There's a difference between responsibility of the policy and responsibility of the practice. In any practice, you have malpractice, that's another issue. When you talk about state and President, you always talk about the decisions and the policy.
Did the President order anyone to kill civilians, did he order the destruction, did he order supporting terrorism in his country? Of course not.
My decision was, and the decision of the different institutions, and the decision of the different officials in Syria - I'm on top of them - was to have dialogue, to fight terrorists, and to reform as a response at the very beginning, response to the allegations, let's say, at that time, that they needed reform in Syria, we responded.
I never rejected any responsibility, but that depends on the decision.
Regarding fighting terrorism, we are ready to cooperate with anyone in this world with no conditions. That's crux of our policy, not today, not yesterday; for years, even before the war on Syria, we always said that.
In the eighties, we asked for international coalition against terrorism after the Muslim Brotherhood crisis in Syria when they started killing, of course they were defeated at that time. We asked for the same thing. So, this is a long-term policy that we base our policy on for years now.
I said we don't pin a lot of hopes of changing administrations [in U.S.] because that context has been going on for more than fifty years now, and that's expected. If they want to continue in the same position of the United States creating problems around the world, that's what they have to do: only interfering in the matters of other nations.
[United States] are sovereign country, they are an independent country, but this is their limit; they don't have to interfere in any other country. Because of this interference for the last fifty years, that's why they are very good only in creating problems, not in solving problems. That's the problem with the American role.
[American's government] thinking they are the judge of the world; they're not.
Any cooperation that doesn't go through the Syrian government is not legal. If it's not legal, we cannot cooperate with, and we don't recognize and we don't accept.
That's the problem with the American position; they think that they are the police of the world.
When you talk about cooperation, it means cooperation between two legal governments, not cooperation between foreign government and any faction within Syria.
We cannot tell anything about what [Donald Trump] is going to do, but if, let's say if he is going to fight the terrorists, of course we are going to be ally, natural ally in that regard with the Russian, with the Iranian, with many other countries who wanted to defeat the terrorists.
We always say we have wishful thinking that the Unites States would be unbiased, respect the international law, doesn't interfere in other countries around the world, and of course to stop supporting terrorists in Syria.
We are very cautious in judging [Donald Trump], especially as he wasn't in a political position before.
We have to wait and see when Donald J. Trump embarks his new mission, let's say, or position within this administration as President.
We don't have a lot of expectations [for Donald J. Trump] because the American administration is not only about the President; it's about different powers within this administration, the different lobbies that they are going to influence any President.
Whether [Turkey] is a NATO country or not, it doesn't have the right to invade any other country according to the international law or to any other moral value.
Let's be realistic, every terrorist came to Syria, he came through Turkey with the support of [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan. So, fighting those terrorists is like fighting the army of Erdogan, not the Turkish army, the army of Erdogan.
It's our right to defend our country against any kind of invasion.
António Guterres role as Secretary-General in bringing all powers together is very essential` and we hope he can succeed, it's not easy of course.
Tayyip Erdoğan is megalomaniac President, he is not stable. He lives during the Ottoman era, he doesn't live in the current time. He's out of touch with the reality.
I always say the Syrian problem as isolated case, as Syrian case, is not very complicated. What makes it complicated is the interference from the outside, especially the Western interference because it's against the will of the Syrian government, while the intervention of the Russians, Iranians, and Hezbollah is because of the invitation of the Syrian government.
Of course, when Secretary-General is objective, he can play an important role in dealing with different officials in the United Nations in order to bring the policies of the different states - mainly Russia and the United States - toward more cooperation and more stability regarding Syria.
I would say I need two things: the first one is to be objective in every statement he could make regarding any conflict around the world, including Syria. The second one is not to turn Secretary-General office into a part or branch of the State Department of the United States.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: