FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Secretary John F. Kerry's Opening Remarks at the London Eleven Plenary Meeting With Qatari Prime Minister Hamad
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Doha, Qatar
June 22, 2013
PRIME MINISTER HAMAD: (Via interpreter) In the name of Allah, most precious, most merciful. Your excellencies, it is my pleasure to welcome you to Doha for this critical meeting which we agreed to hold to explore the ways through which to address the deteriorating situation in Syria. No doubt you are following the development of the tragic events taking place in the Syrian arena. The bloodbath dictated by the regime is continuing. The number of deaths and innocent victims is increasing every day. And the large-scale destruction has become an undeniable fact beside the humanitarian calamity that has befallen the Syrian people, who has largely become either internally displaced or refugees in neighboring and other countries. All of the Arab and international efforts to end the Syrian tragedy has failed, rendering the international community a helpless observer that cannot deal with the situation.
In fact, the regime wouldn’t have been able to easily carry all its bloody policy and murder around and stall all peaceful settlements of the conflict if it were not for the help and support provided to it by very well-known regional and international powers. The less blunt example of that is the interference of Hezbollah of Lebanon, which imposes. And in this regard, the Lebanese Government has to take appropriate actions to stop all interference from Lebanon in the conflict raging in Syria. It is extremely mortifying to hear the news and see evidence about the regime’s unscrupulous use of chemical weapons against its own people.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is what we can see when we observe the situation in Syria. We think it’s the time that we should shoulder our monumental responsibilities of working to put an end to what is going on in Syria if we want to fulfill our legal and moral obligations, taking into consideration that we cannot wait because of the failure of the Security Council members to reach an agreement and a solution of the crisis. We all know what I said in the meeting of Paris. I said that your countries have moved to respond to many other issues that are less severe and less urgent than the continuing bloodshed in Syria without waiting for the explicit mandate from the Security Council.
We are not talking about the military intervention here. We simply call for intervention to resolve the humanitarian tragedy. And this is to agree on a timeframe, the roadmap that brings about a peaceful solution (inaudible) the struggle of the Syrian opposition forces to establish a political system that guarantees freedom, dignity, and human rights for the Syrian people. This objective cannot be achieved without maintaining force balanced, on the ground, to force the regime to engage in Syria’s negotiations. Therefore, we have to extend all kinds of support toward the forces of the opposition to enable them to reach their legitimate goals and provide generous humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people inside the country and the Syrian refugees in the neighboring countries.
Ladies and gentlemen, the use of force may be necessary to reach rightness. The provision and use of arms might be the only way to achieve peace, especially in the Syrian case. As such, moral support alone shall not be enough to the Syrian people. We have to provide all kinds of support to the national coalition of Syrian revolution and opposition forces and the Supreme Military Council until they become capable of confronting the regime’s forces and the regional and international powers supporting it. It is very important to make it clear to everyone that our call to provide support to the Syrian opposition and its military council is previous from humanitarian objectives, and such support has become essential after the regime has spoiled, through its (inaudible) procrastination and maneuvers, all the sincere efforts to bring about a peaceful solution through which to protect Syria and reach the legitimate aspiration of its people.
We are not against (inaudible) a peaceful settlement and definitely we’ll support the convention of Geneva 2 to come to bring about a peaceful transfer of power in Syria through the formation of a free, authorized transitional government in which Bashar al-Assad and his associated whose hands are stained with blood cannot participate. We announce this; notwithstanding, the regime will do its utmost to prevent the convention of such conference or thwart it if it is held, because what this regime is truly concerned with is not a peaceful transfer of power and an end to the tragedy, but try to continue to scramble for power even if that is at the cost of a million deaths and millions of internally displaced people and refugees and destroy and partitioning Syria.
Before I conclude my speech, I would like to share with you the ideas that have been evolving in my mind as we pass through what I think an historic juncture. No doubt we worked on our positions of responsibility to express the interests of our countries through the resolutions that we adopt at the level of international relations. However, this should not make us ignore the judgment of history with regard to the legacy that we are going to leave for the future generations of our countries and worldwide. Accordingly, we have to do our utmost to serve humanity by the resolutions we take. In this context, I recall the objectives outlined in the introduction of the United Nations Charter, as prescribed as commitments by the nations of the world that governments should implement. Here is where the challenge we are facing lies. Are we ready to accept this challenge for the sake of humanity and the peoples of the world? I sincerely hope that we are, and thank you.
And now I leave the mike to Mr. John Kerry.
SECRETARY KERRY: Your Highness, Mr. Prime Minister and my colleagues, foreign ministers, your highnesses, it’s a privilege to be here with all of you. I want to thank Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim and the state of Qatar and the Emir for their hospitality today. We’re very, very appreciative for the opportunity to gather. I think this is the fourth time we have gathered as a group, from the so-called London 11 supporters, and this is really one of the most important meetings that we’ve had in the course of the number of meetings that have successively set out a set of principles by which we believe the conflict in Syria could, in fact, come to a conclusion.
We are enormously appreciative and thank you for your eloquent statement a few minutes ago. Our discussions here that we have just engaged in and that we will continue will reaffirm the belief of every country represented here and of many countries not represented here that the international community is strongly committed to ending the violence in Syria and to bringing about a peaceful resolution to the crisis. I would emphasize that every state represented here, and many who have spoken and who are not here, have not taken sides for the purpose of winning a conflict or of seeking a military victory; they have supported an opposition in an effort to seek a peaceful resolution where all of the people of Syria choose the future of Syria, where the future for Syria is not chosen by one man representing one family or one group that is willing and content to kill people of all backgrounds and all faiths and all beliefs simply to hold onto power. That is an enormous distinction in what brings us here as a group.
