British media seek to belittle pres. Assad’s initiative for peace in Syria
From reactions to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s speech to the nation on Sunday, January 6, it appears that nothing might appease the Syrians’ foreign foes and their domestic stooges, but the toppling of the popular government of Bashar.
President Assad’s remarks showed that his government was seeking to end instability and insecurity across Syria by offering a comprehensive political process that includes referendum, elections and an amnesty for all.
Assad called for an end to foreign-backed terrorist acts inside Syria and urged “concerned states and parties” to stop funding, arming and harboring terrorists.
At the same time, he added that his government was always ready to hold talks with the opposition and will all political parties. President Assad pointed out that he would call for a “comprehensive national dialog” after foreign enemies end their support for the terror groups, and terrorist activities come to an end in the country.
However, Bashar al-Assad foreign foes reacted to his remarks scornfully and dismissively.
The enemies of Syria, in general, and the UK government, in particular, dismissed Bashar al-Assad’s new roadmap for peace and called on him to step down instead.
The president was accused of hypocrisy by British Foreign Secretary William Hague.
“Assad speech beyond hypocritical. Deaths, violence and oppression engulfing Syria are his own making, empty promises of reform fool no one,” he said in a message on Twitter.
The foreign secretary’s comments were enough for the British media to have their agenda and begin to undermine the initiative brought up by the leader of a crisis-hit country to alleviate his people’s sufferings.
The UK’s print media put, undermining Bashar al Assad’s initiative for peace, top on their agenda in line with the coalition government’s policy.
The Guardian carried a report entitled: “Opposition denounces president’s peace plan as ’empty rhetoric’ as Assad pledges to stay and continue fighting ‘terrorist’ violence”.
The report also said: “It was hard to see how his [Bashar’s] latest speech offered even a glimmer of hope for a way out of the bloody impasse between the regime and rebels in a conflict that the UN said last week had claimed 60,000 lives over 21 months.”
“The overtures that Assad offered – a national reconciliation conference, elections and a new constitution – were reminiscent of symbolic changes and concessions offered previously in the uprising that began in March 2011. Those were rejected at the time as too little, too late”, said a report carried by The Huffingtonpost on its website.
The Daily Telegraph used the U.S. reaction to President Assad’s speech in its first report on the issue.
It said: “Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s road map to end the civil war ravaging his country is “detached from reality” and he should step down, the US State Department has said.”
The Daily Mail interpreted the initiative for peace as “defiance of a dictator”, adding that it was “President Assad’s sabre-rattling speech…..”.
The coverage by the British media of the developments in Syria is yet another example of double-standards exercised by the West in the Middle East region.
It comes as the Syrian government insists that the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, with multiple reports confirming that a very large number of the terrorists fighting the government of president Bashar al-Assad are foreign nationals.
However, it is to the best interests of the Syrian people, now that president Bashar al Assad has stretched a hand for dialogue once more, all parties to the conflict, including opposition groups as well as regional and international players, to seize the opportunity and step forward to resolve the crisis and provide the ground for a purely Syrian resolution to take effect to prevent further bloodshed and instability gaining ground in an already volatile region.
Syria has been experiencing unrest since mid-March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of security personnel, have been killed in the violence.