AT CHATEMHOUSE IN LONDON

29April2004

The Dean of Chatemhouse:

Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban is a Minister for Expatriates Affairs, and this is only the half story, because she is also a distinguished academic and activist in representation of the Syrian public policy. She has a Ph.D. of Warwick University in Shelly and Chartist. She's lectured in Literature in Damascus University, and even it is more relevant to what she going to do today is that she is for some years till now at the heart of Syrian foreign policy. She has attended in a interpretative act most key meeting between previous and present president for many years, so she is very well-qualified to say how the foreign Syrian policy has developed. That lets her for the last years to have undertaken a key role in the Foreign Ministry because she is directly concerned to presentation of Syrian foreign policy. So I call everybody who is qualified to come an talk to us about Syrian foreign policy. The title of her talk, I think, the "Middle East is being changed slightly". She is going to talk about the developments in the Middle East. She is going to talk about the Syrian – European relations and the relations with the United States. Dr. Shaaban it is our love to have you here.

Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban:

Thank you, thank you very much. Good afternoon,

Allow me first to thank you all and to thank the British-Syrian society, and in particular Dr. Fawaz al-Akhras and Dr. Ghayth Armanazi who allow me this opportunity to be with you this afternoon. 29April2004

     Actually the Middle East is being changed so quickly that one cannot last lectures three days ahead, because everyday there is something is being changed.

    I would like to start with saying that I believe the reason most of us, probably, would have a different assessment of what is happening in the Middle East is basically because we are exposed to different realities. And I see that as an essential part of the problem, because I believe that if we are exposed to similar realities we  more likely will come to similar conclusions. I'm saying this as an Arab and Muslim woman who lives in the Middle East and who reads western papers beside Arab papers, and most of the time, to be honest with you, western papers don't express what is happening or what are the reasons or is the source of the problem. And I feel that this a main issue that is needed to be addressed.

    So, what I would like to do this afternoon in the thirty minutes I've been allowed to is to reflect with you our perspective, our Syrian perspective, how we see things. I don't talk really as a Minister but as a writer and a columnist and as someone who is deeply engaged in the destiny of our region.

     The question that shocked me is the question of Lee Hamelton who asks Dr. Rice "what is the source of the problem?" who said to Dr. Rice that there are two billion Muslim people some of them are very fine people but it seems that they show too much of discontent, so what is the source of the problem?? The first question after September eleven is "Why do Arab and Muslims hate us??"  I waited patiently for Dr. Rice answer, and I wondered how would she address the essence of the problem. That was the question: How do we get at this discontent, dislocation, if you would across a big swathe of the Islamic world? that was the question of Mr. Lee Hamelton. And instead of talking about the problems in the Islamic world or in the Middle East Dr. Rice showed to say that "I believe very strongly and the president believes that is really a Generational challenge". And she went on to explain that the United States for a long time has connected itself with regimes that have  contraire of freedom, and with the absence of the individual liberties in the Middle East. And she ended up with saying that "what is we want to do is to change the nature of the Middle East", and she said that Iraq is an important example of the that, we have to change the nature of the Middle East, and our success in Iraq is extremely important.

    That answer actually shocked me being a woman who is proud of who we are, of our culture, of our nature, of our  heritage. It is really a shock to hear someone who is saying that he wants to change the nature of the Middle East rather than to change what is wrong in the Middle East or to address the problem in the Middle East.

  So, I will try to address the source of the problem in the way we feel it. It is the occupation of Arab territories that is something really very important for all Arab people. Killing children and women. Assassinations ,demolition of  houses and destruction of lives. Negligence of international legitimacy. Ignoring international will.  Complete absence of Justice. If you ask most Arab and Muslim people most of them probably will find those reasons as the source of the problem. So, this was added to what happened during Sharon's latest visit to the United States and the latest move by Bush and Sharon. That was seen in the Arab world as a confirmation that the source of the problem is totally ignored. The contrary there is a moving in the wrong direction in the Arab- Israeli conflict, and moving in the wrong direction on the war on terrorism. That creates more violence.

