the world of the war is certainly warranted and i think people are tired in syria and beyond and i think this is. a mechanism that allows the syrians to get together and do something about now. positions have changed i told you i mean we could have had an agreement or your call and why it's happening now because positions have changed has the positions how the positions changed within syria or is it the stance of foreign partners or foreign suppliers or is a fair and sides that have well. as you know the syrian. conflict has 3 levels there's the international there's the regional and of course there is a domestic local. positions have changed both of the regional. in the sense that at some point there were countries that did not see. much

meaning towards a constitutional committee i think that has changed i think they have come around to and that has influenced the syrian parties now a messenger i know that when it comes to syria you like quoting him a french political economist who used to say that to solve an intractable problem you need to change the context now apparently the context has been changed as you said but. there was also a big believer in coordinating diplomatic and military policy is among european nations particularly britain france and the united states he's even credited for shortening the 2nd world war through his coordination efforts do you think the syrian war would have been shortened a more specifically do you think the coordination among western powers on the syrian front did ultimately how to prolong or to shorten the syrian conflict.

as you pointed out when there was basically talking about europe and we're talking you later all he was advising them merican president as well but in the middle east it's not just the region it's beyond the region and beyond the region there are 2 camps in the region there were 2 camps so that really complicates things enormously so the context has changed in the sense that when it 1st started of course it was an expression of the grievances of the syrian people became complicated by. i would say regional international interventions. and they were designed to change things in syria it's understandable that at the time it was the beginning of the arab spring and everybody thought that this was history as things got more complicated i think people structure wiser positions and understood that the continuation of syrian conflict are continuation is in no one's

interests including the neighbors quite frankly you're a big very diplomatic as understandable but let me put it in starker terms because i also. know invested in syria i covered this conflict from the very beginning i saw its transition but my own eyes and i think it took a definite turn for the worst while president obama signed a secret the order authorizing the cia to work with the saudi intelligence and to arm the rebels with the specific purpose of deposing president assad now his successor did not carry out that policy have you seen any change in the dynamics or using when a storm in the context of the syrian the war with the change of leadership in washington. well 1st let me say everybody has committed mistakes.

everyone and i think some are prepared to admit that they made mistakes because they are revising their policy. now does that include the united states i think the united states in the sense initially and i think frankly the problem in syria how it started and who became exacerbated is probably because the united states and the russian federation both of them decided to deal with it at an arm's length they allowed their regional allies to take care of sticks. and that's where things got complicated there were a number of opportunities like you said earlier there were a number of opportunities to resolve the conflict there were a number of opportunities. if they were seized and there were really serious attempts by moscow and washington to solve the problem and i was witness to a number of them and it could have been possible and would have shortened the war and would have saved a lot of lives there's no don't now unlike other countries be it the russia or

turkey for example the united states was not actively involved in different nations of the constitutional committee and i think as a result some of its partners on the ground war specifically kurdish groups in this in syria are not represented there do you think it has any impact on the legitimacy all of that word that the committee is now tasked with it well let me tell you having been involved in this exercise for quite some time the kurdish issue has always been there i mean nobody has tried to look at on the contrary the issue is. to get this process moving and if you read carefully the mandated terms of reference and they are published it alludes to the fact that things can change in terms of composition in terms of works and so on and i would interpret that as a door for the kurds to participate in one form or the other you cannot ignore the kurds but i think one thing has to be. absolutely clear we're talking about

maintaining the territorial integrity of syria yes at some point. they will be present and i think that should be present but of course they have to operate within the parameters set by 2254 which you see absolute. respect for the turks and the prince and territory. now. the committee will be tasked with drafting a new constitution and eventually i'm not sure no no no because again i think this has to be very clear. the framework for the solution is resolution $2254.00 and when it comes when it speaks about the constitution it speaks about constitutional reform and that is deliberate so it could be new we could be amended could be anything else and in the mandate it. explicitly says there are 2 possibilities either amended or a new constitution we know that the government has made it very clear the

