Kashmir ko Haqq do Bharat | Shehzad Roy (ISPR Official Video) |...
A Kashmir Day Special song by Shehzad Roy. It focuses on showing Pakistan’s support and unity with the people of Indian-occupied Kashmir, their...
A Kashmir Day Special song by Shehzad Roy. It focuses on showing Pakistan’s support and unity with the people of Indian-occupied Kashmir, their ongoing freedom struggle, and to pay homage to Kashmiri martyrs who lost their lives fighting for Kashmir’s freedom.
4m:14s
1557
FULL SPEECH in ENGLISH | The Day of Fighting Global Arrogance 2022 |...
Why is the day, the 13th Aban (the 4th of November) significant?
What important incidents took place on this day in different years?...
Why is the day, the 13th Aban (the 4th of November) significant?
What important incidents took place on this day in different years?
And what was the real starting point of the conflict between Iran and America?
And who truly started this conflict?
Furthermore, why are the claims of the Americans of supporting the Iranian nation and the Iranian people, shameless and hypocritical?
What does history tell us about the so-called ‘support’ of America?
And what are some of the countless reasons for which the Iranian nation absolutely hates and despises the hypocritical, oppressive, shameless, back-stabbing, and tyrannical American government?
Additionally, what has remained constant and what are some changes that have come about between the current American government and the previous ones?
And finally, how has the American government played a major role in the recent riots in the Islamic Republic?
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution, the esteemed Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei answers these and many more questions in this full speech of his, delivered during a meeting with students on Wednesday, November 2, 2022, the 13th of Aban, as his eminence speaks about \"The Day of Fighting Global Arrogance\".
45m:33s
10915
Video Tags:
purestream,
media,
production,
FULL
SPEECH,
SPEECH,
Global
Arrogance,
Imam,
Imam
Khamenei,
Iran,
America,
people,
government,
Islamic
republic,
Islamic
revolution,
leader,
Fighting Through the Mud | Shaheed Abu Mahdi al-Mohandis | Arabic Sub...
What was the \\\'15th of Sha’ban\\\' operation?
And which region was liberated?
Furthermore, what was the main problem that the troops of...
What was the \\\'15th of Sha’ban\\\' operation?
And which region was liberated?
Furthermore, what was the main problem that the troops of the Hashd al-Sha’bi faced while liberating this region?
Were the troops successful in their mission or not?
And what helped them get through this difficult mission?
Shaheed Abu Mahdi al-Mohandis talks about the operations to liberate Fallujah – a city in Iraq – and the problems that they faced, as he speaks about \\\"Fighting Through the Mud\\\".
1m:54s
1485
Video Tags:
purestream,
media,
production,
Mud,
Fight,
Shaheed,
Abu
Mahdi
al
Mohandis,
Martyr,
operation,
region,
liberation,
troops,
Hashd
al
Sha’bi,
mission,
Iraq,
Speech to Members of Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and Islamic Radio and...
Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech to Members of Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and Islamic Radio and Television Uni Print
17/08/2015
The...
Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech to Members of Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and Islamic Radio and Television Uni Print
17/08/2015
The following is the full text of the speech delivered on August 17, 2015 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with the participants of Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and the members of Islamic Radio and Television Union.
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Ab-al-Qassem al-Mustafa Muhammad and upon his immaculate, pure and chosen household, especially the one remaining with Allah on earth.
I would like to welcome the honorable participants and the dear brothers and sisters, the brothers and sisters from Ahlul Bayt World Assembly, the brothers and sisters from the Islamic Radio and Television Union and the honorable families of martyrs who are present in the meeting. I ask Allah the Exalted to bestow His blessings on all of you.
I would like to raise a few points about the Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and the Islamic Radio and Television Union. As for the Ahlul Bayt World Assembly, its significance originates from the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s (a.s.) household. Allah the Exalted says something - in a very explicit manner - about the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (a.s.) in the Holy Quran: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you members of the Family, and to make you pure and immaculate\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 33: 33]. This description has been used for few groups of people in the Holy Quran. The Ahlul Bayt\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s understanding and knowledge lies in their divine purity. Well, this purity has many dimensions. If a group of people associate themselves with the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (a.s.), they should observe certain criteria. This is what we want to say: these groups should observe certain criteria. The efforts of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (greetings be upon them) revolved around these pivots- first, reviving the original teachings of Islam. They wanted to keep Islamic principles alive. Oppressive governments and taghuts always tried to destroy or change and distort Islamic teachings. One of the most important moves of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household was to resist this attempt. They wanted to preserve and revive Islamic teachings. This was one of their tasks.
Another task that the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (greetings be upon them) did was to implement divine laws. They did so whether during the time when they ruled or during the time when they were removed from government. Their efforts were focused on implementing divine laws in society. This was another task. Another task that they carried out was to engage in jihad in the way of God. You read in the ziarat of the Imams, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"I testify that you strove [jihad] in the way of God, such a striving is due to him.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This means that they did not show any negligence in fighting in the way of God. They engaged in jihad in the way of God with all their power and capability. This was another task.
An important part of this jihad - which is a separate chapter in itself - was fighting against oppression and oppressors. The lives of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (a.s.) were imbued with fighting against oppression and oppressors. The reason behind all those pressures and poisoning attempts and all that martyrdom was this- they fought against oppression and oppressors. This is the life of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household. Now, we want to be their followers. Therefore, we should observe these things. These things should be observed. We should promote Islamic teachings. We should consider implementing divine laws as one of our goals. We should engage in jihad in the way of God with all our power. We should fight against oppressors. We should fight against and confront oppressors. This is our responsibility.
Well, jihad is not confined to a military war. Jihad includes all kinds of fighting, ranging from cultural to political and economic fighting. All these kinds of fighting are included in jihad. Our minds should not only switch to a military war. Sometimes, it is possible that a military war breaks out, but jihad is not only this.
In our opinion, today, the manifestation of jihad for us Muslims and followers of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household is fighting against the plots of arrogance in this Islamic region. Today, this is the greatest form of jihad. We should fight against the plots of arrogance. First, we should identify these plots and study the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s thoughts so that we know what he is going to do. After that, we should plan on how we want to fight against his goals. And this is not confined to defense. Fighting includes both defense and offense. Sometimes, it is necessary for us to adopt a defensive position and sometimes, it is necessary to adopt an offensive position. In both cases, the goal is fighting against the plans of arrogance - which is the main enemy - in the region.
This fighting should take place in the entire Islamic region - particularly in this region which is West Asia. The Europeans insist on referring to this region as the Middle East region. In other words, they locate east on the basis of Europe. To them, a region is Far East, another is Middle East and another region is Near East. Because of the Europeans\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' arrogance, this region has been called, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the Middle East\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" from the beginning. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The Middle East\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is a wrong name. This is West Asia. This is Asia - a large continent - and we are in West Asia. This region is a very sensitive region. It is a very important region in terms of strategy, military power, important underground resources and connection between three continents - Asia, Europe and Africa. It is an important region for which they have certain plans. We should see what these plans are and then we should confront them. This is jihad. The Holy Quran says to us, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And strive hard in the way of Allah, such a striving is due to Him\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 22: 78]. Today, this is jihad in the way of God.
