Rime Allaf - Presidential Adviser, Syrian National Coalition HARDtalk

baby. Now on BBC News it's time for

HARDtalk. Welcome to HARDtalk, I am Shaun Ley.

They must have looked like a position of great influence in the

new postwar Syria. The presidential adviser to the national collision of

Syrian preposition and revolution forces, the president in X or

planning to drive President Assad from power. Rime Allaf became an

adviser after an established career. Now, President Assad is so

confident, he is running for re` election. Important Western allies

are getting nervous, seemingly worried about Islamist 's getting a

foothold in Syria, less than President Assad himself. Time is

running out for the opposition, and not for the president. `` the

President in exile. Rime Allaf, welcome to HARDtalk. He

is not running, but running for re` election. Indeed, as he told

students at Damascus University a fortnight ago, he sings a turning

point has been reached. Of course not, he has said that since his

first speech to Parliament on March the 30th in 2011, he said this was a

conspicuous `` a conspiracy. They keep repeating that we have reached

a turning point and it is nearly over, we had to look at the facts on

the ground. President Assad has not been able to regain control of the

vast majority of Syria. When he says on the ground, it has become a

mopping up operation. His ally, he said a few weeks ago that the danger

of the Syrian regime falling has ended. This is wishful thinking, it

is Luke and Hill ludicrous to think of the head of the militia speaking

for Syrians. They have been demonstrating peacefully ``

ludicrous. It is up to the Syrians to decide whether they want the end

of this regime, you would agree that the majority have said this. The

trouble is it maybe up to the Syrians to make a judgement on that.

For that to be achieved, as he wanted to be, you require a lot of

outside support. It was there at the start, but some of this seems flaky.

That is what Tony Blair had to say last week, he said "repugnant though

it seems, the only way forward is to conclude the best agreement

possible, even if it means, in the interim, President Assad stays for a

period" . The keyword is repugnant, it is ludicrous that we should

imagine a walk in all, as described by so many human rights

organisations around the world, is documented heavily by Syrians and

international media. `` war criminal. It is disgusting that he

should be allowed to consider the notion of running for what is not

really a third term, these elections were never legitimate. It may be

repugnant, you but you have to deal with reality. The world has to

protect, and it has abandoned the Syrian people. Maybe it is a better

way of protecting more people to leave the regime in place. The deal

turned to. It is a strange protection, when you consider that

nearly 10 million people have become refugees, either in neighbouring

countries within Syria, as displaced people. The Syrian people, nearly

one third or up to half of the population, have fled from barrel

bombs. And chemical attacks. How can it be better for Syria and Syrians?

How can it be the only solution, to keep a walk for a medal in charge?

When all of these crimes have been committed? `` keep a walker and all

Hill `` war criminal. They cannot be in charge. President Assad cannot be

part, presumably, any Syrian future. The international community has

never signed up to anything that said he cannot be part of the Syrian

future. Look at Geneva, the establishment of a traditional

governing body can be including of the President. It is the key, it is

the solution to move the country forward. It can include him? Never,

it cannot include people who have been charged... But you have no

evidence the international community with you on that. They may have said

things. Most of the governments in the region have said that President

Assad has to go, whether or not they say it is not the point. Maybe he

has to go in one year, two years, three years, five years, once the

transition has happened? He has been in power for over three years, in

the most devastating war on a civilian population at the start.

The Geneva communique is clear on this transitional body. A transition

by default, that means that the current rulers are not part of it.