   By the way I am thinking of the whole issue in the way that our destinies are targeted including the destinies of the Americans, the Europeans, the Arab world, the Muslim world. I think we are at a critical moment where the destinies of the people all around the world are in targeted. And therefore it is, perhaps, extremely important to try and think of the solution in that way rather than in the way that divide the world into beneficiaries and victims of the problem.

    So, the major assessment of what happened when Bush agreed with Sharon is that the total negation of the right of the Palestinians' refugees. There was an acknowledgement that settlements are legal and a proper thing to do, and once settlements are made nothing can change that reality. There is a negation of the borders. There is a total negligence of the American initiative that led to Madrid Conference and to Madrid terms of reference. So, from the Arab perspective that was a quite disastrous really in the international policy that the only superpower in the world has acknowledged settlements, which have all obstacles in the way for peace.

    So, if I move from here to see what are the different responses to what Bush has said with Sharon we will see that Russia, for example, said nothing can be done really unless the Arab-Israeli conflict is addressed. Many countries in the world, the United Nations' Secretary General expressed that this is a very dangerous thing to do. And actually it was few Israeli Senior officials have expressed also that this is something that they never bent off for fifty six years.

    I would show you how the Palestinians' reaction to Bush and Sharon, and then I will show you what Hamas said and what Sharon said, and actually they go back to the same basic statement. For example Khaled al Batsh said: "this is an announcement of war against Palestinian people". And Yasser Abdrabu who, as you know, signed the Geneva accord, said: “By trying to protect the political future of one another ,Bush and Sharon are jeopardizing the political future of Israelis, Palestinians and the whole region”.

    Now, I will move to what Powell has said. Powell said "settlements are the new reality". You know, for a superpower to say that is something drives to concern really. “ Frankly ,those refugees should not return to Israel but the new Palestinian state will be found for this purpose “ while this may not mean much to the European or the American it is absolutely alarming for the Palestinians and the Arab to hear that. “ Bush’s Support to Sharon’s plan does mean that Washington is trying to impose a final peace settlement “.

    Now, let's see what Blair said. Blair said: “We are all looking forward to seeing both Palestinians and Israelis finalizing a complete peace leading to two coexisting states”. HOW??! If all the rights are negated, settlements is acknowledged, how??!

   That what Kufi Annan said. Now, let's see what Hamas said. Hamas said: HAMAS said that the American president promise to Israel that enables her keeping parts of the West Bank proves that armed resistance is the only way left for Palestinian .

    Now, let's see what Sharon said. Sharon said: Sharon stated that withdrawal from Gaza would ‘severely harm Palestinians and put an end to their dream of a Palestinian state. Actually this is what the Palestinians are responding to. At the bottom line that is exactly what it means. I didn't see what Sharon said in any western press, but I saw it in the Israeli press in Hanot Ahranot Israeli newspaper, I didn't see it in any western press.

    I found this part of the occasion extremely relevant to the mashroomy of terrorism all over the world. And the chaos in which the war on terrorism is leading all of us.

    So, the way in which I feel that terrorism should be addressed is that all parties should All parties should undertake true responsibility toward fighting terrorism. Sometimes there are some statements like after Madrid explosions President Chirac said "the civilized world" should take its responsibility towards terrorism. You know, as if terrorism is only targeting the civilized world, and I wonder what is the civilized world. I'm sure that he didn't mean anything wrong but this is the terminology we are facing everyday. So, what I am saying is that It is wrong to think that fighting terrorism could be achieved by increasing armed conflicts or initiating more wars. Quite the opposite is true. This is how we see things from Arab perspective.

    Everyday and after Madrid attack we see in the newspapers that two Syrians were arrested somewhere who are terrorists etc. and I feel those terrorists who are Those arrested and called terrorists in the west today are the same who had killed thousands of people in their Arab homeland . the west sheltered them and considered them protagonists of human rights. Only today the west admitted that they are terrorists. What I want to say is that terrorism targets all of us. It targets all human beings, and therefore all of us need to stand in the face of terrorism instead of trying to divide the world into bad guys and good guys; those who are with terrorism and those who are against terrorism.