government of syria has moved very clear that they are talking about. discussing the president. whereas the opposition has a new front. so this is an issue i think the committee itself will have to decide when the composition of this committee is supposed to allow for that because i think for the 1st time we have not only the representatives of the government and the opposition but also the so-called civil society which is the united nations was responsible for putting together now after 8 years of conflict i personally think there are no neutrals or as you know independence in syria how confident are you that. the group representing the civil society is truly representing syrian civil society rather than each of the belligerent side well i have to tell you that when this idea came up i was one of the strong advocates. to have an

independent component because i think good independent component would probably be responsible than anybody else of putting forward new ideas now you are right i mean everybody is has some sort of political affiliation that is why i took such a long time to agree on the 50 independents i don't know many of them there has been many lists over the past year and a half i hope what was finally agreed to will be people of color that have ideas and can make a contribution to who actually bridge builders between 2 opposing sides which is the government and the opposition will have to wait and see but are not really privy to all of them so are unable to tell you i heard you say one of the panels that they for mation of this committee would imply that all sides accept each other as an interlocutor or is it genuine legitimate interlocutor does it mean that you

have full confidence in this syrian government allowing this process to run authentically without trying to influence it their way it deems necessary because obviously it is in the strongest position now than it's ever been the over the last 8 years do you think that will impact its ability to run the constitutional process and to impose its own will well i mean this pretty much depends on the international community and the regional powers how they're going to be able to handle that amount of deal to come obviously it's understandable that the government would like to control look and push it in a certain direction there's no doubt about that on our interest and the opposition like to do the same but you are right the government is in the strongest position now and therefore feels like maybe it is in a position that's why maybe the agreement was reached only know that it can. in.

sure that the results of this commission is something that they can live with but the u.n. which represents international community has a duty to implement resolution 2254 and it does have a number of elements and although the job of the u.n. is to facilitate it has to facilitate it within that framework and how it exercises its role will be interesting to see and the government will have to respond to that because we are implementing a security council resolution security council has a role to play to oversight and there have been a number of ideas about how the international community would shepherd this process . bringing in. and what you refer to as a small group to be there to make sure that. the commission would actually be implementing what scared house resolution spoke of as constitutional reform so it is going to be an interesting exercise like anything else it's based

on compromise and let's see how things will evolve to one of these well for the time being the best are we have to take a very very short break but we'll be back in just a few moments. rug up with a little i like i was out of. the set up was a monk what i would. not . then we had. lunch in the. so shawn. so close to

the muslim you quote a lot of the. minute that he is someone that would do the board. in this confessional moment to ask him should i ask for the last company and seeing anti-militarist for the dutch pro who should commission.

british just shoot on disk in the. future. and i'm going to go so sit on the opening much to me mama is just back. welcome back to worlds apart where gravity is held in the radisson a former deputy special envoy for the u.n. secretary general and syrian ambassador as the wall. are in syria hopefully winding

down there is another political and geopolitical confrontation brewing up and they region i mean between iran and the united states and its allies do you do you think these tensions between attack iran and washington may have any impact on the syrian peace process are those 2 related as far as your concerned well everything in the middle east is interconnected as you know but i've seen some. news in the past few days or give me hope that what we have always felt. is probably going to happen is that there is a desire by both washington and tehran to deescalate told really just like just well i mean looks like the french president was able in spite of everything to move them closer to one another just seems. apparently it is true that there could have been an agreement between both to deescalate but it has not materialized but. i

hope because any conflict aeration there will certainly have implications not only for the region quite beyond seoul and i'm hoping that. it will be pursued by france and others to make sure that our or the you know there is no confrontation between the united states well i'm sure nobody wants to see another war in the region but where i slightly disagree with you is that there are signs of deescalation quite on the contrary we've seen a number of. quite mysterious attacks still inexplicable attacks taking place in the region the latest one being the attack on the saudi oil facility oil for which everybody blames each other do you think do you take that as a just sort of shady political gaming or do you actually believe that somebody maybe is trying to nudge the region towards another can that a well off in taishan. what i'm referring to is. development in the past few years

