In an interview with Elaf, former Syrian Vice President Abdel Halim Khaddam envisions a promising future for Syria, currently occupied by the Syrian army. He emphasizes the moral obligation to demand foreign intervention, explaining that Iran controls decision-making in Syria and expresses concerns about Hezbollah’s control over Lebanon.
During the interview with Elaf, Abdel Halim Khaddam advocates for the unity of the Syrian opposition, rejecting discussions solely focused on leadership rights, which he considers futile while Syria is engulfed in turmoil.
Khaddam expresses apprehension about the risks of opposition fragmentation and its aftermath following the fall of the Assad regime. He once again urges the international community to intervene militarily, safeguarding the Syrian people from the regime’s atrocities. He emphasizes that their objective is not to acquire authority or a political role, but rather to fulfill their duty in saving their country and its people.
Foreign intervention is deemed a moral and religious obligation.
Khaddam emphasizes the gravity of the situation in Syria and urges the international community to intervene militarily, drawing parallels with the intervention in Libya.
He highlights the ongoing atrocities committed by the regime, leaving Syrians with no choice but to remain steadfast and act courageously.
However, why advocate for foreign military intervention despite the opposition’s rejection? Khaddam explains that the opposition’s rejection of foreign intervention originates from the Cold War era in the 1950s, during which the conflict between the Arab liberation movement and the Baghdad Pact intensified.
Khaddam asserts that the international community’s call to protect the Syrian people is both natural and legitimate, aligned with international human rights instruments and the United Nations Charter. He strongly criticizes those who oppose military intervention, noting their detachment from the suffering of the Syrian people. They live abroad, their families are not displaced, their children or relatives are not killed, they are not persecuted or imprisoned, and the sanctity of their homes remains intact.
Additionally, Khaddam contends that those who object to foreign intervention are not directly affected Syrians who bear the brunt of the regime’s crimes. He emphasizes that slogans do not halt bloodshed or prevent killings.
Khaddam rejects military intervention in one scenario: when the state represents Syrians and has a national government that emerges from the people and adheres to their principles.
He clarifies that when the Syrian regime transforms the national army into an occupying force, issuing orders to assault cities and villages, destroy, and kill, the request for foreign intervention becomes a national responsibility and a moral and religious duty.
The relationship with Washington is favorable for Syria.
Some individuals discuss Abdel Halim Khaddam’s close ties with Washington, which holds a clear desire to ultimately remove the Assad regime. Is there collaboration between him and the United States in this regard? Khaddam acknowledges the existence of numerous conversations and rumors. He asserts that he is working in the best interests of Syria. He firmly believes that the primary and only viable option to rescue Syria is for the international community to intervene militarily, similar to the intervention in Libya.
Khaddam holds the view that it is natural to expect the United States, Western countries, Russia, and China to align with this option and save Syria. However, if the Russians and the Chinese persist in their stance, Khaddam states that they will demand Western countries to adopt a unified position, akin to their response during the crisis in Yugoslavia, and work towards liberating Syria and restoring power to the Syrian people so they can exercise their choices and fulfill their national aspirations.
Regarding Iran’s aspirations to become a reference point,
Elaf inquires: There is no doubt about the extent of Iranian support for the Syrian regime. Given that you oversaw the relations between the two countries for a period of time, to what extent can Iran continue this support? Khaddam responds by stating that Iran supports the Syrian regime because it is one of the most crucial strategic bases in the region. Iran’s primary objectives revolve around establishing a robust state capable of dominating and controlling the region—a country that possesses authority and decision-making power within the region. This influence extends from the Mediterranean to the borders of Afghanistan.
Iran holds the ultimate decision-making power in Syria,
He asserts that Iran is providing all possible resources to preserve the Syrian regime and prevent its downfall. However, Khaddam believes that eventually the regime will collapse, leading to the demise of Iran’s regional strategy. He further states that Iran currently controls the Palestinian issue through its allies, with whom it has established relationships via Syria. Additionally, Iran exercises dominance in Iraq through Shiite Islamic parties and its presence in the Iraqi arena, along with the presence of sleeper cells in numerous Arab and Islamic countries. This Iranian regional vision contradicts the aspirations of Arabs who strive for progress, prosperity, and growth. Khaddam emphasizes the need for Arab countries to support and assist one another, as well as other nations in need, to achieve a positive position. He views the current situation as burdensome, which can only be overcome through liberation, the establishment of democracy, and the pursuit of progress, growth, and prosperity.
