Transcription
Those dramatic developments that seem to be reshaping the political map of Syria. I'd like your reaction to things that have happened in the last 10 days. The reaction has—oh, sorry, the reaction has been public, repeatedly stated it's inadmissible to allow the terrorist group to take control of the lands in violation of agreements which exist, starting with the UN Security Council resolution 2254, which strongly reiterated sovereignty, territorial integrity, and unity of the Syrian Arab Republic. This resolution condemned any attempts by terrorists to disturb the life of Syrians and called for direct dialogue between the government and the opposition. The opposition groups were listed in that resolution in 2000.
If we speak about Idlib specifically, in 2018 and 2020, in the framework of the Astana format, two agreements were signed clearly solidifying the common resolve not to allow Idlib to be thrown out of Idlib, and these agreements have not been implemented. Now they are grossly violated. I watched your channel this morning, and the coverage is very specific. I would say the anchor was saying that opposition groups were taking new towns. This is the way Al Jazeera calls it, which I would say is not very journalistically clean. Well, there are more than one group, and clearly, Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham is an opposition group in opposition to the government in Damascus. It seems a pretty clear description of what they do.
You've been having meetings—one second, one second. I understand that you defend your bosses who called the shots in Al Jazeera, but could honest journalism provide for a statement like those listed as a terrorist group by the United Nations Security Council and the United States, by the way, and opposition groups who are not listed? I have been reporting on this for the last couple of weeks, and we are saying that very repeatedly. But let me get back to what has been going on in terms of the diplomacy. I understand that you've had a meeting with your Turkish and Iranian colleagues here in Doha. Have you reached any agreements?
Yeah, we strongly reiterated territorial integrity, sovereignty, and unity of the Syrian Arab Republic. We called for an immediate end to hostile activities. We stated all of us that we want resolution 2254 to be fully implemented and for this purpose called for dialogue between the government and legitimate opposition as provided in that resolution. The main thing is not to say something new; the main thing is to implement everything to which you sign up.
But that resolution 2254, which was a Security Council resolution at the foreign minister level, I remember in 2015, and you were there in Russia's seat, talks about a new constitution and free and fair elections, and yet the whole process has got bogged down and has gone absolutely nowhere.
Well, it's still a bit less time passed after the adoption of this resolution since the resolutions promising a Palestinian state were adopted, so everything is relative, if you can understand. Nobody is perfect, as the old American movie says, and everything is relative. Have you spoken—this doesn't mean that we should not keep trying. Have you spoken to your Syrian counterpart in recent hours or any other senior Syrian official, and how worried are they? How worried are they about the situation? They've lost a lot of territory.
Well, we are not in the business of checking who is worried and to what extent. We're in the business to try to help, as diplomatic means, to stop bloodshed and to make justice prevail. In this particular case, justice is resolution 2254. The other authors of this resolution, including the United States, confirm to us that they continue supporting this process as described in that resolution, and we hope that these promises and assurances would materialize soon.
How much of a blow is it to Russia that so much territory has been lost in such a short period of time? Because Russia and the Soviet Union before it have been such a big backer of Syria. How much of a blow is it, and will you intervene further militarily, not just diplomatically?
Our country has been a very big backer not only of Syria but also of Iraq, Libya, and Lebanon. It is not our fault that all the resolutions which were adopted on the Middle East issues—some of them were not adopted. For example, Iraq was bombed out of statehood without any discussion in the Security Council. It is not our fault that the biggest trend of the modern world, namely the fight against those who want to keep hegemony, and on the other hand, those who would like to live in a free world where the United Nations demand to respect sovereign equality of states, is really implemented, be it BRICS, be it Shanghai Cooperation, be it Gulf Cooperation Council, ASEAN, and many others.
So the fight of these two worlds, one phasing out and another one emerging, is not going without clashes and conflicts, which were aggressive adventures launched by the U.S. and its allies in Iraq, Libya, and Palestine. The behavior of the United States regarding what is going on in Palestine is absolutely unacceptable. Invading Syria—this is a repetition of the old, very old habit to create some havoc, some mess, and then to fish in the muddy waters.
The Middle East and Europe are not enough already. NATO, under the United States command, pronounced last year at the summit that security in Euro-Atlantic is indivisible from security in the Indo-Pacific region. So they already eye the entire Eurasian continent, including the South China Sea, the Strait of Taiwan, and the Korean Peninsula. They are creating NATO-like military blocks; NATO infrastructure is being promoted to the region. This is a reflection of attempts not to allow hegemony to phase out, but this is a fight against history.