Today’s meeting is an opportunity for us to assess where we are and determine what we can do to further the goal I just stated. Our goal is not to win a victory for power or for one group that has held power for years. Our effort is to allow the people of Syria as a whole, with every minority respected and protected, to be able to choose the future for their country, and to do so in a climate of peace, in an absence of oppression and violence.
The fact is that we have come together to do all we can to create the conditions for the settlement that implements the Geneva 1 communiqué. The formula for a peaceful resolution to the conflict of Syria already exists. It was already agreed to by members – representatives of the United Nations, by the Arab League, by all of the countries here, and others who signed on to a process by which a transitional government would be put in place to end the conflict, that transitional government being chosen by mutual consent of both the Assad regime as well as the opposition, and that that would put in place the ability of the people of Syria to be able to choose their future.
This would be done by mutual consent, which means that both sides would have to be prepared to compromise; both sides would have to be prepared to come to the table to choose people who will protect not one side or the other, but will protect the rights of all Syrians, and most importantly, end the violence and protect the ability to have a peaceful resolution.
That exists; this is Geneva 1. It’s documented, it’s written, it’s been agreed to, and most importantly, the Russians signed on to this. They have agreed to this. And they agreed with me when I was in Moscow meeting with President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov. They agreed that the sole purpose of reconvening in Geneva for Geneva 2 – the sole purpose was to implement Geneva 1.
So that’s what brings us here today. And in the coming days, we will have an ability to be able to advance this effort, we hope sooner rather than later, to bring the parties together to end the violence. The opposition is prepared, as long as the circumstances are as defined, to implement Geneva 1 and all of the parties here are prepared to convene in order to end the violence and move to this transition and to the appropriate manner of allowing the people of Syria to choose their future.
In the next days, Under Secretary of State of the United States Wendy Sherman and Ambassador Robert Ford are prepared to go to Geneva. They will meet with Lakhdar Brahimi and with a Russian counterpart, and we will try to move forward from there. This meeting today also gives all of us a chance to discuss the efforts to increase and coordinate support for the Syrian political and military opposition for the purpose of being able to get to Geneva and to be able to address the imbalance on the ground that has occurred.
When this Geneva 2 was announced, Assad responded not by saying, "We welcome this as a way to be able to resolve the crisis of Syria," but he responded by bringing Iranians into his country – Iranian fighters and advisers – and by bringing Hezbollah, a designated terrorist organization, to cross the lines from Lebanon and engage in the fight on the ground. So Assad and the Assad regime’s response to a legitimate global effort to try to have a peace conference was to, in fact, militarize the efforts and internationalize that militarization, and make the region far more dangerous as a consequence. This step by Assad and his regime should concern countries all around the world.
The United States, through President Obama’s initiatives that he has already announced, remain committed to helping the people of Syria. At the recent G-8 Summit, President Obama pledged an additional $300 million in humanitarian assistance, bringing our total commitment to more than $800 million, and we’re proud to say more than any other country with respect to humanitarian aid. And we remain committed to forging – all of the ministers here are committed to forging a lasting political settlement. That is, as I said, laid out in the Geneva communiqué and we hope that in the next days we’ll be able to move to actually implement that.
His Highness, the Prime Minister, could not have said more eloquently what the impact of the current conflict is. Our friend here from Jordan, the Foreign Minister from Jordan, Nasser Judeh, has eloquently spoken about the impact of increasing numbers of refugees and life inside Jordan. While there aren’t camps, there’s an enormous impact of refugees in Lebanon, refugees in Turkey, and it is having a profound destabilizing effect, and one can only ask: What does it mean that almost 4 million people in a country have been driven out by their so-called leader and have to find safety and refuge in other countries?
The continued bloodshed at the hands of the Assad regime and the increasing involvement of Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, threaten the very prospects of a political settlement and of peace. And the regime’s use of chemical weapons crosses President Obama’s and other nations’ red lines. We also condemn – all of us – any atrocity or any excess by any extremists or by any oppositionist group that might engage in it. All of this makes the urgency of the political solution far more compelling.
And that is why the United States and other countries here, in their various ways, each choosing its own approach, will increase the scope and scale of assistance to the political and military opposition. And that is why we are working with our allies gathered here today to coordinate our support for the Syrian coalition and the Supreme Military Council. And I emphasize, we do so not to seek a military solution; we do so to come to the table and find a political settlement. Reliable civilian governance and a stronger and more effective armed opposition will better enable the opposition to be able to provide the counterweight to the initiative of Assad to reach out across borders, trans-boundary, to bring Iranians and to bring Hezbollah – again, a terrorist organization – to the table. We believe that this can help build momentum towards the political negotiations that are so critical here.
Every minister at this table and millions of people in Syria and in the surrounding region hope and pray that we can find a peaceful solution of this conflict so that the Syrian people can have a real potential for transition to their future that provides the prosperous and peaceful and pluralistic, diverse Syria that existed before this conflict began. And it is our hope and prayer that this meeting will help contribute to that end. Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.
PRIME MINISTER HAMAD: Thank you, John. Thank you.
Showing posts with label GENEVA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GENEVA. Show all posts
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Monday, June 17, 2013
PRESIDENTS OBAMA, PUTIN MAKE REMARKS AFTER MEETING
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
Remarks by President Obama and President Putin of Russia After Bilateral Meeting
Lough Erne Resort
Lough Erne, Northern Ireland
8:33 P.M. BST
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) I’ve had detailed talks with the President of the United States on almost all the matters. We began with economy and we had detailed discussions. We’ve agreed to launch new mechanisms of cooperation in this domain, including at the levels of the Chairman of Government of the Russian Federation and the Vice President of the U.S.