Hatching plots against the world of Islam and this region in particular is not a new development. Since many years ago - since 100 years ago: since World War I until today - this region has been exposed to many pressures by arrogant powers. One day, it was England, one day it was America and one day it was France. It is 100 years or more now that arrogant powers have been pursuing their goals here. However, these pressures, plans and plots have been reinforced since the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This is because the victory of Islam in an important, great and sensitive country like Iran was confusing for arrogance. In the beginning, they lost the power to analyze events. We used to pursue events and we were witness to this. In the beginning, they were confused. Later on, when they collected themselves, they began to exert pressure and the pivot of this pressure was the Islamic Republic of Iran. First, they focused their efforts on preventing this experience from being repeated in other countries. They were after this. This was why they thought of increasing pressures on Iran. It is 35 years now that we have gotten used to the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s pressures. The people of Iran have gotten used to pressures. It is 35 years now that we have been facing threats, sanctions, security pressures, different political plots and all kinds of pressures.
This began with the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. However, after the emergence of Islamic Awakening - that began four, five years ago in North African countries such as Egypt, Tunisia and other African countries - the enemies increased their pressures. That is to say, the enemy became anxious and uneasy in the real sense of the word. They adopted many measures that are continuing in the present time. Of course, they think that they have suppressed Islamic Awakening, but this humble person believes that Islamic Awakening is not suppressible. Although they have adopted some measures, this movement exists and it will find its true position sooner or later. In any case, they have increased their efforts in the recent years. They have adopted many measures and they have brought new elements into the equation.
The enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plans are based on two things. First, I will tell you that when we say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" we do not refer to an imaginary and fictional creature. By \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" we mean global arrogance and arrogant powers: powers whose existence depends on dominating others, interfering in their affairs and possessing their financial and vital resources. These are arrogant powers or in other words, the leaders of global arrogance. We have a term in our political literature which is global arrogance. It means the division of the world into \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the oppressor\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" and \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the oppressed\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". This is global arrogance. Those who are the leaders of this system are enemies.
If we want to give an example of who this enemy is in the outside world, we should refer to the regime of the United States of America. This regime is the epitome of global arrogance. Of course, others are part of global arrogance as well, but the clearest and the most obvious example is the regime of the United States of America. It knows nothing about human morality and it is not ashamed of committing any crime - of any nature. It covers these crimes, pressures and violent acts behind its smiles and its good and beautiful words. The manifestation of global arrogance is this regime. Therefore, when we say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", it means this.
This enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan in the region is mainly based on two things. Of course, it has many branches, but these are the main two. One is creating discord and the second it exerting influence. This is the basis of the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan in the region. They want to create discord between governments and - after that - between nations which is more dangerous than discord between governments. They want to make peoples bear grudge against each other and establish biased groups with different names. One day, it was \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"pan-Iranism\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"pan-Arabism\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"pan-Turkism\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" and other such orientations and today, it is the issue of Shia and Sunni, takfirism and other such things. They create discord with anything they can. This is only item of their measures and they are working on it in a very serious way. Of course, the English were the first experts of this measure. They have expertise in creating religious discord. The Americans have learned this from them and they are working on it today with all their power.
All the takfiri groups that you see are their handicraft. Of course, we have been saying this for several years, but some people had doubts. Today, the Americans themselves are acknowledging this. They are acknowledging that it was they who created DAESH, al-Nusra Front and other takfiri groups. A bunch of simple-minded - although sincere - Muslims were deceived by them. This is the important point. What is very instructive to us and what we should pay attention to is that sometimes well-intentioned individuals work inside the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan because of lack of vigilance. This has happened. One clear example of this is the issue of Syria. When taghuti governments were overthrown in Tunisia and Egypt with Islamic slogans, all of a sudden the Americans and the Zionists decided to use this formula for destroying resistant governments and countries. Therefore, they turned to Syria and as a result, a group of simple-minded and naïve individuals became the target of this plan. They made Syria reach the current situation. It is four, five years now that Syria has been experiencing this tumultuous situation and it is not clear when it will come to an end.
This was what the enemy did and simple-minded individuals were incorporated in this plan. They filled in the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s puzzle. This happens in many cases. It was they who created takfiri groups. It was they who created thuggish and violent groups and set them on the Islamic Ummah. They pretend that this is a denominational war. I will tell you that the conflicts that they are trying to label as denominational conflicts in Iraq, Syria and other countries are not denominational at all. They are of a political nature. The war in Yemen is a political war, not a religious one. They falsely claim that the issue is about Shia and Sunni while this is not the case. Some of those people who are losing their children, women, infants and their hospitals and schools in Yemen under the bombardment of the Saudis are Shafi\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'i and some of them are Zaidi . So, the issue is not about Shia and Sunni. The conflict is a political conflict, the conflict between policies. Today, they are creating such a situation in the region. It was they who created discord.
We should try to eliminate these differences and conflicts. We have said to everyone in an outspoken way that we extend the hand of friendship to all regional and Muslim governments. We have no problems with Muslim governments. Of course in the present time, our relations with many of our neighbors are already friendly and brotherly. The countries to the north, south, east and west of the Islamic Republic of Iran have good relations with us. Of course, some countries - near and far away - have certain differences with us. They behave in an obstinate way and show malevolence. This exists as well, but our principle is based on establishing good relations with neighboring countries, governments and - particularly - peoples. Our country has very good relations with peoples.
Of course, we believe that we should be committed to principles. We say that principles should be preserved. It was with commitment to principles that our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) managed to achieve victory, preserve the Revolution and give stability to the Islamic Republic. He was committed to principles. One of these principles is \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"They are strong against unbelievers, compassionate amongst each other\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 48: 29]. This is one of the principles. We do not make peace with our enemies - with arrogance - and we do not show enmity towards our Muslim brothers, rather we behave in a friendly and brotherly manner towards them because we believe that we should be \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"strong against unbelievers, compassionate amongst each other.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"
This is the lesson of our magnanimous Imam (r.a.). This is the clear line of the Islamic Republic. In supporting the oppressed, we do not look, have not looked and will not look at the other side\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s religion and denomination. This is our magnanimous Imam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) guideline. Imam behaved towards Shia resistance in Lebanon in the same way that he behaved towards Sunni resistance in Palestine. He behaved towards them without any difference. We supported our brothers in Lebanon in the same way that we supported our brothers in Gaza without any difference. The former were Sunnis and the latter were Shias. The main issue for us is defending Islamic identity and supporting the oppressed. The main issue for us is the issue of Palestine which is the main issue for Muslims in the present time. This is the main issue for us.
We behave in the same way towards our enemies. Our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) fought against Mohammad Reza Pahlavi who was apparently a Shia. Likewise, he fought against Saddam Hussein who was apparently a Sunni. Of course, the former was not a true Shia and the latter was not a true Sunni either. Both of them were separate from Islam, but the former was apparently a Shia and the latter was apparently a Sunni. Imam (r.a.) fought against them in the same way. Therefore, the issue for us is not the issue of Sunni, Shia, denominational bias and other such things. The issue is the issue of Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s principles: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Be an enemy of the oppressor and helper of the oppressed\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Nahjul Balaghah, Letter 47]. This is Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s command. This is our path. This is our line.