    Is Muslim is the only terrorist?? I am also giving the terminologies that is used.   The Jew who kills innocent people is a Fanatic. The Christian is an Extremist. The Muslim is a terrorist. So, this also gives the impact on people's minds because some people are trying to guide between religions. Or they are trying to transfer the conflict as a religious conflict. And I would like to stress here that the conflict in our region is not a religious conflict. It is a conflict about land and power  and about ideology, but it is not a religious conflict particularly in our region, really, all religions for centuries have lived together. And I think it is very wrong to portray the conflict in our region as a religious one. And it is very wrong to talk about Sunnis and Shiites and dividing our society in this religious way because it only brings hatred and chaos in the region.

     So, part of the problem is that we are not exposed to the same information. There is a lots of false information that is coming to western media, or information doesn't really portray the reality or what is going on or focuses on certain reality.

      I will give an example from today's papers about the importance of information and I'll read some of what is written today. For example the Guardian today has an article by Lee Godan, it is this kind of articles that had an impact on the people of the region because it is talking about the cost, the human cost, of war. And he actually confess that he almost sales into battle because he tried to say lies because and he couldn't really do reporting about war from the heavenly garden he tell.

    So, I think not to address the issue with the right information is something very important because it prevents public opinions from getting into the cross of the matter.

    At the meantime there is a war in Iraq, there is negation of Palestinians' rights someone writes about reform and the economist reform in the Arab world. I think that, you know, doesn't make sense at all because we have to start from the beginning; we want to achieve peace, to achieve security and then to be able to go on with reform. I'm talking about our perspective that might or does not fit to the stereotype. Excuse me because in this half an hour I want to be as honest with you as I can, and telling you exactly how we fee.

     So, appreciating the reform in the Middle East with the terms of the Israeli occupation to our territories we certainly we won't be able to do that. Occupation is  a cause of tension that constantly inflames the circle of violence in the region. So, for certain powers to say the security of Israel is important, and I think we have to realize that no one can be secure in that region if residence is given to the logic of violence and bloodshed rather than to dialogue and negotiation or the international legitimacy.

     I think at this strategic level we have to sort out what is the measure that doesn't mean the actions of the day. Is it weapons, or is it dialogue and the international legitimacy??! The other side of this point is that Arab people are not allow to have armament. Take for example the Palestinians whom their territories are occupied, there has been actually genocide to the Palestinian people. This is actually what is happening. The Iraqis don't have armament while all kinds of weapons are used against them. So, what we see is the removal of all armament from people there to defend themselves and yet all occupation that uses all kinds of weapons to kill and destroy.

    What we feel is that terrorism is feeding from violence of occupied territories whether in Palestine or in Iraq. So, the occupation is a crucial set in fighting terrorism and restoring value to dialogue, to negotiation, to international legitimacy, to peace and justice. That no one wants more than that legitimacy because the people there who are paying the price of all that is going on.

     So, since September eleven I believe and I am noticing that the world is being divided into bad guys and good guys, east and west, those who are supporting terrorism and those who are fighting terrorism. And really I feel that it's about time to stop thinking in that way, it's about time that all our societies are not in the accurate time, that we have the same battle, and we have to think together of how to fight this battle and where to start.

    So, what I am saying is that we all have to fight terrorism because we are all targeted. And if I may say something I may just listen to the spokesman at the Foreign office at the United States, and he said that he doesn't call the operation that took place in Damascus a terrorist operation although people where killed, you know, that was in the streets of Damascus. And he just condemn all what is happened in Madrid or in the United States or in Casablanca.

    If we go back to the history of Arab people killed as a result of a terrorist acts we see that all these killings weren't condemned by western countries and by western people.

    The question that we must always ask is that doesn't lives of Arabs a matter??! Although we as Arab countries always condemn any killing anywhere. So, we will not met with the same way, with the say style of doing things. How could the killing of the innocent women and people in the streets of Damascus is not a terrorist act while killing innocent people in any street is a terrorist act??!

     During the Madrid peace negotiations the best rule for these negotiations was that no one is secure until everyone is secure. And the security of all people, of all countries should be staffed of an equal base, and I think this is a very, very important matter in making peace in the Middle East region. We hear everyone is talking about the security of Israel, what about the security of the Arabs??  What about the security of the Palestinians??! What about our security??!