We have spoken in detail about the matters of security -- of strategic security between the two countries and the world as such. I believe that we have an opportunity to move forward on most sensitive directions.
We also spoke about problem spots on the planet, including Syria. And, of course, our opinions do not coincide, but all of us have the intention to stop the violence in Syria, to stop the growth of victims, and to solve the situation peacefully, including by bringing the parties to the negotiations table in Geneva. We agreed to push the parties to the negotiations table.
I hope that after the elections in Iran there will be new opportunities to solve the Iranian nuclear problem. And we’ll be trying to do that bilaterally and in the international negotiations process.
We also spoke about the problem of North Korea, and we agreed to emphasize our interaction on all the directions.
And I am very grateful to the U.S. President for the detailed discussion and for the frank exchange of opinions on these matters.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I had a very useful conversation with President Putin, and I began by thanking him again for the cooperation that they've provided in dealing with the tragedy of the bombing at the Boston Marathon. We have a shared interest in countering terrorist violence, and we are continuing to strengthen our cooperation on this issue, including as we welcome Russia hosting the Winter Olympics in Sochi.
As President Putin indicated, we had extensive discussions about how we can further deepen our economic and commercial relationships. With Russian accession to the WTO, the removal of Jackson-Vanick, I think we're poised to increase both trade and investment between our two countries. And that can create jobs and business opportunities, both for Russians and Americans.
Our discussions on North Korea and Iran were very productive, and we both agreed to consult closely on the North Korean issue. And in Iran, we both accept -- expressed cautious optimism that with a new election there, we may be able to move forward on a dialogue that allows us to resolve the problems with Iran's nuclear program.
And with respect to Syria, we do have differing perspectives on the problem, but we share an interest in reducing the violence; securing chemical weapons and ensuring that they're neither used nor are they subject to proliferation; and that we want to try to resolve the issue through political means, if possible. And so we have instructed our teams to continue to work on the potential of a Geneva follow-up to the first meeting.
And finally, we had a discussion about the fact as the two nuclear superpowers, we have a special obligation to try to continue to reduce tensions, to build on the work that we did with New START, and to lead the world in both nuclear security issues and proliferation issues.
And one of the concrete outcomes of this meeting is that we’ll be signing here the continuation of the cooperation that was first established through the Nunn-Lugar program to counter potential threats of proliferation and to enhance nuclear security.
And this I think is an example of the kind of constructive, cooperative relationship that moves us out of a Cold War mindset into the realm where, by working together, we not only increase security and prosperity for the Russian and American people, but also help lead the world to a better place.
And finally, we compared notes on President Putin’s expertise in judo and my declining skills in basketball. (Laughter.) And we both agreed that as you get older it takes more time to recover.
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) The President wants to relax me with his statement of age. (Laughter.)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody.
Remarks by President Obama and President Putin of Russia After Bilateral Meeting
Lough Erne Resort
Lough Erne, Northern Ireland
8:33 P.M. BST
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) I’ve had detailed talks with the President of the United States on almost all the matters. We began with economy and we had detailed discussions. We’ve agreed to launch new mechanisms of cooperation in this domain, including at the levels of the Chairman of Government of the Russian Federation and the Vice President of the U.S.
We have spoken in detail about the matters of security -- of strategic security between the two countries and the world as such. I believe that we have an opportunity to move forward on most sensitive directions.
We also spoke about problem spots on the planet, including Syria. And, of course, our opinions do not coincide, but all of us have the intention to stop the violence in Syria, to stop the growth of victims, and to solve the situation peacefully, including by bringing the parties to the negotiations table in Geneva. We agreed to push the parties to the negotiations table.
I hope that after the elections in Iran there will be new opportunities to solve the Iranian nuclear problem. And we’ll be trying to do that bilaterally and in the international negotiations process.
We also spoke about the problem of North Korea, and we agreed to emphasize our interaction on all the directions.
And I am very grateful to the U.S. President for the detailed discussion and for the frank exchange of opinions on these matters.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I had a very useful conversation with President Putin, and I began by thanking him again for the cooperation that they've provided in dealing with the tragedy of the bombing at the Boston Marathon. We have a shared interest in countering terrorist violence, and we are continuing to strengthen our cooperation on this issue, including as we welcome Russia hosting the Winter Olympics in Sochi.
As President Putin indicated, we had extensive discussions about how we can further deepen our economic and commercial relationships. With Russian accession to the WTO, the removal of Jackson-Vanick, I think we're poised to increase both trade and investment between our two countries. And that can create jobs and business opportunities, both for Russians and Americans.
Our discussions on North Korea and Iran were very productive, and we both agreed to consult closely on the North Korean issue. And in Iran, we both accept -- expressed cautious optimism that with a new election there, we may be able to move forward on a dialogue that allows us to resolve the problems with Iran's nuclear program.
And with respect to Syria, we do have differing perspectives on the problem, but we share an interest in reducing the violence; securing chemical weapons and ensuring that they're neither used nor are they subject to proliferation; and that we want to try to resolve the issue through political means, if possible. And so we have instructed our teams to continue to work on the potential of a Geneva follow-up to the first meeting.
And finally, we had a discussion about the fact as the two nuclear superpowers, we have a special obligation to try to continue to reduce tensions, to build on the work that we did with New START, and to lead the world in both nuclear security issues and proliferation issues.
And one of the concrete outcomes of this meeting is that we’ll be signing here the continuation of the cooperation that was first established through the Nunn-Lugar program to counter potential threats of proliferation and to enhance nuclear security.
And this I think is an example of the kind of constructive, cooperative relationship that moves us out of a Cold War mindset into the realm where, by working together, we not only increase security and prosperity for the Russian and American people, but also help lead the world to a better place.