Intensifying discord in the world of Islam is forbidden. We are opposed to the behavior of some Shia groups, as it leads to discord. We have said outspokenly that we are opposed to insulting the holy beliefs of Sunnis. Some people from both sides intensify and fuel the fire of enmities. Many of them have good intentions, but they do not have foresight. Foresight is necessary. We should see what the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan is. The enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s first plan is creating discord and his second plan is exerting influence. They want to have decade-long influence in Islamic and regional countries. Today in the region, America does not enjoy the reputation that it did in the past and therefore, it wants to retrieve it. They have the same intention in our country. They have the same intention in Iran. They thought that they could use the nuclear negotiations to exert influence inside our country. Now, the fate of this nuclear agreement is not clear either in Iran or in America. It is not clear whether it will be approved or not in both countries. They wanted to use it as a means to exert influence in our country, but we blocked their path and we will definitely block their path in the future as well [audience chant \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"].
We will not allow the Americans to have economic or political influence in our country, nor will we allow them to have a political presence and cultural influence in our country. We will confront them with all our power which is thankfully great in the present time. The same is true of the region. In the region too, they want to exert influence, have an excuse to show their presence and pursue their goals. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor and grace, we will do our best to prevent this. Our policies in the region are the exact opposite of the Americans. The territorial integrity of regional countries is very important to us. The territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria is very important to us. On the contrary, they are after dismembering these countries. I have said before that the Americans are after dismembering Iraq, but some people expressed surprise. Recently, the Americans themselves have acknowledged that they are after dismembering Iraq. They want to dismembering Iraq. If they can, they want to dismember Syria as well.
Their purpose of doing this is to create small and obedient countries, but by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor and grace, this will not happen [audience chant \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"]. We will defend the Resistance in the region. We will defend the Palestinian Resistance which is one of the most prominent chapters in the history of the Islamic Ummah throughout these years. We will defend this group. We will support anyone who fights against Israel, who condemns the Zionist regime and who approves of the Palestinian Resistance. We will offer all kinds of support, within the scope of our capabilities, to such people. We will offer all kinds of possible support to anyone who confronts the Zionist regime. We will support the Resistance. We will support the territorial integrity of countries. We will support all those individuals who resist the divisive policies of America. We confront all those people who create discord.
We do not approve of the kind of Shia whose headquarters are in London [audience chant \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"] because it is not the kind of Shia that the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (greetings be upon them) promoted. The kind of Shia that is based on creating discord and on clearing the road for the presence of the enemies of Islam is not real Shia, rather it is deviation. Shia is the epitome of original Islam and the Holy Quran. We will support all those people who help unity and we will oppose all those who act against unity. We will support all the oppressed. We will not leave the arena just because they say that we interfered in the affairs of Bahrain and other countries. We did not interfere at all, but we will support them. We feel for the oppressed people of Bahrain and Yemen. We pray for them and we will offer any kind of help we can.
Today, the people of Yemen are really oppressed. They are destroying a country just because of some arrogant and political polices which are pursued in a foolish manner. They could have pursued political goals in a different manner, but they are pursuing them foolishly. The events of Yemen and many other events in the world of Islam - in Pakistan, Afghanistan and other such countries - are really painful for us. And these events are too many and they are really painful. The world of Islam should cure such problems with vigilance and foresight.
As for the Islamic Radio and Television Union, I want to say that this union is very important. The task that you have begun - that is to say, establishing this union - is a very important task. Notice that in the present time, at least 70, 80 percent of the people in Muslim countries are committed to religious principles and beliefs. If you take a look at Islamic countries, you will see that the people are committed to and believe in their religion. To what extent are the radio and television networks in such countries - which should be the representatives of the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s wishes and demands - committed to religion? There is a shocking gap and rift. Seventy, eighty percent of the people are religious, but radio and television networks in such countries do not move in a religious direction and they do not reflect the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s demands. This is very strange. They reflect the same things that the dangerous media empire of arrogance wants. Today, arrogance has created a great media empire. They distort and cover up news and they tell lies. This way, they promote their policies. This is while they constantly say that they take an impartial position. The English radio claims that it is impartial, but they are lying. They are not impartial at all. They move in the exact direction of arrogant and colonialist policies - whether American or English policies.
Audio and print media, news agencies and the complicated means of mass communication that exist today are all at the service of their policies. They are at the service of arrogance, Zionism and their goals. We should do something in the face of this dangerous empire and this large media mafia that is in the hands of American and Zionist capitalists and cartels. What you are doing is the beginning of a movement and therefore, it should be pursued and strengthened on a daily basis. You should bring your partners and colleagues into the arena as well.
By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, a good future is awaiting us. I will tell you that despite the boastful behavior of arrogance and the great efforts that arrogance and its allies and followers are carrying out in financial, military, political and security areas, the future belongs to Islam in the region and in the entire world of Islam. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s dignity and power will increase on a daily basis. Of course, it is necessary to show diligence. Thankfully, there are many mujahid men, women and youth in the entire world of Islam. Therefore, we should appreciate their value and we should use our slogans, our moves, our words and our activities in this direction. If we do so, Allah the Exalted will definitely help: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you help the cause of Allah, He will help you and make firm your feet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 47: 7].
Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings
26m:33s
40701
News Report - Saudi and Yemeni Planes hitting Shias in Yemen - 28Aug09 -...
Yemen's Houthi fighters have accused Saudi Arabia of helping the Yemeni army in its deadly offensive against them in the north-western province of...
Yemen's Houthi fighters have accused Saudi Arabia of helping the Yemeni army in its deadly offensive against them in the north-western province of Saada.
Zaidi Shia fighters, known as Houthis, issued a statement on Friday saying that at least two Saudi warplanes have bombed their positions in the al-Malahid district.
The fighters' statement has been dismissed by the Yemeni army as a baseless allegation.
Fighting between Yemeni troops backed by fighter aircraft and Shia fighters has killed dozens, mostly fighters, since the government launched a wide offensive against Shia tribes earlier in the month.
The Shia fighters have been engaged in on and off fighting with Yemen's army since 2004.
Press TV correspondent in Yemen, Akram Al-Hindi, says the military's campaign against Houthi fighters is expected to intensify in the coming days -- despite the growing civilian death toll.
"We have heard that there was a short truce between the government and the Houthi fighters but shortly after that the fighting erupted again," Al-Hindi said.
"The treaty which was signed based on Qatar agreement and Doha agreement has been declared dead from the Yemeni government side," he added.
According to the correspondent, the Houthi fighters claim that the government is intensifying its military offences and this calls for the end of the truce between the two sides.
"This shows that the violence will continue," Al-Hindi concluded.
The Houthis say they are defending themselves against religious oppression. The government says it is fighting an armed insurgency seeking to reinstate imamate rule, which ended in a 1962 coup.
According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, an estimated 119,000 people from the northwest Yemeni town of Saada are currently displaced.
1m:53s
9543
[English Translation] Interview Bashar Al-Asad - President Syria on...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the...
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.
33m:34s
13417
[Arabic] لقاء خاص مع الرئيس بشار الأسد - Bashar...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the...
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.
34m:40s
13925
[05 Sep 13] Speech in Meeting with Members of Assembly of Experts -...
The following is the full text of the speech delivered on September 5, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in...
