Syria, the Bridge to a New Middle East
IRD: Many call the developments in the Middle East democratic uprisings; to what extent do you think they will actually bring democracy to these countries?
AN: Democracy in the Middle East is more like a joke. But due to these developments, individual freedoms will increase. In fact, the contemporary time is not an era of democracy but is an era of freedom; especially individual freedom, which is sexual freedom in addition to freedom of religion and conduct. Many do not realize the trend in the 21st century and do not know that democracy and ideology were related to the 20th century.
IRD: So what approach is the West following in the Middle East?
AN: The West has realized the fact that the Middle East is on the brink of an explosion. The important question is who gets to manage these crises. The developments in Tunisia and Egypt were normal, but the West immediately entered to control the situation. The ouster of Hosni Mubarak created a vacuum that scared Israel; that is why the ouster of Ghaddafi was necessary. The rest of the developments were the continuation of this event.
Syria had to be isolated, but Asad’s mistakes paved the way for his collapse, and the UN Security Council will soon issue a resolution against him. Unfortunately, the unaccounted measures of people create these challenges for their governments. The West did not think that the Syrian people opposed their government to this extent, observing this opposition made them bolder as well. It was even said that the US and Russia had agreed that Ghaddafi should go and Asad must stay. But now we are witnessing more daring acts by the West.
IRD: So what does the West mean by bringing up the issue of Human Rights in regional countries?
AN: Even though “Human Rights” is basically a joke, however, it is a winning tactic that has paralyzed many governments. Three months ago the collapse of Asad’s government was impossible, but now it is very probable. Now it is clear that the people are ready to do all that it takes to get rid of the regime and the regime is not as strong as assumed before. Therefore, a resolution will be issued against Asad by the UN Security Council. A weak Syria prepared the scene for the West to implement “the Greater Middle East” project. However, the disturbing side effects will only affect the people in this region for at least four to five years.
IRD: Do the US and Israel agree on Asad’s staying because of their concerns over the future of Syria and the possibility of extremist groups coming to power?
AN: That’s not true and if it is so it is manageable. The Israeli concern is that it will have to give back the Golan Heights or at least parts of it, but the regime which will replace Asad will be much more liberal compared to the Jordanian government, and on the contrary, a regime establishing in Jordan could be a threat to Israel, because it will be a revolutionary and anti-West regime at least in the first few months. Nevertheless the era of revolutionary regimes is over, and the era of ultra-liberal youth has arrived.
IRD: What plan does the West have for Iran?
AN: They are trying to create an atmosphere around Iran so as to deprive it of its power. If Iran falls into the same trap as Asad, a new plan will also be prepared for it. The important fact in a war is not killing the enemy, but disabling it.
IRD: Syria is one of Iran’s main allies in the region. What should Iran do in regards to the weakening of its ally?
AN: Iran has been independent and has had no ally from the beginning. It gains its power from within. And it should rely only on the power of its own people as it did during the Iran-Iraq war. The satisfaction of the people is the only solution. Satisfaction of the people is considered a capital for the government, and we should be careful that some do not create dissatisfaction among people and if they do, they should be punished.