And finally, we compared notes on President Putin’s expertise in judo and my declining skills in basketball. (Laughter.) And we both agreed that as you get older it takes more time to recover.
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) The President wants to relax me with his statement of age. (Laughter.)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
SPECIAL STATE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING REGARDING SYRIA
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Background Briefing by a Senior State Department Official
Special Briefing
Senior State Department Official
Amman, Jordan
May 22, 2013
QUESTION: [Senior State Department Official], did the opposition firmly commit to attending the Geneva conference next month? And did they outline in what format and what representation level, et cetera?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It wasn’t the purpose of this meeting to go into the details of how the Geneva meetings would be set. Rather, it was to confirm how it fits within a broader strategy of this group of countries and the Syrian opposition to work on the political track even as we also work on providing additional support to the opposition. So we didn’t go into those kinds of details. We’re not there yet.
With respect to what the opposition said, first I think it’s really important that I emphasize that the 11 foreign ministers there all strongly supported the holding of the Geneva meeting. And they were very vocal in that support with the opposition. George Sabra acknowledged that there are advantages and said that they will need to explain it to the people inside the country. And he said we also look to continued support from our friends at the table, meaning the countries there, and he got strong affirmations that that support would continue. And you’ll see that highlighted twice in the communique.
MODERATOR: Arshad.
QUESTION: Yeah. There’s one line in the communique which I wanted to ask you about, which says the ministers also emphasized that until such time as the Geneva meeting produces a transitional government, they will further increase their support for the opposition and take all other steps as necessary. What does that mean? Does that mean greater military support or greater flows of arms?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Well, different countries are doing different things.
QUESTION: Right.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: So not all the countries at the table are doing the same things in terms of support. And I think that’s going to continue. I don’t think that’s going to change. There’ll be some countries that offer lethal support and there’ll be some countries that do not.
The important thing is that all of the countries agree that this support to the opposition is a tactic that works towards achieving a strategy of securing a negotiated political settlement through a process that would start at the Geneva meeting. So that particular sentence was also specifically there to make it clear that we don’t know if the Geneva process is going to be successful or not. And additional support to the opposition is not tied to a specific outcome of that Geneva meeting. Of course, if the Geneva meeting achieves a breakthrough and we get a transition government, then the opposition will actually be part of the transitional government and we don’t need to support the opposition per se.
QUESTION: Is it fair to say that the support to the opposition, which you described as a tactic that was helpful toward the broader strategy – to put it in simple terms, is it fair to say that by increasing, whoever does it, the flows of lethal assistance and other assistance to the opposition, before or after Geneva, is designed to try to help them regain some of the ground that they had lost in these past days?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It’s long been our sense that Bashar al-Assad and his regime are not willing to make concessions now. And they said that, if you saw the Argentinian newspaper interview that he gave a few days ago. And so we have long said that it’s important to change his calculations, and that in order to change his calculations, the balance of power on the ground must change. And so, as the communique states, we will increase our support to the opposition. And the goal of that is to change that balance on the ground, but not as an end in and of itself but rather to facilitate arriving at a negotiated political solution.
QUESTION: Last one from me on this if I may. Do you expect that increase in support for the opposition to include more of the lethal weapons or more sophisticated weaponry, or is it just going to be more of the same of what has been done before by whichever countries have done that?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think different countries are reexamining their options. It’s not a secret that we’re studying options in the American Administration. We haven’t made final decisions. There is a discussion in Europe about lifting the European arms embargo. They had a discussion – there was talk about that tonight. And so different countries are considering what kinds of steps they need to take. But I think all of them fit within the parameter of helping the opposition writ large.
In specific terms, for the lethal that you’re talking about, the Supreme Military Council – General Idris was there tonight and gave a very thorough briefing on what’s going on on the ground, accenting in particular the latest on the Iranian and Hezbollah and Iraqi presence in the country – working through the Supreme Military Command on the lethal side, but all of it with the goal of strengthening the opposition in order to help convince the Syrian regime that it will have to negotiate the establishment of a transition government. And of course our position is well known. We cannot see how Bashar al-Assad could be a part of that administration.
QUESTION: Just, [Senior State Department Official] --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: -- one quick thing.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah.
QUESTION: Did you mean to say Iraqi?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I’m sorry, what did I say? Oh, yeah, I did mean to say Iranian, Hezbollah, and Iraqi. Idris talked --
QUESTION: You mean Iraqi Shia?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Iraqi Shia, yeah.
QUESTION: Did he give any numbers, any more specifics on the Iranian presence?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah, he did. According to Idris, he said that there are Iranian personnel providing direct advisory support to fighting units. He said that there are Iraqi Shia in several battles. And then he highlighted in particular, but did not limit it to, the fighting in Qusayr. But he also mentioned, for example, areas around Damascus.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) numbers?
QUESTION: But one thing that came up a the presser today --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: You were saying --
QUESTION: Numbers.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Numbers, he said thousands.
QUESTION: And that was thousands of Iranians plus --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Total.
QUESTION: Total?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Total.
QUESTION: Including Iranians, Hezbollah --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Iranians, Iraqi Shia, and Hezbollah. He said thousands.
QUESTION: One thing that came up --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: By the way, I would encourage you to talk to General Idris yourself, and I think one of his people.
QUESTION: One thing that came up at the – Secretary Kerry’s press conference today was a concern that this might spread to Lebanon, either through the actions of Hezbollah or the reactions of the Syrian opposition in this form and in the kind of – informally or formally, have you spoken with the opposition and encouraged them not to take --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.
QUESTION: -- the fight into --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We have.