Never does not, it can involve the current rulers before someone takes

over. Every international law, I believe, will not approve of a walk

from all been in charge of a country. You acknowledge during the

time of the talks in January, you attended, and you wrote in an

article in a British newspaper "a process that is delivered that could

maintain the status quo in Syria indefinitely". You knew what you

were letting yourselves in for. We went to Geneva because we were

hopeful that after three years of devastating war, the powers that

could make things happen were going to put pressure on his regime. We

know that the support comes mostly from Russia and Iran. Russia agreed

to the Geneva communique 2012. The idea was that these negotiations

would be to that PGP. You said you went to Geneva under duress. Indeed,

we went under a great deal of pressure, because of the barrel

bombs and the attacks, they kept falling on the people of Syria while

we were sat there. From those words you wrote in January, it sounds like

he re` believed that there were serious intention by the

international community to support you in favour of President Assad, to

help remove him. `` you really believed. Hoping that he would never

feature again in the country. We have to work with what we have,

political support from a great deal of nations around the world. We hope

they would keep their word. We hoped after the deal on chemical weapons,

a shocked America Syrians, `` a shock to many Syrians. It is his

regime that proves it does not. You have a lot of support, you say,

outside, but what about inside of Syria? There are many revolutionary

inside forces, they have supported the coalition. They are part of this

great coalition of opposition forces. This is right it is called a

coalition. `` this is why. This is why we have groups of

intellectuals, and groups, and committees and local councils who

believe that this political way, this political umbrella to the free

Syrian army, to the armed resistance on the ground is the only way out

for them, to bring the message to the world. The umbrella appears to

be shrinking, doesn't it? Perhaps, in a sense, you have undermined your

own legitimacy. Your website says that one of its principles is not

engaging in any dialogue or negotiations with the regime. Al

Jazeera says that rebels and activists inside Syria dismissed the

group. That shows you that precisely this is what the Syrian people are

asking for, if they had some support from the international community,

some promises, had they been delivered, as we were promised, if

it was proven, that it was the regime who were impeding this

political process, we would see some in happen. We are still waiting.

Either give us the means to defend ourselves, give us more

sophisticated weapons, so we can neutralise this as power, this is a

monopoly of the President Assad regime, or at least establish

humanitarian quarters. Or, push the regime. But why should they listen

to you saying that? If you lose support on the ground. Look at, for

example, the Syrian National Coalition, that was the biggest part

of the opposition in Excel, they announced they were putting the

opposition because they were taking part is in talks `` X Ihle. ``exile.

It is true, but after the Geneva talks, the Syrian National Coalition

asked to be re` integrated into the coalition. In the assembly in April,

most members were voted back in. Those who boycotted understand that

we should not be negotiating. They saw that the coalition did a good

job improving it was serious, and proving it was looking for political

solutions. And, that it was willing to go all the way to show that. What

did you come up with? We came out with very little so far. But we had

always hoped that we were going to get those promised pressures on the

regime, or in the alternative, the defenders are hoping to smash them

against this brutal regime. You have to remember that the regime is

supported financially and militarily by Russia and Iran. You have to

remember that members of the terrorist group Hezbollah and

members of Iraq and the Iranians publican guard helping President

Assad in his war. But given the reluctance of your backers... But

still... They still have not been able to make a real dent in Syria.

They control a small part in Syria at the moment. With those allies who

are foreigners. At the free Syrian army controls vast parts of Syria

and the regime has been unable to gain control. President Assad is not

winning. The stalemate will be very different. That we pick up on your

point about the role of the free Syrian army and your contention that

you have, and you maintain support inside of Syria. The BBC has gone

into Aleppo in the past few days. This is what one resident told our

correspondent. Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd.

