Geagea to Asharq Al-Awsat: Arabs Are Not Concerned with Lebanon of Qassem Soleimani

Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.
Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.
TT

Geagea to Asharq Al-Awsat: Arabs Are Not Concerned with Lebanon of Qassem Soleimani

Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.
Geagea speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat.

The Lebanese Forces’ main slogan for its electoral campaign – “We want and we can” – has emphasized the political party’s willingness and determination to bring about change in the upcoming polls, as stated by the LF leader, Samir Geagea, in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The Lebanese people today are facing a very big problem; we know how to solve the crisis, and we are able to do it,” Geagea said, stressing that for the first time in the country’s history, voters will not take into account “partisan or family considerations in the narrow sense of the term,” but would focus instead on public affairs and living concerns.

According to the LF chief, the “opponent” in the elections scheduled for May 15, is the “hard core” of the ruling system, which is represented by Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), led by MP Gebran Bassil, President Michel Aoun’s son-in-law.

He noted in this regard that this political bloc could see weak results in the elections, which would make it lose impetus and strength.

“This is an undisputed fact… despite the varying estimates of the extent of the loss. Consequently, the previous system will collapse, and this election will bring about a new majority,” Geagea told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Underlining his belief that the parliamentary majority would not be held by a single political party, he stated that the elected group of forces, parties and personalities would be able to forge a new path

Asked about the experience of the March 14 forces, which held the parliamentary majority in 2005 and 2008, but failed to achieve their desired goals, Geagea said: “Truthfully, we were about to achieve something in 2005, but we failed ourselves.”

“We had a government recognized by the whole world, and when (Hezbollah) carried out its operation on July 11, 2006 (the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers and the outbreak of the Second Lebanon War), the government negotiated for a ceasefire even though everyone was aware that it was not responsible or aware of the party’s plans,” he continued.

“The government was able to obtain a ceasefire on the best possible terms for Lebanon, and all Western countries responded to its request, including Arab and Gulf states,” Geagea stressed, noting that despite the wave of assassinations that rocked the country in 2005 and 2006, economic growth registered a rate of 4 to 7 percent.

“The repeated attacks, assassinations, and the barbarism of the other party made some of the parliamentary majority hesitate and abandon its march… So we were in the majority, but we exercised governance as a minority,” he remarked.

Geagea emphasized that the experiences of the so-called governments of national unity should not be repeated.

“We want a defined government that has a very clear and coherent policy. A government of real experts, not advisors,” he stated.

The LF leader noted that Hezbollah and Amal Movement might be able to maintain “their full parliamentary representation.”

“But even if this happens, their public representation will be poor compared to the previous elections,” he said.

With simple calculations, Geagea talked about other confessions, saying: “In the Druze scene, the situation will remain the same… because the Progressive Socialist Party, headed by Walid Jumblatt, is still by far the strongest within the sect.”

As for the Christian arena, he affirmed that a major shift would take place.

“Change will vary between 40 and 60 percent, as no one can know how people will act out of their sufferings over the past two years,” he underlined.

In the Sunni street, and despite the withdrawal of former Prime Minister Saad Hariri from political life, Geagea stressed that many figures “still carry the ideology of the Future Movement and share our visions and aspirations.”

Asked about the lack of cooperation with other components, such as the Kataeb Party and the forces that represent the civil movement, he replied: “There are continuous attempts to gather as many of these figures, if not all of them. What unites us at least is a view of the current situation and how to get out of it.”

“I tell you frankly, all those do not represent the hard core of the regime (Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement). Thus, the convergence of necessities and visions objectively will allow us to form a large bloc in parliament, regardless of the organizational status of this bloc,” he stated.

Geagea said he was confident that the elections would take place on time, “despite the intentions of some, especially the hard core.”

He noted in this regard that the FPM would do anything to delay the elections, “but I do not see that they are able to find a way to postpone or cancel them.”

On whether a parliamentary majority of around 65 deputies out of 128 would be able to elect a new president at the end of October, Geagea said: “No, but it is certain that others will not be able to bring their president, and this is important. You start by preventing anything harmful and keep trying to do useful things.”

The path out of the crisis following the elections, if things went as expected, is also clear to Geagea.

“Our crises are intertwined. Economics and politics are interconnected…The main problem we have is political, which has resulted in economic crises. The ruling group combines corruption, inefficiency, and chaos…” he remarked.

All of this is due to the actual decision-making authority, which is the Lebanese government, and behind it the successive parliamentary majority during the past five and six years, according to Geagea.

“Therefore, anything is possible if change happens at the political level,” he stated.

The LF leader stressed that his party was the right alternative for the FPM on the Christian arena.

He explained: “The work of the Lebanese Forces is completely opposite to all the practices that we have seen from the FPM while in power.”

On how to resolve Lebanon’s crisis with the Gulf, Geagea stressed that Arab and Gulf states would reconsider their position when the authority is no longer in the hands of the corrupt.

“Certainly, they are not interested in the current Lebanon. They will not be interested Qassem Soleimani’s Lebanon (the IRGC general who was killed in a US raid), but in the country of Charles Malek, Camille Chamoun, Rafik Hariri and Bashir Gemayel,” he concluded.



