What Obama said

Модератор: zlata

What Obama said

Сообщение DARPA » 06 окт 2015, 20:52

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. There were several events in Syria, about which I would like to ask you, starting with Russia's participation. You met with President Vladimir Putin earlier this week, and I'm wondering, do you think the length that he was honest with you about their intentions in Syria? If the goal is Russian group is "Islamic state", including those with which the United States is working, it is not required if the US military to protect them? And the situation in Syria, more broadly: obviously, there are certain gaps in the training program and supply the Syrian opposition. Do you believe that this program can be improved, or are you willing to consider other options? Could you, in particular, to reconsider the no-fly zone, as called for by several of the presidential candidates, including your former Secretary of State?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, let us understand what is happening in Syria and how we got there. What began as peaceful protests against President Assad, it has turned into a civil war, because the Assad responded to these protests with unimaginable cruelty. Thus, it is not a conflict between the United States and any party in Syria; it is a conflict between the Syrian people and the brutal, ruthless dictatorship.

The second point is that Assad is still in power, because Russia and Iran support him throughout this process. In this sense, the fact that Russia is doing now, not very different from what they did in the past - they are simply more open to it. They support a regime that is rejected by the overwhelming majority of Syria's population, because people have seen how he was ready to drop bombs on children's drum and villages indiscriminately, and more anxious to hold on to power than the state of his country.

Therefore, in my conversations with President Putin, I have said very clearly that the only way to solve the problem in Syria - is to implement the political transition that will leave the integrity of the state and the military, but Assad must necessarily go away because it can not be rehabilitated in the eyes Syrians. This is not my opinion, it is the opinion of the vast majority of Syrians.

And I said to Mr Putin, I would be willing to work with him if he is ready to become a mediator, together with its partners - Assad and Iran - in the process of political transition, and then we would be able to count on the fact that the rest of the world will take a political decision. I also said that the military intervention, the attempt of Russia and Iran to support Assad and try to reassure the population by force, just make them get bogged down in a quagmire. It's not going to work. And they'll be stuck there for a long time, if you do not elect the other way.

....

And the last point that I want to stop, because the conversations here in our community, sometimes different from what is being said abroad. Putin had to go to Syria, not because of the strength, but because of the weakness of the fact that his client, Mr. Assad loses power. At this time it is not enough just to send arms and money; now has to send its own aircraft and pilots. And the idea that he put forward a plan, which the international community sees a viable, because there is a vacuum - does not convince me, I do not see that a coalition of 60 nations is built for him after the speech at the UN.

Iran and Assad constitute a coalition of Putin at the moment. The rest of the world is ours. So I do not think people are deceived by its current strategy. This does not mean that we do not see that Putin is starting to realize that their best interests to find a political settlement. And, as I said in New York, we are ready to work with the Russian and Iranians, as well as our partners in order to find a political solution. No one pretends that this will be easy, but I think it is still possible. And that is why we will support the link.

But we can not organize such talks, if there is no recognition of the fact that there must be a change in government. We are not going back to pre-war state. And airstrikes against moderate opposition, which makes Russia are counter-productive. It moves us from a final decision, which we should all aspire.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. You just said that you reject the approach of president Putin in Syria and his attacks on the moderate opposition. You said that this is a recipe for disaster. But what are you willing to do to stop President Putin and protect the moderate opposition? Would you have considered imposing further sanctions against Russia? You would go to supply the opposition anti-aircraft units to protect them from the Russian air attacks? And how do you feel about critics who say that Putin has you beat, he praised you on the situation in Ukraine and decided that it can get away with it?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I've heard it all before. (Laughter.) I have to say that I was always amazed that not only opponents, but other people are buying it.

Let's think. When I came to office seven and a half years ago, America was in the worst financial crisis in history, we dragged the whole world into a huge depression. We have been involved in two wars with little coalition support. World public opinion about the United States was at the lowest point - we were just above Russia at the time, and I think potentially below China. We lost 800,000 jobs in the month, and so on and so forth.

Today, we are strongly developed economy in the world - probably one of the few bright spots in the global economy. Our ratings went up. We are more active in addressing the increasing number of international problems and finding answers to everything - from Ebola to counteract LIH.

Meanwhile, Mr. Putin took office at a time when their economy was growing, and they are trying to turn to a more diversified economy, and as a result of brilliant moves, their economy is reduced by 4 percent per year. They are isolated from the world community, subjected to sanctions, joined by those who were their closest trading partners. Their main allies in the Middle East were Libya and Syria - Mr. Gaddafi and Assad - and the country falling apart. Now he just had to send troops and planes in order to support the regime, risking alienating the entire Sunni world.

So what was the question? (Laughter.)

But I think it's really interesting to understand. Russia does not become stronger as a result of what they do. They get attention. Sanctions against Ukraine still in place. And the fact that I constantly offer - from a position of strong, because the United States is not under sanctions, and we are reducing the economy by 4 percent a year - that I proposed - is the way in which they can return to growth and to make life easier for their people.

Until now, the action of Mr Putin were successful only insofar as it increased its rating in Russia - it might impress, if you count the measure of success. Of course, it's easy to do when you have a state-controlled media.

But it's not a smart and strategic move on the part of Russia. The fact that Russia is currently doing - it's not just throws himself in the situation where the vast majority of the Syrian population sees them as an enemy, but the Sunni population of the entire Middle East will see him as a supporter of the regime, who dropped bombs on children. And this despite the fact that Russia has a significant Muslim population within its own borders, as it should also worry.

I want Russia to be successful. This is not a competition between the United States and Russia. It is in our interest that Russia was responsible, effective player on the international scene, who can share the burden with us, along with China, along with Europe and Japan, with other countries - because we have big problems. I hope that Mr. Putin is making a risky move to support Assad, he admits that it is not a good long-term strategy, and that it instead will work on a political settlement.

I also hope that they will be able to solve the problems with Ukraine in such a way that recognizing Russian interests will be maintained the basic principles of sovereignty and independence, which Ukrainian people must be the same as everyone else. Until that time, we will remain tensions and differences of opinion.

We're not going to do correspondence Syria war between the United States and Russia. It would be bad strategy on our part. It's a battle between Russia, Iran and al-Assad against the overwhelming majority of the Syrian people. And our battle - against LIH, together with the international community, to resolve the conflict so as to stop the bloodshed and put an end to the crisis of refugees so that people can be at home, to work, to grow food, to have shelter for their children, send them to school. This is the side on which we are.
DARPA
 
Сообщений: 1520
Зарегистрирован: 26 июн 2014, 11:58

Вернуться в HIGHLIGHTS STORIES

Кто сейчас на форуме

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 0