E`mail: [email protected]. Many armed groups are stealing

houses, that is not doing good to people. That is why we started to

hate both sides. We do not want the free Syrian army or the forces, we

want to live in peace". They are right to say that. They support

fully bringing them to court. And anyone who has committed a war crime

should be indicted. But what is happening on the ground now, and the

danger that it is diminishing the level of support that the coalition

enjoys, and you are imposing your political authority, even if

President Assad went. All the more reason to intervene, and for the

world to stop this insane war. When nobody is allowed to give the upper

hand. Is time running out? Yes, for most people in Syria who are subject

to this. Is it running out for you? Know, the Syrian revolutionaries and

those who rose up against President Assad are not giving up. `` no. The

effect has been clear. After over three years, we are in our fourth

year. Nobody is going up his arms. People prefer to leave the country

and become refugees them to submit to the regime by macro threw. Rime

Allaf you say that they held on in the last opposition. `` the regime

by President Assad. These are areas that are under siege. President

Assad's have reinforced their control in Damascus. Resistance in

the third largest city, Homs Tom which has held out for two years is

in danger of being crushed. `` Homs. It is not the basis for an

opposition victory. I didn't speak about victory. What is the

alternative, defeat? There is no defeat possible for those who rose

up. So this goes on and on? This is all the more reason for the world to

intervene, this is crimes against humanity as described by NGOs and

the UN. May I remind you that while President Assad controls this area

with the help of Hezbollah, he has been unable to gain control of one

suburb or several suburbs of Damascus. He has two bomb them with

chemical weapons. `` to bomb. You are saying there is no military

victory possible. That is why we went to Geneva and that is why we

request the world powers, those who can make it happen, to pressure the

President Assad regime. This is what we will need. It is President Assad

who is saying that he only believes in a military solution and is still

unable to regain control. For your external backers, whatever you think

of what they say in public, the practicality for them is whether or

not you are worth supporting because you will achieve a better outcome

than what exists. Anyone is worth supporting compared to a criminal.

America shows they are worried about what you are saying. This is what

the assistant Secretary of State for the eastern FS appearing before a

Senate committee says, over the past year, we have refocused our

activity, channelling sources to local governments and civil society

groups as well as the Syrian coalition. A kiss is on ways to

focus on basic security, staving off the advances of extremist groups.

She is saying you cannot be trusted with suppliers. She is talking about

extremists. It is the Free Syrian Army. It is whether you are

effective at fighting them. We are at extremely effective. Large areas

have been liberated from Al Qaeda foreign terrorists who have

infiltrated Syria, many of them as reported in trusted newspapers, with

the help and collusion of the Syrian regime. The only people fighting

extremists are the moderate nationalists of the Free Syrian

Army. The UK suspended deliveries of nonlethal aid. Has it restarted

them? Not the way we would like them to. Why not? This is a question that

should be asked to the British government. You must be having this

conversation. We have asked the same conversations that we always have

the same excuses, we don't know what is happening, we need better

control. We proved a buy day that we are the only capable force of

tackling those terrorists. When we are left to our own devices, we are

left without the real weapons, the more we will split fighting the Al

Qaeda terrorists and the regime. Is it possible they no longer want you

to win? It is possible they have strange rationale. These are

countries which support the declaration of human rights,

responsibility to protect humans. It is ludicrous to imagine...

(CROSSTALK) is it worrying? Not just worrying. You feel a lot of despair

in Syria that these promises did not materialise with the increase of the

savagery of the regime which has been proven. A former US ambassador

to Syria and other countries in the Middle East, a distinguished figure

in the US, one who would be thought to be still well plugged into what

the thinking is in Washington, he said in a speech, it is time to

consider a future for Syria without President Assad. He being ousted is

not going. Do we want the alternative? A major country at the

heart of the Arab world at the hands of Al Qaeda. We need to come up with

a future that includes President Assad, as bad as he is, because

there is something worse. This is a false dichotomy. Al Qaeda only

entered Syria and these extremists materialised 1.5 years ago. At the

beginning, there was no such thing. They are there now. Because we did

not get the help that was needed. These governments must ask

themselves why we have this phenomenon. Is it not because the

Free Syrian Army, moderate nationalist there, as described by

the UN, did not get the help they needed? Whatever the reason. That

might be one that history books need to consider. That is the situation

on the ground as it now exists. Given those unpalatable options, do

you accept that for some people and some important people, they would

refer President Assad gone, so it matters more that he is the mosts

don't run Syria found that you do. We are the people who don't want

Islamists to run Syria `` Islamists. You should be making a

deal with President Assad than. They are two different evils, caused by

the presence of each other. Because the regime was allowed to go on,

because the Free Syrian Army could not defend themselves, we have the

creation of this phenomenon. The more the Free Syrian Army has to

fend for itself without real help, the more people, and we have seen

this in Afghanistan, Pakistan, all over, when they are faced with

despair, they turn to extremist groups getting their own financing.