Goldrich to Asharq Al-Awsat: No US Withdrawal from Syria

US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
TT

Goldrich to Asharq Al-Awsat: No US Withdrawal from Syria

US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich has told Asharq Al-Awsat that the US does not plan to withdraw its forces from Syria.

The US is committed to “the partnership that we have with the local forces that we work with,” he said.

Here is the full text of the interview.

Question: Mr. Goldrich, thank you so much for taking the time to sit with us today. I know you are leaving your post soon. How do you assess the accomplishments and challenges remaining?

Answer: Thank you very much for the chance to talk with you today. I've been in this position for three years, and so at the end of three years, I can see that there's a lot that we accomplished and a lot that we have left to do. But at the beginning of a time I was here, we had just completed a review of our Syria policy, and we saw that we needed to focus on reducing suffering for the people in Syria. We needed to reduce violence. We needed to hold the regime accountable for things that are done and most importantly, from the US perspective, we needed to keep ISIS from reemerging as a threat to our country and to other countries. At the same time, we also realized that there wouldn't be a solution to the crisis until there was a political process under resolution 2254, so in each of these areas, we've seen both progress and challenges, but of course, on ISIS, we have prevented the reemergence of the threat from northeast Syria, and we've helped deal with people that needed to be repatriated out of the prisons, and we dealt with displaced people in al-Hol to reduce the numbers there. We helped provide for stabilization in those parts of Syria.

Question: I want to talk a little bit about the ISIS situation now that the US troops are still there, do you envision a timeline where they will be withdrawn? Because there were some reports in the press that there is a plan from the Biden administration to withdraw.

Answer: Yeah. So right now, our focus is on the mission that we have there to keep ISIS from reemerging. So I know there have been reports, but I want to make clear that we remain committed to the role that we play in that part of Syria, to the partnership that we have with the local forces that we work with, and to the need to prevent that threat from reemerging.

Question: So you can assure people who are saying that you might withdraw, that you are remaining for the time being?

Answer: Yes, and that we remain committed to this mission which needs to continue to be pursued.

Question: You also mentioned the importance of humanitarian aid. The US has been leading on this. Are you satisfied with where you are today on the humanitarian front in Syria?

Answer: We remain committed to the role that we play to provide for humanitarian assistance in Syria. Of the money that was pledged in Brussels, we pledged $593 million just this past spring, and we overall, since the beginning of the conflict, have provided $18 billion both to help the Syrians who are inside of Syria and to help the refugees who are in surrounding countries. And so we remain committed to providing that assistance, and we remain keenly aware that 90% of Syrians are living in poverty right now, and that there's been suffering there. We're doing everything we can to reduce the suffering, but I think where we would really like to be is where there's a larger solution to the whole crisis, so Syrian people someday will be able to provide again for themselves and not need this assistance.

Question: And that's a perfect key to my next question. Solution in Syria. you are aware that the countries in the region are opening up to Assad again, and you also have the EU signaling overture to the Syrian regime and Assad. How do you deal with that?

Answer: For the United States, our policy continues to be that we will not normalize with the regime in Syria until there's been authentic and enduring progress on the goals of resolution 2254, until the human rights of the Syrian people are respected and until they have the civil and human rights that they deserve. We know other countries have engaged with the regime. When those engagements happen, we don't support them, but we remind the countries that are engaged that they should be using their engagements to push forward on the shared international goals under 2254, and that whatever it is that they're doing should be for the sake of improving the situation of the Syrian people.

Question: Let's say that all of the countries decided to talk to Assad, aren’t you worried that the US will be alienated in the process?

Answer: The US will remain true to our own principles and our own policies and our own laws, and the path for the regime in Syria to change its relationship with us is very clear, if they change the behaviors that led to the laws that we have and to the policies that we have, if those behaviors change and the circumstances inside of Syria change, then it's possible to have a different kind of relationship, but that's where it has to start.

Question: My last question to you before you leave, if you have to pick one thing that you need to do in Syria today, what is it that you would like to see happening today?

Answer: So there are a number of things, I think that will always be left and that there are things that we will try to do, to try to make them happen. We want to hold people accountable in Syria for things that have happened. So even today, we observed something called the International Day for victims of enforced disappearances, there are people that are missing, and we're trying to draw attention to the need to account for the missing people. So our step today was to sanction a number of officials who were responsible for enforced disappearances, but we also created something called the independent institution for missing persons, and that helps the families, in the non-political way, get information on what's happened. So I'd like to see some peace for the families of the missing people. I'd like to see the beginning of a political process, there hasn't been a meeting of the constitutional committee in two years, and I think that's because the regime has not been cooperating in political process steps. So we need to change that situation. And I would, of course, like it's important to see the continuation of the things that we were talking about, so keeping ISIS from reemerging and maintaining assistance as necessary in the humanitarian sphere. So all these things, some of them are ongoing, and some of them remain to be achieved. But the Syrian people deserve all aspects of our policy to be fulfilled and for them to be able to return to a normal life.