The following is the full text of the speech delivered on September 5, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with the chairman and members of the Assembly of Experts.The meeting was held on the occasion of the 14th Congress of the Assembly of Experts which was held on the 12th and 13th of Shahrivar.
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
I would like to welcome the honorable gentlemen and the ulama and seminary scholars who are outstanding personalities from throughout the country and who have thankfully gathered in this meeting. Although the responsibilities of the Assembly of Experts have been defined in the Constitution, the arrangement of this meeting has resulted in the generation of different discussions about different arenas of the country and the expression of different opinions by the gentlemen.
Well, executive officials are also present in this meeting. Fortunately, the esteemed President and a number of other honorable officials are also members of this assembly and this has boosted the hope that the opinions of the gentlemen in this meeting will receive more attention. I hope that this will be done and we too will help, within the scope of our capabilities and responsibilities, for the gentlemen to achieve the stated matters.
I deem it necessary to point out that your participation in the funeral procession of the [unknown war] martyrs - which was held in the beginning of this congress - was very valuable and constructive. When the people see that honorable and great personalities, such as the esteemed chairman of the Assembly of Experts and other personalities, pay their respects to the bodies and graves of martyrs - whom they do not know - and participate in their funeral procession because of the fact that they are the martyrs of the path of the Revolution and the path of righteousness, this will be a lesson for our society. And I will say that our country and our society will be in need of keeping the memory of the martyrs alive and preserving their path for a very long time.
The point that I would like to make is that on different levels of decision- making for the Islamic Republic, it is our responsibility to adopt a comprehensive outlook towards the issues of the country. It is obvious that different events - on regional, international and domestic levels - occur which are beyond our power to prevent. The Islamic Republic, the officials, the people and those who protect the foundations of the Islamic Republic have certain responsibilities. These responsibilities cannot be defined on the basis of the events which occur. That is to say, when something happens, we cannot make a certain move and adopt a certain position in an inactive way. This should not be done. This means that the Islamic Republic is being dragged into different events. It is necessary to preserve our comprehensive outlook towards the issues of the country and we should adopt positions and identify events with this comprehensive outlook. Thankfully, this comprehensive outlook has dominated the country until today. It is not the case that officials have ignored this issue since the beginning of the Revolution until today.
The Islamic Republic was formed amid a whirlwind of events. This has been repeatedly mentioned, but we should not forget that the heart of this statement is the preservation of God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s religion in people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s lives, in society and in our country. The heart of this statement is the formation of our social lives on the basis of sharia, the divine religion and the divine values and rules. The formation of such a government in a world which was quickly moving towards materialism was like a miracle and this miracle happened.
When the Islamic Republic was formed, there was an opposition to the issue of reliance on Islam. We should not say that their opposition and enmity was because of our independence or because our policy of fighting against global arrogance. Of course, this is true and this is one reason for their enmity, but fighting against global arrogance grew out of the heart of Islam. Our democracy grew out of the heart of Islam as well. It has been said many times that when we speak about religious democracy, this does not mean an unusual combination between democracy and religion. This is not the case. Our democracy has originated from religion and Islam has shown us this path. We managed to form the Islamic Republic with the guidance of Islam. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, it will be the same in the future. As a result of this belief in Islam, the enemies have focused their attention on Islam. If they can take Islam away from the Islamic Republic, the products of Islam will naturally be destroyed and undermined. Issues should be analyzed by adopting this outlook.
There are certain deployments in the world and we are always one side of things in many of these deployments. We should see who and what our opposing side is. We should see why it shows hostility towards us and why we put up a resistance against it. We should take a look at these things with a comprehensive outlook. Allah the Exalted says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Is then one who walks headlong, with his face groveling, better guided- or one who walks evenly on a straight path?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 67: 22] The meaning of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"walks evenly on a straight path\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is that we should see - with open eyes, with wisdom and foresight and by considering all aspects - what the goal is, how we should achieve it and what the existing realities are. We should make a decision and move forward by paying attention to these things.
Today, you can see that different events are happening in our region. For several years up until today, global arrogance has chosen West Asia as a place where it can launch its attacks. But despite the presence of arrogant powers in the region and despite their activities, Islamic Awakening has emerged. And I will tell you that Islamic Awakening has not come to an end. It is not the case that we can think Islamic Awakening has been destroyed by the events which have taken place in a number of countries. Islamic Awakening is not like a mere political event or a coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état. It is not like a process in which power is transferred from one individual to another.
Islamic Awakening means the emergence of a kind of awareness and self-confidence which is based on Islam. Under certain circumstances, this Islamic Awakening created certain events in North Africa, Egypt, Tunisia and, before these countries, in Sudan. In other countries too, there is an enormous potential for such events.
We should not think that Islamic Awakening has been destroyed. Islamic Awakening is a reality which is hidden beneath the outer layers of Islamic societies. This is why the people in any country which claims to be oriented towards Islam vote for an Islamic government. This is a sign of people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s orientation towards and attention to Islam. Therefore, Islamic Awakening is a very great event and despite the efforts of global arrogance, this event has taken place. It was not what global arrogance wanted. Therefore, it is natural for the opposing side to react to it. Today, we are witnessing the reactions of the camp of the enemies. These reactions and responses can be seen in East Asia - that is to say, in Pakistan and Afghanistan - and the farthest corners of West Asia such as Syria and Lebanon.
Arrogant powers - the government of the United States of America being the outstanding power among these arrogant powers - have defined certain interests for themselves based on their colonial outlook. This outlook is the same as the colonial outlook which they adopted in the 19th century, but it has a different form. And they are trying to solve all the regional issues by promoting the interests which they have defined for themselves. They are doing the same thing in Syria and Bahrain. The presence of global arrogance in the region is one which is based on transgression, oppression and greed and which wants to destroy every resistance which is put up against arrogant powers. Of course, thankfully, they have not managed and will not manage to do this.
This region has enormous wealth and it has a very important geographical and natural location. Therefore, it is natural for them to pay attention to this region. If one takes a look at what they say and what they have already done, he will see that their goal is to possess and establish their domination over the region by making the Zionist regime play a pivotal role. They are after achieving this goal. As you can see, on the issue of the latest events in Syria, the excuse which they have recently made for their interference is the use of chemical weapons in this country. Of course, with sophistry and clever use of reasons, they are trying to pretend that they want to interfere on humanitarian grounds. Who in the world does not know that this is a false claim?
Undoubtedly, what is not important at all for American politicians is humanitarian needs. These are the people who kept, for many years, thousands of prisoners in Guantanamo prisons and, before that, in Abu Ghraib in Iraq while there were not any trials for these prisoners. They were imprisoned just because of certain allegations. A number of them are still in prison. Well, is this humanitarian? These are the people who saw the heavy bombardment [with chemical weapons] of the region - whether what happened in Iraq\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Halabja or what happened in our cities such as Sardasht and other cities - which was conducted by Saddam, but who did not at all react. Not only did they not react, but they also helped Saddam.
Given that the Americans did not help Saddam by giving him chemical weapons - of course, westerners gave him chemical weapons and there is no doubt about this because we have the information which is related to this issue - they at least saw what happened. They became aware of this, but they did not express any opposition. This is the way they show their humanitarian support.