after these attacks. i think i don't think it's in the interest of iran or the united states trouble confrontation. probably both are looking for a way out. but i think they're going to look for a way out now is somebody pushing for a confrontation well. we know for example there are certain countries who. have been pushing the united states for years to confront iraq but the united states never reached that point because they understood the implications so the latest news that i've heard is the actually. both are looking at a way out now problem the problem is. you know you don't necessarily go to war intentionally sometimes unintentionally you sleep walk into a war and i think this trip. now speaking about those provocations our contest

that russia has recently suggests that creating what it calls and monitoring system to look into incidents like this reach. involves some degree of plausible deniability or the speculation of false flag attacks what do you think of the safety and most importantly do you think it would be free of political and geopolitical manipulation. well of course i'm not familiar with the details of the people i couldn't go even to the russians on the phone though they are they did so as well of course i mean if it were possible to have it i think it would be a good idea the issue is. who would manage it. in what context i mean is it something within a broader context because you know as you know russia has an initiative about a regional security system in the middle east i would imagine this would be part of it but the creation of a regional security system. or architecture in the middle east or in the gulf

specifically. will take time. i think the 1st time was proposed by russia was probably more than 10 years ago so. we can discuss that in more detail but the monitoring system makes every sense the issue is how do you bring it about all but as a former un official documenting that is also an indication of how little trust russia or perhaps other countries in the best in the human ability to do that kind of investigative work because you know has a number of bodies to investigate chemical attacks and other sort of attacks. russia skepticism about the use of those mechanisms is well known don't you think that perhaps it's an indication that the un has not been doing its job if not properly with and off the neutrality of that country like russia with call for the creation of a at the in the other mechanism to do that what if if i'm not mistaken i think the

secretary general has already dispatched a team. to saudi arabia to verify what has happened i'm not aware of the russian proposal. is is designed for the un not to be involved and i'm not sure i mean i know russia has a right it's not that about not involving the united nations i think it's more about not trusting the results of its investigation and that the syrian war unfortunately provides a number of examples when major countries had drastically different opinions on what has happened despite all of them having security and intelligence sources on the ground well once again i mean. the best way to proceed is to have a regional understanding about this mechanism now could be under the auspices of the u.n. could be otherwise i think this is really for something russia house to i think explain a little bit more because i really. i don't know the details so i'm unable let me

ask you a somewhat different but related question that you know that russia has often been critical of the previous u.n. special envoy stuff and the mystery it suggested that perhaps sometimes he was stonewalling the process or that he wasn't fully neutral. you worked with him closely you just said in this interview that you believe that the constitutional committee could have been created earlier is it least part of the freshest criticism is every staff and dennis justify is it fair i wouldn't personalize it i've worked with close to friend in the story quite closely. his heart was in the right place and i think mr lavrov will say that quite clearly they had a very good relationship and they understood at the end of the day the special envoy whether it's the mr or or anybody else working on other issues. has to operate within the parameters set by the security council and its men and particular the 5

permanent members you cannot effectively discharge your mandate if you are unable to balance things between the 5 permanent members at least if not an entire security council so i think personalizing it is a bit too much i think if you asked the minister lavrov directly you will have a lot of praise. on the personal level just of a lot of people but i think you also ignore as if he is right to create criticize them when they're professional or whatever i mean i was in many meetings i mean probably all the meetings de mistura had with minister for all of. i think they were always very frank and friendly you don't have to agree with everything. but most meetings between de mistura and various secretaries of state again frank and friendly don't necessarily agree on everything. but i think he handled himself admirably given the context in which. operator which was on.