QUESTION: What’s – how have you tried to address this?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We have, for example, spoken to commanders in the Homs area and – who have talked about the problem of supply trains coming up out of the Lebanese Bekaa. And we have said that we need to keep Lebanon out of this, and we need to find ways to stop the flow coming out of Lebanon. And of course we are discussing the broad Lebanese policy of disassociation from the Syrian conflict with the Lebanese Government.
QUESTION: Did you say that if they do intervene in Lebanon, it might affect American thinking on how much the United States can support them?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Michael, I’m not going to go beyond where I just went in terms of our diplomatic contacts. You can – but I can say this: We strongly support the territorial sovereignty of Lebanon. We do not want Lebanon dragged into the Syrian civil war.
QUESTION: I noticed in Secretary Kerry’s opener, he seemed to make a point of saying that the rebels had agreed to various things themselves, including not to use chemical weapons and so on. Is it fair to say, between the conversation you’re just alluding to and the kinds of things that the Secretary referenced at the beginning, that there was a message to the rebel groups that they need to kind of keep their noses clean here?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh, absolutely.
QUESTION: Can you talk a little bit more about that?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Well, that wasn’t – I mean, that came up a bit tonight. But also, just in terms of the importance of the armed opposition to organize themselves and to bring themselves together under this Supreme Military Council that General Idris heads. And of course, they themselves say that they want to do that, but the Supreme Military command would ultimately become, if you will, the backbone of the future leadership of the Syrian military. Interestingly, Idris said that there probably are some members of the military that they could bring into the future Syrian military – people who don’t have blood on their hands, people that are vetted and are respectable.
So we think it’s very important that Idris and the Supreme Military command and all of the armed opposition groups, A, not try to acquire chemical weapons and, B, that they leave the facilities – they don’t try to enter them. And we have a communicated that with them.
MODERATOR: Anyone else, a last question?
QUESTION: In Istanbul, the agreement was that all military aid would go to Idris, and all 11 countries agreed to do that.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: Has there actually been military equipment, do you know, delivered to Idris since then?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.
QUESTION: Have you seen a reduction in the amount going to al-Nusra and other groups?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: First indications are good, but it’s too early to be sure. This is one of these ones where we’d like to have more facts, but the first indications are good.
QUESTION: And can you say anything about the quantity getting to Idris now?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No, I don’t want to go into that.
MODERATOR: Indira.
QUESTION: You talked about the – sorry, I’m so tired. (Laughter.) You talked about the --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Tell me about it. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: I’m trying to remember, what did he talk about? Oh, using this threat of increasing aid to the opposition as a means to the end of getting everyone to the table. So today, at the conference, did Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and others talk in any specifics of how much they’re willing to up their military aid as a means – I mean, we’ve got a pretty short window here, a couple of weeks.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: This wouldn’t – I mean, at a level of foreign ministers, you normally wouldn’t get into how many truckloads or planeloads (inaudible.).
QUESTION: Or in principle that they are bringing --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: But what we’re talking about here is grand strategy, and the grand strategy is clear in the communique, which is the importance of a political solution along the lines of full implementation of the Geneva communique. All the foreign ministers signed on readily to that. That – at the same time, we have to increase support to the Syrian opposition, including the Syrian Military Council for the military assistance. But again, with the goal of promoting, ultimately, a negotiated political deal.
QUESTION: And just to clarify, they did or did not say whether they would be – that they have a slate of people and they’re willing to go to Geneva?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: They said that they wanted to do further internal consultations, which is not a surprise. Remember that they are in the middle of leadership meetings right now. They’re supposed to begin choosing a new leadership tomorrow – Thursday. So Sabra said he understood the utility of it and he understood the importance of the political solutions and said we absolutely support the political solution. But he said, "I have to go back, and let us work on our political leadership meeting."
QUESTION: And what sort of information do you have about the Syrian regime having its slate ready? You cited to us the other day that you had read press reports, but do you have any first --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. Yeah, I understand one of my diplomatic colleagues is saying there’s another list out there. To be honest, until the Syrian Government names its own list itself, I don’t think we really know who’s going to come. We have been told that the Prime Minister of Syria will head the delegation. However, the rest of the members of the delegation, we don’t know. And I don’t think we will until we get – first we have to fix a date, and then work out a lot of the details, some of the things that Brad was asking about. Then maybe we’re going to have a better sense of the Syrian delegation. But I think, frankly, it really doesn’t matter what other countries say about the Syrian regime’s willingness to talk. Let’s hear it from Damascus itself.
QUESTION: And the Prime Minister would be acceptable to the opposition?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think so, yeah.
QUESTION: Who told you that the Prime Minister would lead the delegation? Was that the Russians or someone else?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It is – we’ve heard it from a variety of contacts, including but not limited to the Russians, but it’s also been in Arab media repeatedly.
QUESTION: Were there any important commitments pertaining to military support, pertaining to, I don’t know, opposition new willingness to engage in the political effort that’s not captured in this communique, that you think deserves highlighting?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Sabra talked – and we talked about the expansion of the meetings that are going on now. Do you all know what’s going on in Istanbul? Should I give two sentences on that?
QUESTION: Yes.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Key things to know: They are having meetings right now to expand their general assembly, which, for want of a better expression, would be like their proto-parliament. They’re talking about expanding it by as many as 30 to 40 seats, to take it from 61 now up to 91 to 100. They’re discussing that right now. There are names; they’re supposed to elect people, and there’s a slate of people that would go forward to be elected – by the existing 61 members. So that’s supposed to start tomorrow. Then they’re supposed to go from that to electing a new president. Remember that Mouaz al-Khatib resigned, so George Sabra is the interim, but he’s only the interim, so they’re going to elect a new president. That is supposed to happen, George said, sometime in the next couple of days.