In Afghanistan and Pakistan, they fire a volley of bullets at wedding caravans and kill many people. In Iraq, they killed hundreds of thousands of people with oppressive measures. Today too, their agents are still doing the same things, but they behave in an indifferent way. No one in the world believes that the Americans care about humanitarian issues. Of course, they use sophistry and give clever reasons, but they say such things to justify their own moves. We believe that they are doing is a mistake. On this issue, they will receive a serious blow and they will feel it. They will definitely suffer a loss in this regard and there is no doubt about this. Well, this is the condition of the region.
The Islamic Republic was formed amid a whirlwind of events. At that time, it stood up against different hostile groups for many years. Not only was the Islamic Republic and its slogans not weakened and undermined, but it also became stronger, in the real sense of the word, on a daily basis. Today, the Islamic Republic is completely different - in terms of power, influence and domestic capabilities - from the Islamic Republic which existed 25, 30 years ago and today, its slogans are firm. Therefore, it should know what it wants to do by taking a look at its miraculous background and paying attention to the plots of the enemy in the region. Our responsibility, the responsibility of all the officials of the country and the responsibility of the Islamic Republic\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s government is to pay attention to three great criteria for all decisions and actions:
The first criterion is the ideals and goals of the Islamic Republic. These ideals and goals should never be ignored. We can refer to one of the most important ideals of the Islamic Republic in a short phrase: ‘Creating an Islamic civilization\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'. Islamic civilization means an environment in which we can achieve growth in spiritual and material areas and in which we can attain the ultimate goal for which Allah the Exalted has created us. It means living a good and dignified life. Islamic civilization means building a dignified, powerful, confident and innovative individual who can improve the natural world. This is the goal and ideal of the Islamic Republic.
The second criterion is the methods and guidelines which help us achieve these goals. These are general guidelines and they should be identified. These guidelines are relying on Islam and taking care not to become the oppressor or the oppressed in different interactions. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Be an enemy of tyrants and oppressors and be a friend and helper of those who are oppressed and tyrannized.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Nahjul Balaghah, Letter 47] This is a responsibility. This is a general guideline. Reliance on the votes of the people and reliance on what helps us establish democracy and other such things constitute the main policies and the major guidelines of the Islamic Republic for achieving ideals. Other guidelines are communal work, communal effort, communal innovation, national unity and other such things.
And the third criterion is taking realities into consideration. We should see realities. In a meeting which was held in the auspicious month of Ramadan, I said to officials of the Islamic Republic that what we need is a kind of idealism which takes realities into consideration. We should gain a proper understanding of realities. We should take a look at realities and see what our weak and strong points are and we should know what prevents us from moving forward. We should gain a proper understanding of realities. In that meeting, I referred to a number of sweet realities which exist in our country. We should not always take a look at our weak points and shortcomings.
The emergence of outstanding ideas and thoughts, the existence of active and innovative elements, the promotion of religious teachings and spiritual concepts among many youth, the preservation of religious and Islamic slogans, and the increasing influence of the Islamic Republic in the region and in the entire world constitute a number of the existing realities. These realities should be seen. Of course, besides these sweet realities, there are a number of bitter realities. This is similar to our [personal] lives which is a combination of sweetness and bitterness. By relying on and strengthening sweet realities, we should try to decrease bitter realities or make them fade away.
These three elements should receive attention. Ideals and the guidelines which are necessary to achieve these ideals should not be ignored. Of course, realities should be taken into consideration as well. If we do not take realities into consideration, we will not tread our path in the right way. However, realities should not prevent us from treading our path. If the existence of a rock makes us turn back from our path, we have made a mistake. Also, if the existence of this rock is ignored and if we tread the path in a careless way, we have made another mistake. But if we take a look and see what ways we can find around this rock or how we can take the rock away from our path, make a hole in it or find an alternative path, then we have adopted the right outlook on realities.
This is what our magnanimous Imam did in the first chapter of the Revolution - that is to say during the first 10 years of the Revolution which were very fateful and sensitive years. Our magnanimous Imam did not close his eyes to realities, but he did not back down and did not forget about the guidelines either. You should take a look at Imam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s life and slogans. Our magnanimous Imam was a person who was not afraid of anyone on the issue of the Zionist regime. The idea that the Zionist regime is a cancer and should be destroyed was expressed by Imam. He was not afraid of anyone on the issue of the evil, arrogant and meddling moves of America. It was Imam who said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"America is the Great Satan.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" It was Imam who said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The attack of Muslim youth and Muslim students on the U.S. embassy and taking their documents and tools - which were used for spying - is like conducting a second revolution and is perhaps better and more important than the first revolution\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". These are the methods of Imam. One the issue of the war, he said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We fight until we end the fitna.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This is what Imam said. Other people used to say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We should continue fighting until we can achieve victory.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" But Imam said that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We fight until we end the fitna.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" It was such resistance which strengthened the foundations of the Islamic Republic.
You can see what happened to those people who did not know this path, who acted in a different way in their own countries and who compromised their principles and forgot about their main slogans in order to please arrogant powers. If the slogan of fighting against Israel had been advocated in Egypt and if they had not accepted the false promises of America and its agents, the situation would definitely not have been like this. Today, the dictator of the Egyptian people, who destroyed their dignity for 30 years, has been released from prison and those who had been elected with the votes of the people may be sentenced to death.
If they had not done these things, such a situation would never have been brought about. If the elected officials had adopted proper positions, those who gathered around Tahrir Square and chanted slogans against the elected officials- half or more than half of them would have started to support these elected officials. That is to say, they were not the kind of people to confront and oppose the elected government, but when one stops adopting correct and appropriate positions, such things happen. These are things which should receive attention.
What we feel we should do to solve problems is that we should strengthen the Islamic Republic from inside the country. It is not only in this era that problems exist. Problems have always existed. Problems exist in all countries. If anyone thinks that there are no problems in such and such an advanced country, or in such and such a wealthy European or western country which is densely or sparsely populated, then they are wrong. Problems exist everywhere. Naturally, each nation faces certain problems when it wants to do something. The officials in such a country should solve the problems and move forward.
Now, some people may want to solve problems by asking for help, by relying on others, by bribing other people and by suffering humiliation. And a number of people may want to solve problems with their own power and with the capabilities which exist in their own country. We believe that we should strengthen the Islamic Republic from inside the country. This is the essence of our work. We should strengthen ourselves from the inside. It is possible to strengthen ourselves from inside the country by thinking rationally and adopting a wise outlook. It can be done by making scientific progress and by building economic infrastructures and managing economic issues in the right way. In my opinion, these are things which are possible.
Today, you can see that when they exert pressures on our oil industry, we will face certain problems. What is the reason for this? This is because since the war ended until today, we have not managed to reduce our dependence on oil. If we had reduced our dependence on oil, such pressures would not have brought about this situation. Therefore, we should take a look at ourselves and we should want to solve problems with our willpower.
Thankfully, there is a new administration in our country today. One of the advantages of the current condition is that a fresh administration has entered the arena. With new ideas and thoughts, with new innovations and with a competent group of people, it wants to carry out its responsibilities and move things forward. It wants to move towards the goals which it has highlighted. The honorable President is a cleric who is active and experienced in different revolutionary arenas. This is also one of the advantages which we enjoy today.