now let me also give you an ability to criticize russia for a change because i heard you say once that russia has a somewhat similar advantage with the united nations and has been trying to cultivate its compasses here of talking or it was being able to talk with all the players at least in the middle east do you think russia has used this capacity to the best of its ability well i mean let me put it this way russia is certainly not the only player in the middle east or others song. whatever russia tries to do is. subject to the actions of others now if you look at the various conflicts in the middle east i think. has been equidistant from from all the parties. i think the only exception is probably on the arab israeli or palestinian israeli conflict because there are clear security council resolutions and general assembly

resolution so russia's position there although it has excellent relations with the arabs and with the israelis probably in russia's relations with israel our best right now but it operates within a certain frameworks up by the security council in general assembly resolution when it comes to syria it supports the government but it has relations with the opposition has a very good relationship with the kurds. in yemen it has relations with the antagonists and tries to talk to them and even within the context of the. problems that you're having today between the between saudi arabia and. egypt and qatar. russia has taken a position that is balanced and tries to help both sides overcome the differences so clearly every country does what it is in its interest but it so happens it's

interesting for for it to have enough influence it has to be equidistant and i think it's it wasn't easy and i really have to. praise russia for being able to handle that over the long term because you can do that in short periods but russia has been able to come to think that this capacity if it's fully developed would also all kind of keep away from the un all that legitimacy because you can is it a make a case that for example be asked in the process and what russia and iran have been mate able to achieve so far should have been the u.n. job it should have been the u.n. it's it's. actually it's mandates you negotiate those issues rather than. individuals individual countries to do that and then serve as a sort of legitimizing force when much of their work is being done whereas the how would you split that mandate war and peace it's been the united nations as an organization that was specifically tasked with those issues. the initiative of

individual countries i would look at the most complementary i think the charter provides for others to operate even regional organizations there is no contradiction. if certain countries for example because of syria are able to get together and work out because there are other countries who have a presence on the ground and as a military dimension actually when as you know shies away from if they're able to do something and they have been able to accomplish quite a lot into the constitutional committee which is a by product of their efforts i think it helps the u.s. i mean i would not saying as as user playing the role for you when i would look at it on the contrary as complimenting the role of the u.n. when cannot do everything it needs as much help as they do anything though well when it comes to war and peace well i think what if you look at the history of what i'm going to look at the syrian conflict was i mean because the syrian conflict because of the various layers of the u.n.

and because of the 6 there is no agreement within the security council what do you expect the went to do i think what the u.n. has been able to do and i think that is extremely important is that to keep syria on the. international radar with all the suffering and tragedy that is happening you know sometimes people just forget about it and say look this is a conflict will not be resolved no i think you want was capable of keeping it on the radar but also there's another aspect which is screaming is the humanitarian assistance in spite of all what was happening the you went without the you when i think the situation would have been a lot worse in terms of the humanitarian situation in syria on both sides of the political divide so the u.n. does play a role but its role is a function of how the security council operates and as you know there has been much agreement and this could well at the recent tell now let's hope that i don't know.

exactly well ambassador it's been a great pleasure for me talking to you thank you very much for a great pleasure thank you very much for having me encourage our viewers to keep this conversation going on our social media pages. same place same time here in the world that are. just buy that will survive. when customers go buy. it now well reducing our. that's undercutting but what's good for markets it's not good

for the global economy. because they copied him he's so bored that even such a bad copy sending. i'm not up to me but he got on the field to find the next guy. who looked up live again in the human being done the infernal to feed the dog she even dumped the attempt. at. the click for the c.e.o. actually he has a deflection board as her to say. that is going to be better than i got out for me it's a good. sign he's innocent i'm going to going to. get

nothing like a. long long while the name. on the bottom is up in the street show my own kids who cannot all. handle a new person and they have to me move 100 gundy a new mower gun to run the seas christ to go to you then again mark you can't even join you. in this community there are people who believe that it's ok to suffer actually it's really hard there are no jobs and you see that i've got kids that ask and as a parent. i can come up with lots of arguments there's a lot of conflict in the game and between the 2 most of the conflict i would say

the most around morning and most of them is me. close one you know the children's o.c.d. know each other there's good business the state of california alone makes 6000000000 dollars you have to prison complex just to get some point in your life where. you don't care anymore nobody cares about you so you don't care mind anything. protection for the whistle blower out the hard sell for the trump impeachment inquiry and a dramatic departure from the way other kenyan foreman being treated there also coming up on the program. people in indiana around the world mark 150 years since the birth of. violent resistance office and the faced in some regions blighting celebrations.