Lebanon currently faces a dangerous situation as it is governed by Hezbollah,
according to the former Vice President of Syria. He explains that the alliance between Bashar al-Assad and the Iranian regime has allowed Tehran to exert complete control over Lebanon. Despite being an independent country, Lebanon is under the full influence of Iran through Hezbollah. The security situation in Lebanon is fragile, and Hezbollah holds power over the government, institutions, and key positions in the political and security sectors. Therefore, Lebanon’s independence is compromised, and the situation is both concerning and perilous.
However, Khaddam believes that the Lebanese people will only be able to break free from Hezbollah and Iran’s control once the Syrian regime falls and a democratic system is established. He emphasizes that the discussion of Lebanese sovereignty is no longer viable, as Lebanon should reclaim its status as an independent sovereign Arab state with its own responsibilities and obligations.
The future of Syria is threatened by the fragmentation of the opposition,
According to Khaddam. He explains that a new opposition group called the National Authority for Supporting the Revolution emerged from a series of meetings held in Paris among a group of Syrian patriots. The National Commission, as part of the political opposition, aims to unite all opposition parties with the goal of overthrowing the regime and establishing a civil democratic state.
Khaddam expresses his concerns about the impact of multiple opposition groups on Syria’s future. He fears that internal differences within the opposition could harm the country’s interests. He calls for a unified slogan focused on saving Syria and rejects divisive political slogans that prioritize one opposition party over another. Khaddam emphasizes the importance of unity, a shared vision to overthrow the regime, navigate the transitional phase, and work towards the best future for Syria.
Regarding the leadership of the Syrian opposition, Khaddam believes that the priority lies in unifying the ranks rather than focusing on individual leadership. Once unity is achieved, effective leadership can emerge naturally. Therefore, he considers discussions about leadership at this stage to be irrelevant and describes them as “Byzantine” debates. The urgent matter is to stand together with those who lead and those who do not, as it is a matter of patriotism, especially during such critical times when the country is engulfed in conflict and lives are being lost
The selection of the president is determined by the people.
However, when it comes to the political figure most capable of leading the opposition, Khaddam believes that it is the people who make that choice. He emphasizes that the issue is not about individuals but rather collective action and a national sentiment that requires cooperation and support from everyone. He stresses that the goal is not to replace one dictator with another; power must be returned to the people. According to Khaddam, once the regime falls and the transitional phase is overcome in Syria, it is through democratic polls that the people will decide who will lead the future constitutional phase of the country.
I’m not looking for a political role
Khaddam dismisses criticism aimed at him, particularly from those who argue that his long service under the Syrian regime disqualifies him from speaking on behalf of the opposition. He states that such concerns do not bother him. He asserts that Syrians are well aware of his previous role in foreign policy and his detachment from domestic politics. Khaddam highlights that he spoke openly about the details of that era when he left Syria.
In response to accusations of loyalty to the regime, Khaddam likens such criticism to naivety. He poses a rhetorical question, comparing it to the leaders of Quraysh who fought against Prophet Muhammad and attempted to extinguish the Islamic call. Yet, they later became champions of the Islamic call from Medina to the borders of China and the Atlantic. Khaddam draws parallels to historical figures such as Omar ibn al-Khattab and Khalid ibn al-Walid, who initially opposed the call but later played crucial roles in establishing the pillars of the Islamic State.
Khaddam views the words of his critics as part of the propaganda propagated by the Syrian regime to discredit its opponents. He maintains that such attempts do not concern him. He asserts that he is not seeking authority or engaging in politics but rather undertaking national action to save his country and alleviate the suffering endured by the people for over five decades.
Arab initiative
When asked about the shortcomings of the Arab initiative that led to its failure in providing the Syrian regime with a historic opportunity to respond positively to the demands of the Syrian people, Khaddam stated that while the initiative was based on the reality of the Arab regime, the National Commission, on the other hand, is committed to rejecting all forms of dialogue with the regime. They advocate for its downfall and holding all responsible, including its leaders and those involved in cases of torture and persecution, accountable.
Democratic Syria after Assad’s rule
Khaddam envisions a democratic Syria after Assad’s rule. He believes that there is no other path to restore Syria to its rightful place of growth, progress, and prosperity in service to the Arab nation except through democracy. According to Khaddam, a post-Assad Syria will be democratic and ensure the people’s right to choose their constitutional institutions. Authority will be vested in the Council of Ministers rather than concentrated in the hands of the President of the Republic. He foresees Syria as a country that embraces various forms of democracy, where power is transferred through elections, granting the legislative authority full control over the executive authority and the right to hold it accountable.
Khaddam highlighted that Syria, like other Arab countries that have followed the same path, has experienced living under totalitarian regimes since 1952. However, this approach has only led to corruption, backwardness, poverty, and fear. He emphasized that only through the democratic choice can freedoms be released, enabling citizens to think, create, produce, and work to their full potential.