    I feel unless we deal with issues with a field of dignity nothing can be solved. We have as Arab and Muslims to feel that we are equals, and our lives are equal just as the lives of others, so that we can deal with things. And I think the only way I find it possible now is for the international community to take its own responsibility because we are at a challenging moment, a very difficult moment, but perhaps with a great opportunity that we all are responsible and thinking people to feel where the danger is and how could we unite our work together against violence and against terrorism because in every race and in every culture and every religion and in every country there are people who would work day and night for peace to achieve peace, noble and justice. So, what I am saying is that West and East are responsible for fighting terrorism. And I think there is a moral responsibility now, you know, towards what is happening in the Middle East because I'm sure if I have a slide to show you here of what is going on in Fallouja, and the children of their hands and legs were cut while they are of seven I am sure none of us will accept to see all these damage inflicted on innocent and human beings anywhere.

     It is, perhaps, the time we all feel responsible. And I would like to say that the letter, for example, of the diplomat to Mr. Tony Blair at least shows that people are thinking about solutions. What things have to be done, how things should be done. And we feel in the Middle East that people are waiting for us to find solutions, real solutions, that are enduring and that will be good for everyone.

   I had the other day a dialogue with Daniel, you know, on the satellite, and actually everything although he is the director of the speech institute in Washington most Syrian people who saw him said that what he is saying is absolutely irrelevant to our region. So, I find this also as a part of the problem. And people really should try change the way they address the issues on the ground.  

    So, I am trying to reflect on some solutions, and I am just thinking aloud with you really if an exercise of reflecting with you all the issues. In our complex world we need to resist the culture of sound bites and instant opinions. I mean the way they are talking about sometimes, they are either with us or against us, we know and they do not know. You know, all these terminologies don't really reflect anything on the ground. So, we need to be more reflective. And I feel that military solutions are no solutions, and we have to agree to that. And we have to stop dividing the world into bad guys and good guys, civilized people and uncivilized, western and Muslims. I see in this division a real part of the problem. I really do.

   Now, the Spanish example. I found in the Spanish example something really energizing although twelve Moroccans  were arrested suspected of carrying out the attack that killed a hundred and ninety people in Madrid. The Spanish foreign Minister said we relate this to Morocco. I find this really exa,plary because the same terrorists are the ones who conducted the terrorist acts in Casablanca. This is a wonderful attitude to say that the terrorists who attack you and the terrorists who attack him and we are going to stand together to fight the terrorists. I feel this is the way to be followed.

    Other dimensions, you know, like Foreign correspondents: USA Today, Karen Jurgensen resigend on April 20th because of a scandal involving her star foreign correspondent, Jack Kelley. I think it is wrong to cover what is happening in our region, it is really wrong. I said many times that we are one world.

    One final thing I would like to make, you know, the image that sometimes promoted about Muslims loving to die and Muslims wanting to bombing, and I would like to share with you this, I think, the only Muslim who wants to die is the Muslim who is humiliated so much that doing this will be more valuable than his life. No one ever wants to die. Islam is the religion that taught us how to live happily. We love nothing more than all our children to live happily and to grow. But when the humiliation becomes bearable death is the best thing and the only option some people have. You have aspiration for your children and we have aspiration for our children. But when western officials say the Palestinians have enough food, you know, is that an enough reason to make people living!! To have enough food!! Or is it the matter that they must have secure, peaceful and ambitious life!! That is the thing, I think, we have to think about. We don't only want to have enough food or enough water. We need to have enough dignity, security, prosperity for all of us. Just exactly like that you want for your children.

Thank you very much.

The Dean of Chatemhouse:

 thank you very much indeed. Just what we have to do before we have the questions I just want to repeat the laws of lectures here. Before asking your question could you please identify yourselves, and could you please be as clear as you can. One final thing, Dr. Shaaban asked that she wanted technique group questions rather than individual questions so I want to gather the question in a group of three questions. Thank you very much.

Question 1: I want to ask you whether the United States has a clear foreign policy towards Syria or is there the policy of the state department or the policy of other group?? And if it is the policy of the foreign department do you think that they have to change it??!

Question 2: "a Japanese correspondent"  Japan is the country that have a good relations with Syria, but they sent troops to Iraq for humanity purposes. Do you think that this may change the Japanese image in the Middle East??

