014? President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk. Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League? President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League. Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations? President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them. Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted? President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house. Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel? President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world. Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon. Al-Manar: Thank you.

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday, Following is the full text of the interview: Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President. President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness? President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else. Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example. President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces. Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria? President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir. Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel. President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference? President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else. Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command? President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance. Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance? President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now? President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak? President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change. Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game? President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan. Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do? President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons. Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles? President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis? President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names. Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups? President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves. Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month? President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend. Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options. President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see. Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions? President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear. Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term? President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government. Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014? President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk. Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League? President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League. Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations? President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them. Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted? President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house. Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel? President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world. Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon. Al-Manar: Thank you.