Naturally, all of us should help the administration. I think it is my responsibility to help. As we helped and supported all administrations, we will definitely help and support this administration as well. And officials will do this too. Of course, my support for different administrations does not mean that I agree with all the things that they do. In different eras, there were different administrations. We both supported and criticized all these administrations. But, such criticisms should not make us think that the administration is an outsider and it should not make us withdraw the support that we should provide to all administrations. It is necessary to provide such support and help. It is also necessary to pray for all administrations and offer our advice to them. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Advice is necessary for all believers\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [speaking in Arabic].
A friendly piece of advice may sometimes be offered in a harsh and severe way. I believe that if the officials who receive such a harsh and severe piece of advice think carefully, they will be happy to have received such advice. Even this harsh and severe piece of advice is to their advantage.
Anyway, when I take a look at the current conditions in the country, I see that the future is very promising despite the problems which were referred to by the friends in this meeting - of course, they did not refer to many of the existing problems. I see that we have a clear path ahead of us and we have clear and definite ideals. We know what we want to do. Also, the path to achieving these ideals is clear and well-defined and there is no ambiguity and confusion in our guidelines and it is clear what should be done.
During the recent years, it has become clear where alignments - on a regional and international level - lie. Of course, flexibility and clever maneuvers in all political arenas are good and acceptable, but such maneuvers should not make us cross certain red lines, stop pursuing the main guidelines and ignore ideals. These things should be observed. Of course, each administration and each individual uses specific methods and implements specific ideas and they move things forward with these ideas. I am completely optimistic and I believe that all the existing problems - including economic, political and security problems and cultural problems which are deeper and more important than economic problems although a number of economic problems have a higher priority - can be solved and the path to achieving this goal can be taken. I ask Allah the Exalted to help us do this.
There is a certain point that I have written down to discuss. You should pay attention to the fact that one of the main methods used by the enemies of Islam, particularly the enemies of the Islamic Republic in the region, is to create sectarian and denominational discord between Shia and Sunni Muslims. You should pay attention to this issue. There are two groups of people who have turned into the agents and mercenaries of the enemy. The first group is made up of a number of Sunni Muslims and the second group is made of a number of Shia Muslims. The first group engages in takfirism and has deviated from the essence of religion and the second group is made up of people who work for the enemy. In the name of Shia, these people provoke the feelings of other Muslims, justify their enmity and fuel the fire of fitna.
Each group, each institution and each government which is deceived by this great plot, which involves itself in this issue and which makes a mistake in this regard will certainly harm the Islamic movement and the Islamic government. Our country in particular will be harmed if this happens. I insist that outstanding ulama - whether Shia or Sunni ulama and whether those who live in Iran or those who live in other countries - should pay attention to the fact that differences between Islamic denominations should not make us create a new camp against ourselves. Such differences should not make us ignore the main enemy which is the enemy of the essence of Islam and the enemy of the independence and welfare of the people of the region.
I hope that Allah the Exalted will help all of us and I hope that all of you and us benefit from the blessings and prayers of the Imam of the Age (may our souls be sacrificed for his sake).
Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings
22m:25s
45149
[28 Oct 2013] Salafist movement confirmed death of Jordanian nationals...
A Salafist movement confirms that at least 77 Jordanian nationals have been killed in Syria since the beginning of the unrest in the Arab country....
A Salafist movement confirms that at least 77 Jordanian nationals have been killed in Syria since the beginning of the unrest in the Arab country.
The Jordanian Salafist Movement has said the slain militants were fighting under the banner of the al-Nusra Front. It added that there are at least 15-hundred Jordanian nationals fighting in Syria, most of them members of the al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. A very large number of the militants fighting against the Syrian government are reportedly foreign nationals. Latest reports also suggest that more than 210 extremists have traveled from Germany to Syria since the conflict started about three years ago. The Syrian government says the West and its regional allies, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, are supporting the militants.
0m:47s
5824
Bodies of 20 Saudi Soldiers Found on Yemeni Border Months After They...
The bodies of 20 Saudi Soldiers have been found on the Yemeni border, months after they went missing in action while fighting the Houthi Resistance...
The bodies of 20 Saudi Soldiers have been found on the Yemeni border, months after they went missing in action while fighting the Houthi Resistance Fighters in Yemen, as part of the illegal genocidal war against the Houthis by the Yemeni, Saudi and US Bloc. The Saudis have also acknowledged the fighting prowess of the Houthis. Report. Recorded on January 24, 2010 at 1100GMT
0m:52s
5696
Terrorism serious threat to globe - 2Day Conference in Tehran -...
The secretary of the International Conference on Global Alliance against Terrorism for a Just Peace (GAATJP) warns of adverse consequences...
The secretary of the International Conference on Global Alliance against Terrorism for a Just Peace (GAATJP) warns of adverse consequences of spreading terrorism, insisting on the serious threat it poses to the world.
“Despite all the progress, human life is exposed to the threats of complicating terrorism and war which have influence on various aspects,” Davoud Ameri said Saturday.
He underscored the importance of exchanging information among the elite and public opinion as the way to resolve the issue of terrorism, IRNA reported.
“Fight against terrorism will bear fruit only through respecting religions, culture and destiny of human beings,” the GAATJP secretary pointed out.
Ameri conveyed the message of peace and friendship of the Iranian nation to the world and expressed hope that the conference would draw a new plan for fighting terrorism.
The two-day International Conference on Global Alliance against Terrorism for a Just Peace kicked off in the Iranian capital, Tehran, on Saturday with over 100 foreign and 300 local experts attending the summit.
Participants engage mainly in exchanging views on ways to uproot terrorism.
The theoretical principles of terrorism, the typology of terrorism, coordination of attempts to fight terror, policies adopted by different governments to combat terrorism, real objectives of combating terrorism, as well as terrorist groups, cultural terrorism, cyber-terrorism, media terrorism and the role of media in fighting terror are among main topics on the agenda of the event.
Tehran also hosted four exhibitions of posters and caricatures on 'a just peace,' as well as photo exhibitions of the families of victims of terror attacks in Iran and the Middle East ahead of the GAATJP on Friday
2m:33s
10439
[06 June 13] Debate : Syrian army Retakes Qusayr - English
Syrian government forces are going ahead with their mop-up operation in Qusayr after they regained full control of the strategic town. The troops...
Syrian government forces are going ahead with their mop-up operation in Qusayr after they regained full control of the strategic town. The troops were reportedly defusing on Wednesday explosive devices planted by the Takfiri militants fighting against the government in different parts of the town.
More than 200 pickup trucks carrying militants left the town and moved to a nearby village in the north of Qusayr. The government is trying to bring the town back to normal as soon as possible. Syrian military forces have dismantled the terrorist network of the foreign-backed militants in the strategic area, which borders Lebanon.
Qusayr has been an important center and supply route for the foreign-sponsored militants fighting against the Damascus government. The Syrian Army also reported that it has obtained documents confirming the role of Arab and non-Arab countries in the Syria crisis.
This episode of the Debate will take a look at the significance of retaking Qusayr.
26m:14s
6529
[21 July 13] PKK,al-Nusra Front battle near Turkey-Syria border -...
