Perhaps most in the West ought to sit up and take notice of the words of leaders in the Middle East all too sadly missing in the discourse and narrative of that troubled region.
FP's Middle East Channel report makes for worthwhile reading:
"This week, Charlie Rose was in Damascus and conducted high-profile interviews with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal. The Bashar interview echoed many of the points previously made on the Channel by Joshua Landis in his piece 'What is behind the Scud scare?' in which he described how Bashar's Syria views its strategic decisions largely in a context of an assymetric power imbalance with Israel. Bashar noted about the U.S. in this vein that:
Meanwhile, Rose's interview with Meshaal, both explicitly and implicitly, shed light on how the Islamic Resistance movement sees itself and how it reconciles the fact of its movement and political apparatuses. On the latter point, Meshaal expanded upon previous statements that have reflected the pragmatic wing of Hamas' political ideology. Said Meshaal: "So when the occupation comes to an end, the resistance will end, as simple as that. If Israel would go to the 1967 borders...that will be the end of the Palestinian resistance." He went on to declare Hamas' opposition to the intentional targeting of civilians, called on the United States to directly negotiate with the movement, and that Hamas didn't have any "problem whatsoever with the United States", just with its favoritism in the region."
Go here and here to view the two interviews.
FP's Middle East Channel report makes for worthwhile reading:
"This week, Charlie Rose was in Damascus and conducted high-profile interviews with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal. The Bashar interview echoed many of the points previously made on the Channel by Joshua Landis in his piece 'What is behind the Scud scare?' in which he described how Bashar's Syria views its strategic decisions largely in a context of an assymetric power imbalance with Israel. Bashar noted about the U.S. in this vein that:
They don't understand that we want peace. But if you want peace, it doesn't mean--to sign [sic] peace treaty, it doesn't mean we sign capitulation agreement. That's what they don't understand. There is a big different between capitulation agreement and peace treaty.
Meanwhile, Rose's interview with Meshaal, both explicitly and implicitly, shed light on how the Islamic Resistance movement sees itself and how it reconciles the fact of its movement and political apparatuses. On the latter point, Meshaal expanded upon previous statements that have reflected the pragmatic wing of Hamas' political ideology. Said Meshaal: "So when the occupation comes to an end, the resistance will end, as simple as that. If Israel would go to the 1967 borders...that will be the end of the Palestinian resistance." He went on to declare Hamas' opposition to the intentional targeting of civilians, called on the United States to directly negotiate with the movement, and that Hamas didn't have any "problem whatsoever with the United States", just with its favoritism in the region."
Go here and here to view the two interviews.
Comments