So yes, we are very much sorry for the Syrian people who became subjects of another geopolitical experiment. We are absolutely convinced of the inadmissibility of using terrorists like Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham to achieve geopolitical purposes, as that is being done now with the organization of this offensive from the escalation area. But you know what? We do in the world—maybe the mentality is different. The Americans, for them, I know them very well, for them what is important is how they are perceived, and they always want to be perceived as number one. When they tell something, everybody must say, "Yes, sir," whatever Uncle Sam decides.
In our case, it's not about being concerned with the impression we make on the people. We do things in which we believe, and if we could help since 2015 to keep the Syrian state intact, if we could organize the process with Iranian and Turkish colleagues, which is called the Astana process, and we met today, as you mentioned, this in itself was a very helpful process. Nothing goes smoothly in world diplomacy, but the events we are witnessing today are clearly geared to undermine everything we have been doing during those years.
We are sorry not for the image that people see in the person of the Russian Federation or me personally, but we are very concerned with the fate of the Syrian people. We don't want them to follow the fate of Iraqis, Libyans, and other nations who were disturbed by people desiring to keep their domination.
The Russian Embassy in Damascus is now urging Russian nationals to leave Syria. Does that mean that you believe that Assad may not be able to cling on to power? And if that is the case, are you going to try and save him this time?
Well, the Western embassies in Kyiv some time ago suggested for their nationals to leave. The embassies in South Korea are doing the same. It's a diplomatic job. I understand that you need some sensation in your interview. It's a diplomatic job for you as journalists to care about facts. I have, among other things, to care about my compatriots. But the sensation surely is the fact that so much of the territory of Syria has been lost in such a short period of time.
Do you think Assad can hold on, and what is Russia going to do militarily?
Militarily, Russia helps the Syrian Army, the Air Force, which is based at Khmeimim, and we assist the Syrian Army to counter the attacks of terrorists. What is the forecast? I cannot guess. We are not in the business of guessing. We agreed today with Iran and Turkey to issue a strong call, which I described, and we would be doing some specific steps to make sure that this call is heeded.
You say that Russia has been helping the Syrian military; it clearly has. Are you not frustrated then that it seems in many cases the Syrian military just ran away? It's a bit like when the Taliban took over Afghanistan in 2021, is it not?
Well, the Americans have been leaving Afghanistan even more chaotically. I think, you know, if you want me to try to give my assessment of who behaves how and how this is perceived outside, then this is your right. You are interviewing me, and I think I gave my advice.
It seems, however, that you are doing everything to avoid coming to Ukraine.
I will come to Ukraine, but I definitely want to talk about the issues in the Middle East first. I want to come back to Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham, which, as you say, was formed from the al-Nusra Front and remains on the UN blacklist. But their leader, Galani, is now projecting a different tone; he's sending a message to Alawites that they are welcome. Do you think that at least someone should be talking to him to see if he's telling the truth?
Well, first of all, he is projecting this position, as far as I understand, on CNN, and we checked with the Americans whether he's still on the U.S. terrorist list, and they said yes, he is, in addition to the Security Council terrorist list. So giving him the audience of CNN is already something.
As for the promises he is spreading, I never— you know, challenge the English proverb: the proof of the pudding is in the eating. But there are other cases, and there's one obvious one: the Taliban were on a blacklist; they were allied to Al-Qaeda, and now in Afghanistan, Russia deals with the Taliban. Things change. We never withdrew our embassy from Kabul; the embassy was staying there throughout the American and Coalition occupation, throughout their shameful departure, and we never withdrew the embassy.
The Taliban, by the way, they are not as an organization on the UN terrorist list. Several leaders of the Taliban are now on the personal terrorist list, but I understand what you mean. You are basically saying that life is more interesting and more complicated than resolutions, statements, claims, and promises. We'll see how it works. If the opposition, which was mentioned in resolution 2254, is a responsible opposition, if they care about their country, then they would not allow for this operation to continue. They participate in hostilities as well, and today's call from Iran, Turkey, and Russia should be heard by everybody who is on the ground in Syria.
On the ground in Syria right now, the focus is the battle for Homs. If Homs is taken, then the territory controlled by Assad will be divided in two, and on one side of that will be your big naval base that you were given for 49 years, a sovereign naval base, and also your large air base in Latakia. Is Russia worried about those? Apparently, some analysts say there have been satellite images of Russian vessels already leaving your Tartus naval base.