Then they will – remember there was the question of the Prime Minister and setting up a temporary government. They’re then supposed to elect that, or to confirm that, a slate of ministers including a defense minister that would work directly with Salim Idris. That is then supposed to happen towards the end of this seven meetings, which we think will take somewhere around three to four days, but those of us who worked in Iraq understand these things can take longer.
So that’s all supposed to happen. Once they’ve done all of these things, then they will have a new leadership of the coalition, and potentially a vastly expanded kind of base of people, from 61 going up to 90 or maybe 100. So out of that, then, they will then sit, and I think make a decision on Geneva.
QUESTION: Can I ask just --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: But can I just add one other thing? We, the Americans, in the meantime are spending a great deal of time – I have a team in Istanbul right now that are talking to the Syrians, both to the elements of the Free Syrian Army as well as to the political leadership, and explaining how they can use Geneva to their advantage.
MODERATOR: Michael.
QUESTION: Just a last quick one. Have you resolved the issue of the other potential participants in Geneva, namely the Iranians?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No.
QUESTION: At least among the 11?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No. And I think --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: And I think that is one we’re going to have to talk also to the United Nations.
MODERATOR: All right, last one, Jo.
QUESTION: Sorry. [Senior State Department Official], are you now going to go to Istanbul?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I’m going in --
MODERATOR: Few hours.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: -- five hours.
QUESTION: To Istanbul?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Okay.
QUESTION: And will you be attending the meetings? Or will you just --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh, no, I’m not invited to attend them.
QUESTION: Okay.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: And I, frankly, shouldn’t be in the meetings. These are meetings about Syria by Syrians. So – but I wanted to make sure that everyone there knows where we stand on issues they must – they need, really – you can put this in your story – they do need to resolve their leadership issues. They cannot continue with an interim president. They have to have someone chosen, and they need to resolve the issue of the temporary government. They’re either going to do it or they’re not. It’s taking a lot of time and attention.
So they need to resolve the question of expanding their base and bringing additional people in. So these are big issues and they need to move forward on them. So then they can move on to other things like Geneva.
QUESTION: I don’t mean to be obtuse, but why has it been so enormously difficult for the opposition to coalesce around a single --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Because they’ve never had elections and so nobody knows anybody’s relative weight, because nobody knows if you represent 10 percent or 50 percent. And because nobody knows, everybody is equal, and yet that’s very difficult.
MODERATOR: All right, last one.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: This is a dynamic, by the way, that you see frequently when the iron boot comes off a political system, and before you have any kind of election. So I – I mean, this is not the first time I’ve seen this.
QUESTION: So everything in the communique seem to be points that the Secretary and other nations have already made, they’ve already all but stated. So what is new out of tonight’s meeting that we didn’t know --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: What is new out of tonight’s meeting is that there is a solid international backing for the holding of a new meeting in Geneva by the friends, by the core friends of Syria.
QUESTION: Thanks.
MODERATOR: Thank you very much.
Background Briefing by a Senior State Department Official
Special Briefing
Senior State Department Official
Amman, Jordan
May 22, 2013
QUESTION: [Senior State Department Official], did the opposition firmly commit to attending the Geneva conference next month? And did they outline in what format and what representation level, et cetera?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It wasn’t the purpose of this meeting to go into the details of how the Geneva meetings would be set. Rather, it was to confirm how it fits within a broader strategy of this group of countries and the Syrian opposition to work on the political track even as we also work on providing additional support to the opposition. So we didn’t go into those kinds of details. We’re not there yet.
With respect to what the opposition said, first I think it’s really important that I emphasize that the 11 foreign ministers there all strongly supported the holding of the Geneva meeting. And they were very vocal in that support with the opposition. George Sabra acknowledged that there are advantages and said that they will need to explain it to the people inside the country. And he said we also look to continued support from our friends at the table, meaning the countries there, and he got strong affirmations that that support would continue. And you’ll see that highlighted twice in the communique.
MODERATOR: Arshad.
QUESTION: Yeah. There’s one line in the communique which I wanted to ask you about, which says the ministers also emphasized that until such time as the Geneva meeting produces a transitional government, they will further increase their support for the opposition and take all other steps as necessary. What does that mean? Does that mean greater military support or greater flows of arms?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Well, different countries are doing different things.
QUESTION: Right.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: So not all the countries at the table are doing the same things in terms of support. And I think that’s going to continue. I don’t think that’s going to change. There’ll be some countries that offer lethal support and there’ll be some countries that do not.
The important thing is that all of the countries agree that this support to the opposition is a tactic that works towards achieving a strategy of securing a negotiated political settlement through a process that would start at the Geneva meeting. So that particular sentence was also specifically there to make it clear that we don’t know if the Geneva process is going to be successful or not. And additional support to the opposition is not tied to a specific outcome of that Geneva meeting. Of course, if the Geneva meeting achieves a breakthrough and we get a transition government, then the opposition will actually be part of the transitional government and we don’t need to support the opposition per se.
QUESTION: Is it fair to say that the support to the opposition, which you described as a tactic that was helpful toward the broader strategy – to put it in simple terms, is it fair to say that by increasing, whoever does it, the flows of lethal assistance and other assistance to the opposition, before or after Geneva, is designed to try to help them regain some of the ground that they had lost in these past days?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It’s long been our sense that Bashar al-Assad and his regime are not willing to make concessions now. And they said that, if you saw the Argentinian newspaper interview that he gave a few days ago. And so we have long said that it’s important to change his calculations, and that in order to change his calculations, the balance of power on the ground must change. And so, as the communique states, we will increase our support to the opposition. And the goal of that is to change that balance on the ground, but not as an end in and of itself but rather to facilitate arriving at a negotiated political solution.