Question 3: "from sign number institute" during your discussion about the sources of the problem you sort out several significant facts about the question of the need for the reform within the government gives a clear impression until the other time of the other problem the question of the reform within the government should not even be started, so do you think that it is Washington second step should be??

Dr.  Bouthaina Shaaban: thank you very much. Whether U.S. has a different policy towards Syria, or whether it is the foreign department I think  the policy of the United States towards the region seems to be confused in a way that even for the United States itself, you know its policy towards Iraq. I think Syria has a very good reason to be active in the region, and to be a key player in the region. It has always been, and therefore that's what we truly expected from the United States. Syria should be an active and a key player in the region. But because the peace process is totally abandoned Syria of course was a key to any initiating, and negotiating in the peace process that they took the other rout as it were of trying to portrait Syria and they had the Accountability Act. But I think the original reason for that is the policy towards peace in the region and towards the Arab - Israeli conflict, because if the United States decided that they are going to address the peace process then Syria would be the key. But they decided to be on the behalf of the Israeli side completely but this, unfortunately, is neither good for Syria for the United States nor for the region, really.

    And for Japan, yes I think Japan is a country that's highly respected in the region and a country that helps the region a lot. But I think the people of the region are very politically sadly and they  understand that, probably, Japan was, perhaps, subjected to pressure to send troops. So, people forgive Japan for that. I think Arab people are very politically sadly and they understand the background of the problem. So, I hope that, you know, will not damage the image of the relations between us and Japan. They are active in the Middle East, and they are doing a very good jobs in the Arab countries and in many areas.

    After reform in the Middle East I think the Greater Middle East, as we heard about two months ago. We have all these terminologies coming to us and being sent to us, you know, although we have a very good thinkers in the Middle East who can find idioms, better idioms than those were sent to us. I think the reform in the Middle East, as we say is a good word that has a bad intention in Arabic, you know, but I do not know how to translate it for you. But it is a good cause but it had a bad intention. I think the prime objective behind the giving all these marketing for the reform in the Middle East for the democracy in the Middle East is to say that solving the Arab – Israeli conflict will not solve the problem because we have so many problems in the Middle East; we have to change the governments there in order to reform the Middle East and to do things in the Middle East which I think is totally wrong. The key issue in the Middle East is the Arab – Israeli conflict, and solving the Arab – Israeli conflict is solving eighty percent of the problem, but not to say that we are staying and not doing anything, at least I speak for Syria. We involved in a very serious process of reform and we are working everyday and we are acknowledging as much knowledge and expertise as  we can from different areas. But the situation in the region, you know, does not offer an incentive or a good climate. I think what we need is a better climate, that was what I meant. I did not say that we are not doing anything, we are not sleeping until the climate comes. We are working on a reform. We are working to make our life better. We are working for our future generation but also we are working for improving the political climate in the region because only then we can have a full fledge movement of hopefully working for the prosperity of our people. And no one is interested in a better economic reform than us, because we are the beneficiaries of that. So, this tone, you know, no one is interested in the reform in the Middle East more than the sons and the daughters of the Middle East. That is not real actually, it has an inferior motive.

Question4: about the Israel offer to make peace with Syria.

Dr.  Bouthaina Shaaban:  I would like to answer you not just about the Syrian government, but I would like to answer you in the name of all Arab governments, because there was an initiative on the table that all Arab governments put in March 2002 an initiative in which they said that they are all ready to make peace with Israel if Israel will withdraw to the line of the fourth of June 1967. And actually now the Israelis and the Americans don't accept even to talk about this initiative. All Arab countries combine, and this happened for the first time, they put an initiative as a result of Arab summit in Beirut in March 2002 that they are ready to make peace with Israel if Israel will withdraw to the lines of 1967. The only one who is not interested in peace is Sharon, because he believes in killing the Palestinians and grapping their territories. We would love that this initiative to be picked up by the United States and Europe and for a peace negotiations to start on the basis of the international legitimacy. And president Assad in his interview with the New York times three months ago reasserted that Syria is ready to make peace on the basis of Madrid terms of reference, on the bases of the Security Council resolutions, on the basis of the Arab initiative. Of course they talked a lot about it in Israel and then they said that they are not interested, you know.

