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 were talking of later all he was advising them merican president as well but in the middle east its its not just the region its 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. They were designed to change things in syria its understandable that at the time it was the beginning of the arab spring and everybody thought that this was the tide of history things got more complicated i think people structure wiser positions and understood that the continuation of syrian conflict are a continuation is in no ones interests including the neighbors quite frankly youre a big very diplomatic as understandable but let me put it in stark returns because i also. Invested in syria i covered this call came from the very beginning i saw its transition that 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 60. Everyone and i think some are prepared to admit that they made mistakes because they are revising their policy and. Now i dont 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 an arms length they allowed the regional allies to take care of sticks. And thats where things got complicated there were a number of opportunities like you said earlier there were a number of opportunities to resign. The conflict there were number of opportunities if were if they were seized and there were serious attempts by moscow and washington to solve the problem and i was witness to a number of them and could have been possible and would have shortened the war and would have saved a lot of lives theres no dont 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 were specifically kurdish groups in this and syria are not represented there do you think it has any impact on the legitimacy all of that word that the committee is now task for it well let me tell you having been involved in this exercise for 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 mandate in terms of reference and they are published it alludes to the fact that things can change in terms of composition and 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 is that we are 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 2255. 00 which would see absolute. Respect for the target and the prince and territory interpret it was for now. The committee will be tasked with drafting a new constitution and eventually im not sure no no no because again i think this has to be very clear. The framework for the solution is. 2254. 00 and when it comes what 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 very clear the government of syria has made very clear that they are talking about. Discussing the president. Whereas the opposition has a new front structure so this is an issue i think the committee itself will have to decide the composition of this committee it 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 socalled 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 this 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 5th of independence i do not 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 have ideas and can make a contribution to one 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 you going to talk i heard you say one of the panels that the information of this committee would imply that all sides accept each other as an interlocutor or is it a genuine legitimate interlocutor does it mean that you have full confidence in this Syrian Government allowing this process. Children authentically without trying to influence their weight. Deems necessary because obviously it is in the strongest position now than its ever been the last 8 years do you think that will impact its ability to run the constitutional process and to impose its own well i mean this pretty much depends on the International Community and the regional powers how theyre going to be able to handle that now to deal with the coming obviously its understandable that the government would like to control look and push it in a certain direction theres no doubt about that on our interest and im sure the opposition would 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 thats why maybe the agreement was reached only know that it can. Ensure 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 else resolution spoke of as constitution reform so it is going to be an interesting exercise like anything else its based on compromise and lets see how things will evolve to one of these well for the time being. Bester we have to take a very very short break but we will be back in just a few moments. And were going to fulfill repeated promises oh politics to the people and come on you know weve all pots. Pretty. Much. Pretty good. You want to. Know. I can link up my time after time corporations repeat the same mantra sustainability its very important to accelerate transitions to sustainable transport sustainability. More equitable and sustainable well. They claim their production is completely harmless. Because. It. Companies want us to feel good about buying their products while the damage is being done far away this is Something Else this must be going to mean and i mean look if. You listen to me. Didnt. Seem to. Understand that so going in. Is youll be a reflection of reality. In a world transformed. What will make you feel safe from. Isolation or community. Are you going the right way or are you being led so. What is true what is. In the world corrupted you need to descend. To join us in the depths. Or a maybe in the shallows. Welcome back to worlds apart where runs the assailant in the ramsey former deputy special envoy for the u. N. Secretary general and Syrian Ambassador as the war in syria hopefully winding down there is another political and geopolitical confrontation brewing up and the region i mean between iran and the United States and its allies do you do you think this 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 is interconnected answer but ive seen some. News in the past few days or hope that what we had always felt. Is probably going to. Happen is that there is a desire by both washington and tehran to deescalate oh really you know so i just hope. 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 but quite beyond seoul and im hoping that. It will be pursued by france and others to make sure that. The you know there is no confrontation between the United States well im 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 weve seen a number of. Quite mysterious attacks still inexplicable attacks taking place in the region the latest one being a big 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 im referring to is a development in the past few years after these attacks. I think i dont think its in the interest of iran or the United States travel confrontation. Probably both are looking for a way out. But i think theyre going to look for a way out now because 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 employer. So the latest news that our per. Actually. Both are looking at a way out now problem the problem is. You know you dont necessarily go to war in tantrum i sometimes and you sleep walk into a war and i think this trip. Now speaking about those provocations our contest that russia has recently suggested 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 this idea and most importantly do you think it could be free of political and geopolitical manipulation. Well of course im not familiar with the details of the whole island does even to the russians and the familiar with the 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 u. N. Official document that is also an indication of how little trust russia or perhaps other countries in the best in the u. N. Ability to do that kind of investigative work because you know has a number of bodies to investigate chemical attacks. And the other sort of attacks. Russias skepticism about the use of those mechanisms is well known dont you think that perhaps its an indication that the un has not been doing its job if not properly with and nuff neutrality of that country like russia with call for the creation of free up the in the other mechanism to do that what well if if im not mistaken i think the secretary general has already dispatched a team. To saudi arabia to verify what has happened im not aware of the russian proposal. Is is designed for the un not to be involved and im not sure i mean i know russia has a right its not that about not involving the United Nations i think its 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 or otherwise i think this is really for something russia house to i think explain a little bit more because i really dont know the details so im unable of it 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 is that and the mystery it suggested that perhaps sometimes he was told stonewalling the process or that he wasnt fully neutral on certain issues you worked with him closely you just said in this interview that you believe that the Constitutional Committee could have been created earlier is at least part of the freshest criticism of the staff and dennis justified is it fair i wouldnt personalize it ive worked in close. A 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 its 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 Security Council so i think personalizing it is a bit too much i think if you as minister lavrov directly you will have a lot of praise haswell i mean on a personal level just a lot of people but i think you also ignore as if he is right to create criticize them when theyre professional or whatever i mean i was in many meetings i mean probably all the meetings de mistura had with minister lavrov. I think they were always very frank and friendly you dont have to agree with everything. But most meetings between de mistura and various secretaries of state again frank and friendly dont necessarily agree on everything. But i think he handled himself admirably given the context in which you operate and which was not. 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 capacity 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 there are others so. 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 russia has been equidistant from from all the parties. I think the only exception is probably on the arab israeli or sitting israeli conflict because there are clear Security Council resolutions and General Assembly resolution so russias position there although it has excellent relations with the arabs and with the israelis probably in russias relations with israel our best right now but it operates within a certain frameworks up by the Security Council of General Assembly resolutions 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