QUESTION: Last one from me on this if I may. Do you expect that increase in support for the opposition to include more of the lethal weapons or more sophisticated weaponry, or is it just going to be more of the same of what has been done before by whichever countries have done that?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think different countries are reexamining their options. It’s not a secret that we’re studying options in the American Administration. We haven’t made final decisions. There is a discussion in Europe about lifting the European arms embargo. They had a discussion – there was talk about that tonight. And so different countries are considering what kinds of steps they need to take. But I think all of them fit within the parameter of helping the opposition writ large.
In specific terms, for the lethal that you’re talking about, the Supreme Military Council – General Idris was there tonight and gave a very thorough briefing on what’s going on on the ground, accenting in particular the latest on the Iranian and Hezbollah and Iraqi presence in the country – working through the Supreme Military Command on the lethal side, but all of it with the goal of strengthening the opposition in order to help convince the Syrian regime that it will have to negotiate the establishment of a transition government. And of course our position is well known. We cannot see how Bashar al-Assad could be a part of that administration.
QUESTION: Just, [Senior State Department Official] --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: -- one quick thing.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah.
QUESTION: Did you mean to say Iraqi?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I’m sorry, what did I say? Oh, yeah, I did mean to say Iranian, Hezbollah, and Iraqi. Idris talked --
QUESTION: You mean Iraqi Shia?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Iraqi Shia, yeah.
QUESTION: Did he give any numbers, any more specifics on the Iranian presence?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah, he did. According to Idris, he said that there are Iranian personnel providing direct advisory support to fighting units. He said that there are Iraqi Shia in several battles. And then he highlighted in particular, but did not limit it to, the fighting in Qusayr. But he also mentioned, for example, areas around Damascus.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) numbers?
QUESTION: But one thing that came up a the presser today --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: You were saying --
QUESTION: Numbers.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Numbers, he said thousands.
QUESTION: And that was thousands of Iranians plus --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Total.
QUESTION: Total?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Total.
QUESTION: Including Iranians, Hezbollah --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Iranians, Iraqi Shia, and Hezbollah. He said thousands.
QUESTION: One thing that came up --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: By the way, I would encourage you to talk to General Idris yourself, and I think one of his people.
QUESTION: One thing that came up at the – Secretary Kerry’s press conference today was a concern that this might spread to Lebanon, either through the actions of Hezbollah or the reactions of the Syrian opposition in this form and in the kind of – informally or formally, have you spoken with the opposition and encouraged them not to take --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.
QUESTION: -- the fight into --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We have.
QUESTION: What’s – how have you tried to address this?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: We have, for example, spoken to commanders in the Homs area and – who have talked about the problem of supply trains coming up out of the Lebanese Bekaa. And we have said that we need to keep Lebanon out of this, and we need to find ways to stop the flow coming out of Lebanon. And of course we are discussing the broad Lebanese policy of disassociation from the Syrian conflict with the Lebanese Government.
QUESTION: Did you say that if they do intervene in Lebanon, it might affect American thinking on how much the United States can support them?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Michael, I’m not going to go beyond where I just went in terms of our diplomatic contacts. You can – but I can say this: We strongly support the territorial sovereignty of Lebanon. We do not want Lebanon dragged into the Syrian civil war.
QUESTION: I noticed in Secretary Kerry’s opener, he seemed to make a point of saying that the rebels had agreed to various things themselves, including not to use chemical weapons and so on. Is it fair to say, between the conversation you’re just alluding to and the kinds of things that the Secretary referenced at the beginning, that there was a message to the rebel groups that they need to kind of keep their noses clean here?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh, absolutely.
QUESTION: Can you talk a little bit more about that?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Well, that wasn’t – I mean, that came up a bit tonight. But also, just in terms of the importance of the armed opposition to organize themselves and to bring themselves together under this Supreme Military Council that General Idris heads. And of course, they themselves say that they want to do that, but the Supreme Military command would ultimately become, if you will, the backbone of the future leadership of the Syrian military. Interestingly, Idris said that there probably are some members of the military that they could bring into the future Syrian military – people who don’t have blood on their hands, people that are vetted and are respectable.
So we think it’s very important that Idris and the Supreme Military command and all of the armed opposition groups, A, not try to acquire chemical weapons and, B, that they leave the facilities – they don’t try to enter them. And we have a communicated that with them.
MODERATOR: Anyone else, a last question?
QUESTION: In Istanbul, the agreement was that all military aid would go to Idris, and all 11 countries agreed to do that.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: Has there actually been military equipment, do you know, delivered to Idris since then?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yes.
QUESTION: Have you seen a reduction in the amount going to al-Nusra and other groups?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: First indications are good, but it’s too early to be sure. This is one of these ones where we’d like to have more facts, but the first indications are good.
QUESTION: And can you say anything about the quantity getting to Idris now?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No, I don’t want to go into that.
MODERATOR: Indira.
QUESTION: You talked about the – sorry, I’m so tired. (Laughter.) You talked about the --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Tell me about it. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: I’m trying to remember, what did he talk about? Oh, using this threat of increasing aid to the opposition as a means to the end of getting everyone to the table. So today, at the conference, did Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and others talk in any specifics of how much they’re willing to up their military aid as a means – I mean, we’ve got a pretty short window here, a couple of weeks.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: This wouldn’t – I mean, at a level of foreign ministers, you normally wouldn’t get into how many truckloads or planeloads (inaudible.).