The problem is those extremist groups it Dow enjoy support on the

ground. And insurgency centre member, Charles Lister, said,

al`Nusra enjoys remarkable levels of support. Across the anti` government

population. Key members of Western backed coalitions, your

organisation, has not content al`Nusra because it manages

countless relationships with localised moderate rebel groups. It

is part of the broader coalition of the ground. For some people, it is

actually acceptable. Al`Nusra is considered one of the allies of Al

Qaeda. They have issued a fatwa against the Free Syrian Army

leaders. And, against the leader of the National coalition of Syrian and

fighters. He might not like you. On the ground, it is part of the fight

against President Assad. And, it is one that is acceptable to some

people. It is not acceptable to the back as you have outside. You are

between a rock and a hard place. Most of us reject extremism. Just

like we reject the extremism of President Assad. There are two evil

forces. There is one opposition and revolution force fighting both of

them. Tony Blair said last week in a speech in London, no shirt of

intervening in the middle east. He thinks it is necessary. He is no fan

of extremism. `` shirk. There are so many problems around elements within

the opposition that people are wary of any solution that is victory for

either side. Extremist groups should not receive support from surrounding

nations, which you agree it. Here is a subject in which the principal

nations of the G20 could come together. China and Russia, the US

and Britain. They can all agree that they don't want Islamists in control

in Syria. In the past, they haven't been able to agree on the future of

President Assad. Maybe, it is possible, listening to Tony Blair

and Ryan Crocker, that they might now. They should follow news in

Syria more closely and not look at the big cliches in the media. They

should follow the battles that the Free Syrian Army is conducting

against these terrorists. We repeat of this is not this dichotomy that

we are fighting for. It is not either President Assad or the

terrorists. That is what President Assad has been trying to convince

the world. He is winning because there are people fighting those

terrorist entities. That is the regime and Al Qaeda. If you give

support to those who are secular or on the record, we agree to the

Geneva communique and have issued a statement of principles in Geneva,

which outlined a vision for a secular or released it, death and

aquatic Syria. It is not include the terrorists of Al Qaeda. You have

said several times, the humanitarian situation in Syria is appalling. A

report by the UN complained that none of the parties in the conflict

adhered to the demands of the Security Council to allow

humanitarian access. They say that access is denied by all sides. Do

you accept that on the ground, some of your supporters are doing that as

much as government is doing that? There are lots of mistakes. I

repeat, everybody has committed war crimes should be tried and indicted.

The High Commissioner of human rights at the UN says that the

excesses and crimes of the regime far outweigh those of any rebels. We

have to consider who the rebels are. Are they Free Syrian Army? Or the

terrorists? Millions of refugees have fled. Some near Damascus were

reduced, according to the UN, to eating animal feed or nothing at

all. If you were to win, why were those who have starved, those who

have been displaced, welcome you and your colleagues back? No one is

saying the National coalition should be the one to run Syria or that the

Free Syrian Army should take over. We are calling for a transitional

governing body. Once the body is in, there will be people from the

current government, some from the opposition, who work together and

draft a new constitution and call for elections. When we went Syria? A

few months before the revolution started. Over three years ago. In

the spring, in the summer sorry, of 2010. We have family in Syria. We

understand the frustrations of people. This is the reason why the

sooner real pressure is put on the regime, the sooner people like us

can go back to Syria. Will you be welcomed after what has happened?

You have contributed to the misery people are experiencing just as the

President Assad regime has done. You have prolonged this war. I most

Syrians will tell you this is not a war, this is a repression, a war of

the people. People in Syria are not fighting one another. There are

foreign militias fighting each other. We are trying to fight them

off. Rime Allaf, thank you for talking to us on HARDtalk. Thank you

for speaking with me. A change in the weather is on its

way for the end of the week but for the time being we start on a mild

night. Great, misty and murky day for most to begin with. A bit of

brightness breaking through in western areas. In the south, showers

will start developing once again and by the afternoon some of those will

be heavy and sundry. The emphasis will