Well, there is a naval exercise in the Mediterranean. Maybe your satellite images took this for something different. But again, once again, if you want me to say, "Yes, we have lost in Syria; we are so desperate," if this is what you need, let's continue. But my point is I'm not in the business of guessing what is going to happen. We are trying to do everything not to allow terrorists to prevail, even if they say that they are no longer terrorists.
What about the role of Turkey in this? You met with a Turkish foreign minister here in Doha. Do you think they are controlling the situation or just want to keep on top of the situation?
They are a very influential actor in Syria, and I think you know this. They are concerned with the security of their border with Syria. We discussed it in the Astana format and in the context of Astana plus Syria discussions on normalizing relations between Turkey and Damascus. There is a series of ideas which we want to put into practice to keep Syria territorially integral and united while ensuring the security of the border, which has been porous for terrorist attacks on the territory of Turkey. The Adana agreement of 1986, I think, is an example of how this can be addressed, and I have no slightest doubt that the relations between Syria and Turkey must be normalized, and we will be doing anything to be helpful.
To finish on Syria, please, Mr. Foreign Minister, you keep mentioning resolution 2254. If ever it got to the stage of the ultimate part of that resolution, free and fair elections—hand on heart, you cannot believe, can you, that the Assad family, the Assad dynasty that's run this country for 54 years, has run it throughout this war when half a million people have died, that they would be elected in free and fair elections?
To get to this point, you said yourself that this is the crowning paragraph of the resolution. Before that, you need to implement what comes before it, including sovereignty and territorial integrity to be respected. The Americans' invasion and occupation of the east of Syria, supporting Kurdish separatists, including on the lands which historically belong to Arab tribes, exploiting oil and food resources, selling them in the world market, and financing the quasi-state they're building there—do you think it is not an inhibition for free and fair elections throughout Syria?
Let's move to Gaza. Over 45,000 people have been killed since October the 7th last year, and as you know, back on June the 10th, 14 members of the Security Council voted for a ceasefire; the U.S. abstained. There should now be a ceasefire. Is there any valid reason, in Russia's view, almost six months later, why there is no ceasefire in place now?
Because this was a resolution of the quality which we could not support. We did not veto it only because all our Arab friends, including Palestinians, did not want us to. They wanted to give it a try. It mentioned a Biden plan, and the Americans were persuading us during the meeting of the Security Council that this Biden's plan is supported by Netanyahu. We asked to circulate the Biden's plan; they said, "No, no, no, no, no, it's not necessary. Trust us." Trust me, like Schwarzenegger used to say. And so we abstained, and it turned out that the plan does not exist, that Israel is not committed to anything. So this plan turned out to be one of the rules on which the world order must be based—a rules-based world order, nothing specific.
So with a resolution intended not to be implemented, how can we expect that it would? Israel has now killed—no applause—Israel has now killed many of Hamas's commanders. Do you think it has any real reason to continue fighting, or is it just causing carnage, death, and destruction deliberately of Palestinians?
Well, we strongly condemned the terrorist attack on the 7th of October last year, but at the same time, we strongly condemn the way Israel reacted, basically by starting a collective punishment of the Palestinians. I discussed this issue with some Israeli colleagues, and well, not even in the—I think publicly either the minister of defense or some other official from the cabinet, when asked why they don't take measures to prevent damage to civilians, peaceful citizens, he said there are no peaceful citizens there in Gaza; as of the age of three, they are all terrorists.
With this philosophy, when Antonio Guterres condemned the terrorist attack and then said, "But it did not happen in a vacuum," you remember what Israel's reaction was? The former ambassador demanded that Guterres resign. Eventually, he was declared persona non grata. Unbelievable. I don't think Israel is doing good for their own interests because this notion that they are terrorists when they reach the age of three—well, this is, of course, a figure of speech. But for almost 80 years, generation after generation is growing in the situation of occupation and the situation of bloodshed.
Of course, the parents and the teachers at school explain the history of the Palestinian people and what happened in 1948. So unless a Palestinian state is created, which was, by the way, a precondition for the creation of the Israeli state, unless a Palestinian state is created, extremism would be breeding and breeding and breeding in the region. There is no doubt, and just to say that we will exterminate all Hamas members—I don't think it's a serious pledge.