As fighting continues between foreign-backed militants and Syrian troops, neighboring countries seem to be dragged into the confrontation. The...
As fighting continues between foreign-backed militants and Syrian troops, neighboring countries seem to be dragged into the confrontation. The Turkish government has been a key ally to al-Nusra Front fighting against the Syrian army.
2m:51s
4503
[27 Oct 2013] Militants capture southern Tafas town in Syria - English
Reports coming out of Syria suggest that insurgents battling government troops have seized a town in the southern Daraa province.
Militants took...
Reports coming out of Syria suggest that insurgents battling government troops have seized a town in the southern Daraa province.
Militants took control of Tafas following weeks of heavy clashes with army forces. The fighting has left dozens dead on both sides. The town of Tafas links the eastern and western parts of Daraa along the Jordanian border. In another battlefield in the central province of Homs, insurgents and government troops are fighting for control of a highly-strategic arsenal in Mahin. Militants say they have killed at least a hundred Syrian army forces, and lost scores of their own men.
0m:35s
6053
[17 Dec 2013] 400 to 500 dead in clashes between rival army factions in...
The United Nations says that between 400 and 500 bodies have been taken to hospitals in the South Sudan capital Juba after clashes between rival...
The United Nations says that between 400 and 500 bodies have been taken to hospitals in the South Sudan capital Juba after clashes between rival army factions.
The chief of UN peacekeeping forces says that about 800 people were also injured in battles between troops loyal to President Salva Kiir and an opposition leader who allegedly tried to stage a coup. The fighting began on Sunday after the president accused troops loyal to his arch-rival, ex-vice president Riek Machar, of attempting to seize power. Machar was sacked from the government in July. About 15000 people have sought refuge in UN compounds around Juba since the fighting started on Sunday.
3m:0s
5530
[08 Feb 2014] US concerned about American militants returning from Syria...
The US Homeland Security Chief is concerned about Americans who have fought in Syria and are now back home.
Jeh Johnson says the issue has...
The US Homeland Security Chief is concerned about Americans who have fought in Syria and are now back home.
Jeh Johnson says the issue has become an issue of homeland security. He added that law enforcement and security forces across the world are focused on foreign nationals Heading to Syria including those from the US, Canada and Europe. Western officials are concerned that their nationals fighting the Syrian government become even more radical after joining other insurgents. US authorities have confirmed that militants from some fifty countries are in Syria fighting the government there. Damascus says some western and regional countries are facilitating insurgent infiltration into the country.
2m:50s
6151
[17 Feb 2014] Violence increases in Iraq - English
targeted the home of Sheikh Abu Rishi -- one of the leaders of Iraq\'s Awakening council in the western province of Anbar.
Several people most of...
targeted the home of Sheikh Abu Rishi -- one of the leaders of Iraq\'s Awakening council in the western province of Anbar.
Several people most of them police officers were killed in the bombing. Iraq\'s Anbar province has been the scene of bloody attacks as militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant have attempted to take control of the cities of Falujah and Ramadi. The Iraqi army has however been able to kill a number of ISIL militants and destroy their vehicles. The fighting in Iraq\'s Anbar province has caused 300,000 people to leave their home. The fighting however has not been limited only to Anbar as the militants made an attempt to take over the city of Sleima Bek in northern Iraq.
2m:6s
5321
[11 Nov 13] Speech to Members of the Soldiers of Islam Mourning...
A small portion of the Farsi is included, but the
The following is the full text of the speech delivered on November 11, 2013 by Ayatollah...
A small portion of the Farsi is included, but the
The following is the full text of the speech delivered on November 11, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with the members of the Soldiers of Islam Mourning Committee.
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
The Soldiers of Islam Mourning Committee is an auspicious phenomenon. The idea that our soldiers form mourning committees is a very auspicious and important idea. The pivot of this committee is mourning for Ashura. The other tasks that you referred to are good and necessary subsets, but the pivot is reviving and understanding the depth of Ashura.
One point in this regard is that the connection between the words \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"committee\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" and \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"soldiers\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" has an important meaning. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Soldiers\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" means those people who engage in jihad in the face of the enemy. Jihad includes \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"moqatele\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Moqatele\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" means a military war. Jihad is a combination of different wars such as military wars, intellectual wars, psychological wars and social wars. A combination of these things is jihad and jihad includes all of these wars. One of the characteristics of jihad is the existence of an enemy. Not any effort is called jihad. It is possible that someone engages in scientific work, but this may not be jihadi work. Jihad is a movement which is launched in the face of a hostile act and a hostile enemy. Those people who engage in jihad in the way of God and who enjoy a jihadi characteristic and spirit will realize that this is a real blessing for their hearts and souls.
Jihad is necessary because human societies are not devoid of enemies. They may have few or many enemies. Sometimes, like our society, they have many enemies and sometimes they do not. But in any case, they have an enemy. Therefore, if a society has an internal force for confronting the enemy - this force is comprised of soldiers and mujahids - then it can have a feeling of security. But if it does not enjoy this force, then it will be like a body that suffers from lack of white blood-cells which are in charge of fighting against infection. In such circumstances, all kinds of diseases may afflict this society.
The effort of this group of people to revive and commemorate Ashura and to mourn for Hussein ibn Ali (a.s.) is very appropriate and necessary. Therefore, the essence of this connection - that is to say, the connection between mourning committees and soldiers - is very blessed and good. You should not abandon this and you should preserve it as much as you can.
Another point is that the word \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"heyat\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [committee] means lack of order in the conventional sense of the word. They say that such and such a person acts in a heyati way. This means that he acts in a disorganized way. Perhaps we can say that you are the first people to impose order on an organization which is disorderly by nature. This is a very good thing.
Well, why does the word \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"heyati\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" mean disorderly in the conventional sense of the word? This is because when someone enters an Imam Hussein (a.s.) heyat, no one tells them where to sit and where not to sit and when to come and when to go. All the movements and comings and goings are based on the will of the people and this originates in faith. This is a very good thing and you should preserve it. You should preserve the committee\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s relationship with what people love and believe in. You should preserve the interest that the hearts of people have in this committee. That is to say, it should not be the case that the committee acts in a formal way.
In my opinion, the centers that you should work in are Hussainiyahs. You do not need bureaucratic organizations. Hussainiyahs, heyats and mosques are the centers that you should engage in. If we affiliate this committee to an organization and if we specify a multi-storey building for that with bureaucratic equipment, this is not a committee anymore. I fear that it may face certain problems. I am not saying that it will not be a committee, but in my opinion, the nature of such committees requires the enthusiastic participation of the people in mourning ceremonies for Imam Hussein (a.s.). This is what exerts a powerful effect on them. This is what the Revolution originated from. At least, it can be good ground for growing revolutionary virtues and teachings.