Question 5: you spoke about killing, killing of women and children, absent of justice, the Palestinians suffering from the genocide. Now, I wonder if this is really the policy of the Israelis who are killing the leader, leaders rather than honest people, my question is could you please give us an example of genocide? Could you give us an example of the policy that kills the children? Just give us an example.

Question 6: Liz from the BBC. I want to ask Dr. Shaaban about your response to the attacks in Syria, I think you've rejected them and connected them to the war against al Qaeda, and what do you think they bombed the United Nations building for? Why do you think that al Qaeda would target Syria? Secondly, you spoke about the attitude of the United States towards Syria, what is the Syrian reaction if similar attitude comes from Europe including Britain??

Question 7: from British program of the Chatemhous, there have been some commentary on the situation in Iraq and the obsessing of the coexisting of the political order in Iraq. There is a challenge to reach this order. One way in which it is described that if the Shiites majority in Iraq wants to enjoy too much representation in government this would make a radical change of Shiite Arab. Do you have any comment on that??

Dr.  Bouthaina Shaaban:  Thank you. For the examples of the genocide I really don't bring with me the slides of the genocide because I felt that this may hurt your feeling. But I will give you some statistics only. Fifteen thousand houses, Palestinian houses, have been destroyed in the last two years, so fifteen thousand families have become refugees on their own territory. Ten thousand people have been injured. Seven hundred Palestinian children under the age of ten have been killed and shot in the head. Is that the democratic policy to kill the Palestinians!! Two hundred thousands olives tree have been uprooted. Qalqilia now doesn't see the sun. that is the truth of what is happening in Palestine. And what the international community I would really want them to do is to do the apartheid sanctions against the apartheid. That is the truth if you do not want to hear it don't hear it, but that is the truth and that is actually what is going on on the ground. You know, many children are without eyes, without hands and without legs. And they are not bodyguards of targeting leaders. I think the whole, you know, coverage of the targeting leader is a bad attitude and a terrible attitude and is all used for a coverage of what I talked about. I am not happy to talk about this, I would love to talk about a very different reality, but that really the truth of it.

    Now, as for Liz the attacking in Syria. You know, I find it really difficult to understand why an attack in Syria is not a terrorist act while an attack anywhere else is a terrorist attack. A woman was killed and two men were killed and buildings were destroyed. They are investigating now what was the source of the problem, and where these people came from, and who they are. And I do not want to give any thing before reaching the full results in the investigations, but it is certainly an act of terrorism, and this is not the first time that terrorism hits our streets.

     Now, you are asking me about the hardened position of the Europeans. I think it is Britain that has a different policy now in the way of regarding Iraq and its close ties to what the United States is doing. So, this doesn't express the consensus of the European countries. You know, what Syria would love to see is a different strategy of addressing things; whether it was about Syrian- European association or about the situation in Iraq or about the Arab – Israeli conflict because we really feel that this is not leading anybody anywhere not only Syria. The problem is that when the whole region is on fire, you know, you cannot really think any more about Syria, Lebanon and Jordan and Kuwait. They are all on fire. A comprehensive solution needs to be solved. And Syria has a historical call for the European role in the region because the Europeans are closer culturally to the region. We still call for this role in the region and we hope that this will set somewhere in the future.

    Now, the challenge to the regional order, the Shiite Arabs, you know the whole terminology of speaking about the Shiite and Shiite Arab is really dividious in the region. I think there are so many sensitivities in the region needed to be understood in much more different way, and  playing this card, you know, Shiite majority and Sunnis and Kurds, etc. is extremely dangerous for our region. We have ten thousand of years, if you have ten Syrian people here no one will never ask what is your religion. This is the ultimate question that no body will never ask because we are a melting dough of so many ethnities, too many religions so that it is too dangerous to try and to invite us to think in this way. This really threatens the future of the region thinking along these lines. It is probably to be used along this line is a disastrous for the United States to think in this way also, or to any other country or to any other region. Why are there now the European Union that is a combination of more than one cultural country? All what we can say is to call to stop this way of addressing issues in the region and to find a different strategy, the strategy that the sons and the daughters of the this region contribute to. Because as the destiny of someone is decided somewhere else where so little understanding of the culture and the people things will continue to be difficult.