QUESTION: Or in principle that they are bringing --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: But what we’re talking about here is grand strategy, and the grand strategy is clear in the communique, which is the importance of a political solution along the lines of full implementation of the Geneva communique. All the foreign ministers signed on readily to that. That – at the same time, we have to increase support to the Syrian opposition, including the Syrian Military Council for the military assistance. But again, with the goal of promoting, ultimately, a negotiated political deal.
QUESTION: And just to clarify, they did or did not say whether they would be – that they have a slate of people and they’re willing to go to Geneva?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: They said that they wanted to do further internal consultations, which is not a surprise. Remember that they are in the middle of leadership meetings right now. They’re supposed to begin choosing a new leadership tomorrow – Thursday. So Sabra said he understood the utility of it and he understood the importance of the political solutions and said we absolutely support the political solution. But he said, "I have to go back, and let us work on our political leadership meeting."
QUESTION: And what sort of information do you have about the Syrian regime having its slate ready? You cited to us the other day that you had read press reports, but do you have any first --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Yeah. Yeah, I understand one of my diplomatic colleagues is saying there’s another list out there. To be honest, until the Syrian Government names its own list itself, I don’t think we really know who’s going to come. We have been told that the Prime Minister of Syria will head the delegation. However, the rest of the members of the delegation, we don’t know. And I don’t think we will until we get – first we have to fix a date, and then work out a lot of the details, some of the things that Brad was asking about. Then maybe we’re going to have a better sense of the Syrian delegation. But I think, frankly, it really doesn’t matter what other countries say about the Syrian regime’s willingness to talk. Let’s hear it from Damascus itself.
QUESTION: And the Prime Minister would be acceptable to the opposition?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I think so, yeah.
QUESTION: Who told you that the Prime Minister would lead the delegation? Was that the Russians or someone else?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: It is – we’ve heard it from a variety of contacts, including but not limited to the Russians, but it’s also been in Arab media repeatedly.
QUESTION: Were there any important commitments pertaining to military support, pertaining to, I don’t know, opposition new willingness to engage in the political effort that’s not captured in this communique, that you think deserves highlighting?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Sabra talked – and we talked about the expansion of the meetings that are going on now. Do you all know what’s going on in Istanbul? Should I give two sentences on that?
QUESTION: Yes.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Key things to know: They are having meetings right now to expand their general assembly, which, for want of a better expression, would be like their proto-parliament. They’re talking about expanding it by as many as 30 to 40 seats, to take it from 61 now up to 91 to 100. They’re discussing that right now. There are names; they’re supposed to elect people, and there’s a slate of people that would go forward to be elected – by the existing 61 members. So that’s supposed to start tomorrow. Then they’re supposed to go from that to electing a new president. Remember that Mouaz al-Khatib resigned, so George Sabra is the interim, but he’s only the interim, so they’re going to elect a new president. That is supposed to happen, George said, sometime in the next couple of days.
Then they will – remember there was the question of the Prime Minister and setting up a temporary government. They’re then supposed to elect that, or to confirm that, a slate of ministers including a defense minister that would work directly with Salim Idris. That is then supposed to happen towards the end of this seven meetings, which we think will take somewhere around three to four days, but those of us who worked in Iraq understand these things can take longer.
So that’s all supposed to happen. Once they’ve done all of these things, then they will have a new leadership of the coalition, and potentially a vastly expanded kind of base of people, from 61 going up to 90 or maybe 100. So out of that, then, they will then sit, and I think make a decision on Geneva.
QUESTION: Can I ask just --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: But can I just add one other thing? We, the Americans, in the meantime are spending a great deal of time – I have a team in Istanbul right now that are talking to the Syrians, both to the elements of the Free Syrian Army as well as to the political leadership, and explaining how they can use Geneva to their advantage.
MODERATOR: Michael.
QUESTION: Just a last quick one. Have you resolved the issue of the other potential participants in Geneva, namely the Iranians?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No.
QUESTION: At least among the 11?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: No. And I think --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: And I think that is one we’re going to have to talk also to the United Nations.
MODERATOR: All right, last one, Jo.
QUESTION: Sorry. [Senior State Department Official], are you now going to go to Istanbul?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: I’m going in --
MODERATOR: Few hours.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: -- five hours.
QUESTION: To Istanbul?
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Okay.
QUESTION: And will you be attending the meetings? Or will you just --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Oh, no, I’m not invited to attend them.
QUESTION: Okay.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: And I, frankly, shouldn’t be in the meetings. These are meetings about Syria by Syrians. So – but I wanted to make sure that everyone there knows where we stand on issues they must – they need, really – you can put this in your story – they do need to resolve their leadership issues. They cannot continue with an interim president. They have to have someone chosen, and they need to resolve the issue of the temporary government. They’re either going to do it or they’re not. It’s taking a lot of time and attention.
So they need to resolve the question of expanding their base and bringing additional people in. So these are big issues and they need to move forward on them. So then they can move on to other things like Geneva.
QUESTION: I don’t mean to be obtuse, but why has it been so enormously difficult for the opposition to coalesce around a single --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Because they’ve never had elections and so nobody knows anybody’s relative weight, because nobody knows if you represent 10 percent or 50 percent. And because nobody knows, everybody is equal, and yet that’s very difficult.
MODERATOR: All right, last one.
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: This is a dynamic, by the way, that you see frequently when the iron boot comes off a political system, and before you have any kind of election. So I – I mean, this is not the first time I’ve seen this.
QUESTION: So everything in the communique seem to be points that the Secretary and other nations have already made, they’ve already all but stated. So what is new out of tonight’s meeting that we didn’t know --
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: What is new out of tonight’s meeting is that there is a solid international backing for the holding of a new meeting in Geneva by the friends, by the core friends of Syria.
QUESTION: Thanks.
MODERATOR: Thank you very much.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)