The next point which is very important is the issue of nurturing panegyrists and protecting them against errors and mistakes. This is very important. One of our serious problems is really this. Panegyrists have acquired a bad name in this regard, but it is not particular to panegyrists. This issue is not particular to panegyrists and other people in charge of such affairs. It has been witnessed that those people who take the minbar and those who recite eulogies for Ashura - including panegyrists, those who have minbar and other such people - have said inappropriate things. Sometimes you and I have meeting and talk and I may say an inappropriate thing. This is not a problem because it is between you and me. This is not important. But sometimes, we have an audience of one thousand, 10 thousand or 50 thousand people and sometimes, this audience turns into millions of people. In such circumstances, we should see what effect an inappropriate and wrong statement may exert on our audience. A number of people may accept this wrong statement and they may learn a wrong concept. A number of people may reject this statement and they may take an instant dislike towards the essence of religion. Besides, there may be an angry argument between certain groups of people.
Notice that certain deviations may emerge as a result of this wrong statement. Since long ago, we have seen that sometimes panegyrists perform rowzas that are obviously wrong, but they continue to perform because in order to make a few people shed tears. This is not particular to the present time. Since I was a child, I have participated in mourning ceremonies and I have listened to people who took the minbar. Should we make people shed tears at any price?
You can narrate the event and you can do it in an artistic way in order to produce strong effects on people, but you should not say things which are false. I have heard that, addressing the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.) a panegyrist said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Whatever you have is because of Imam Hussein (a.s.)\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Notice how wrong this is. How can someone talk such nonsense about the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.)? Whatever Imam Hussein (a.s.) has is because of the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.). Whatever he has is because of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.). Why do they not understand such concepts? Besides, they claim that they are good panegyrists and they say whatever crosses their mind. In my opinion, we should attach great significance to such issues.
The next point is concerning the issue which was raised by Mr. Nejat as well. He is right. Such committees cannot be secular. We do not have secular Imam Hussein (a.s.) committees. Anyone who is interested in Imam Hussein (a.s.) is also interested in political and jihadi Islam and the kind of Islam which engages in fighting, offering blood and laying down one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s life. This is the meaning of faith in Imam Hussein (a.s.). If a panegyrist takes care not to enter into political discussions, this is wrong. Of course, this does not mean that whatever political event takes place in the country, we should bring it up in rowzas and we should adopt specific orientations - whether revolutionary or anti-revolutionary - towards it. This is not what I mean, but revolutionary and Islamic thoughts and the auspicious guidelines which Imam (may God bestow paradise on him) formulated in our country should be brought up in such ceremonies.
This task is a great and important task. The best people who can perform rowzas for Imam Hussein (a.s.) are mujahids in the way of God and these young soldiers. You should appreciate the value of this and you should provide guidance. This can be a bright and shining spring for enlightening the minds of the people and the audience and it can improve them in terms of Islamic and religious teachings.
How good it is to pay attention to the issue of reading the Holy Quran in mourning ceremonies. How good it is to employ Islamic, revolutionary and Quranic concepts in mourning ceremonies. Sometimes, when they mourn, people say certain clichés such as \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Hussein vay\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Well, this has no value and one learns nothing from repeating \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Hussein vay\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". When the audience says such clichés, you can raise revolutionary, Islamic and Quranic issues and issues which are related to the present time. When the audience repeats it, this becomes internalized in their minds. This is very valuable. This is a task that cannot be carried out by anyone except you. No media network can inculcate religious teachings into the minds and the hearts and souls of people. Therefore, this is an important and great task. I hope that Allah the Exalted rewards and bestows success on you so that you can carry out this task in the best way possible.
Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings
9m:28s
30642
The Mujahid\\\'s Journey | Nasheed for War Veterans | Farsi Sub English
The Mujahid\\\'s Journey | Nasheed for War Veterans
Our pure and sincere martyrs lay down their lives for fighting against the oppressors and...
The Mujahid\\\'s Journey | Nasheed for War Veterans
Our pure and sincere martyrs lay down their lives for fighting against the oppressors and terrorists. What about the war veterans? Is their value any less than the martyrs. A tribute to all the fighters fighting for truth and justice out there.
4m:14s
8326
Video Tags:
PureStream,
Pure,
Stream,
Media,
Nasheed,
Journey,
Struggler,
Way,
Martyr,
Martyrdom,
Terrorist,
ISIS,
Daiesh,
Justice,
Tribute,
War,
Right,
Path,
Allah,
Islam,
Tireless,
Paradise,
Motivation,
Go Back Before It\\\'s Too Late | Brig. Gen. Esmail Qaani | Farsi Sub...
There\\\\\\\'s a very special message coming from the global Resistance against the Arrogant Powers of the world, including the Zionists.
What...
There\\\\\\\'s a very special message coming from the global Resistance against the Arrogant Powers of the world, including the Zionists.
What is that message?
And there\\\\\\\'s another message from the global Resistance against the Arrogant Powers of the world for the Palestinian people who are fighting for the right to self-determination and fighting to keep their homeland from foreign invaders.
But what is that message?
Brig. Gen. Esmail Qaani explains.
1m:30s
3896
Video Tags:
purestream,
media,
production,
Go
Back,
Esmail
Qaani,
Brig.
Gen.
Esmail
Qaani,
message,
world,
special
message,
global
Resistance,
Palestinian,
self-determination,
Arrogant
Powers
of
the
world,
homeland,
people,
invaders,
explains,
Ahmadinejad address to JEW Rabbis - Farsi English translated
President of Islamic Republic of Iran - Dr. Ahmadinejad delivers a lecture to Jewish Rabbis who are God fearing and truth lovers. These Rabbis are...
President of Islamic Republic of Iran - Dr. Ahmadinejad delivers a lecture to Jewish Rabbis who are God fearing and truth lovers. These Rabbis are fighting against zionism. May Allah guide the truth seekers and protect them from the enmity of the devilS.
10m:4s
15052
Ashura Procession 1428 Montreal Canada - Arabic
An Eulogy Mourning Imam Hussain (AS) in Arabic... Imam Hussain (AS) was killed in Karbala, Iraq by the army of Yazeed when he...
An Eulogy Mourning Imam Hussain (AS) in Arabic... Imam Hussain (AS) was killed in Karbala, Iraq by the army of Yazeed when he (AS) was fighting for freedom, justice, and humanity. a latmiyah, eulogy, nauha
2m:41s
8536
Political Dimension of Fidak - The Property of Sayyeda Fatima s.a. -...
Political Dimension of Fidak - The Property of Lady Fatima s.a. - English text. May curse of Allah be on the aggressors. From the first -awwal-...
Political Dimension of Fidak - The Property of Lady Fatima s.a. - English text. May curse of Allah be on the aggressors. From the first -awwal- till the last -akhir-. Peace and blessings of Allah be on Muhammad s.a.w.a.w and his progeny a.s. Sahih Bukhari Volume 4 Book 53 Number 325. Narrated Ayesha -mother of the believers- After the death of Allah s Apostle - Fatima the daughter of Allah s Apostle asked Abu Bakr AsSiddiq to give her the share of inheritance from what Allah s Apostle had left of the Fai i.e. booty gained without fighting which Allah had given him. Abu Bakr said to her - the holy prophet had said -Our property will not be inherited whatever we -i.e. prophets- leave is Sadaqah -to be used for charity-. Fatima the daughter of Allah s Apostle got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of the Holy prophet s.a.w.a.w. This video highlights some of the political dimension why this crime of usurping the property of daughter of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.a.w was committed.
7m:38s
15150
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 1 -...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now
8m:17s
19070
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 2 -...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
7m:52s
48748