Question 8: I don't really think about my question, but I'll try to say it. My first question is about the swear of the government, Syrian government, and how does it elect? question is about the Kurds' rights, I think and I'm reading daily about Kurds have been arrested by the Syrian governments, and you can find this in most of the websites. Don't you think that it's time for more democracy??!

Question 9: Ten Fendry the director of the British - Syrian society, about the U.S. – Saudi relations. There are some terrible events against the western people in the region, and now you have the same events in your country. Now, do you have a plan to some extent to investigate and demonstrate for the western people what's going on in the region??

Question 10: you have spoken in a very critical way regarding the U.S. and the Israeli policies in the region. What Syria wants to do as a larger act ?

Dr.  Bouthaina Shaaban:  For the question about the Syrian government I think I do not have the knowledge about the government's swear and what was the process of that they were elected. I understood from your question that you want us to have more democracy before the American pressure, so you see what happened in Iraq as a more democracy I assume.

    And as for the Kurdish Syrian citizens, we have Kurds, Sunnis, Shiites, Armenians and every single ethnicity is in Syria and that is why Syria lasted for ten thousand years. We have to keep this beautiful matrix in order to continue.

    Ten Fendry, yes, hello, and lovely to see you and thank you for your fair question, I think it is very important question. I'm sure that people in the foreign ministry and ministry of information are setting up the strategies to explain what is happening to the west. I really feel that this is absolutely bad, because at this moment concepts should be more important than reality. And I think devoting a lot of efforts to explain to the west what is happening to the west, what is our strategy, what is our vision seems to be one of the most important things to do. And I totally agree with you. I think there must be a campaign from our side to be pro-acted on that.

    What can Syria actually do. The problem of that, it is difficult for me to explain that I do not feel that I'm just a Syrian woman, I feel as an Arab woman. I do not only care about Syrian children I do also care equally for the Palestinians and the Iraqis children. Historically Syria played that role. And actually our destiny is indulgent as Arab people and for the Arab future. Of course we're doing what we can in Syria for and to draw the attention of the world that peace is the answer, the enduring peace is the answer. And we shall continue doing this. We cannot really do much without ending Israeli occupation, without and without ending the occupation of Iraq and without allowing countries to prosper and flourish their own rout. But politically I don't think that any Arab country can do it on their own. And I think that is why the Arab League now are engaged in discussing the agenda for the next Arab summit. In which probably they will address all these issues and to put strategies towards what is happening in Iraq and what is happening in Palestine towards Europe and towards the U.S.A. we do feel that we have to discuss the issues together, I don't feel that just the Middle East, but I feel even Europe and the Middle East are indulgent in the same destiny and even the Americans. I read the Economist and under America I read the situation in Iraq because the Americans are there. So, it is really we are all indulgent and we cannot separate one from another.

The Dean: There will be just one more question. Yes please.

Question 11: you have mentioned the International Law. Do you think that there is still the respect to the international Law in the light of the using of the Vito??

Dr.  Bouthaina Shaaban:  Thank you. I really do agree with you. I really I don't feel that we do have an international terms of reference in a way. And that's why I, probably, feel that all of us are in danger and the destiny of the world is in danger. What we do and what we don't do, is it the jungle? Is it the missile? Is it strength? Or there should be terms of reference, international law, international terms of reference that should be respected?? You know, in the Security council twenty nine vitos have been taken against the rights of the Palestinians including a vito against to send the international observers to protect the lives of the Palestinians. I think it is very dangerous when you reach that stage, you know. Twenty nine vitos were taken to prevent civil innocent people not to being killed. That was exactly what I pointed to. You know, we have all to work together. I think, and what I would love to say to the entire world and to your respectable group that I want each one of you to feel responsible. We have to work together, we have to feel that we need motivate people to work to hopefully bring better days for humanity.

The Dean : thank you very much I think the time of the questions have ended. Thank you very much indeed Dr. Shaaban. It was quite encouraging to have some other Syrian people here to talk. You were very great, and thank you very much■