"We have always – since the beginning of this narrative regarding the chemical weapons – we have said that we didn’t use it; we cannot use it, it’s impossible to be used in our situation for many reasons, let’s say – logistical reasons.


One reason, a very simple one: when you’re advancing, why would you use chemical weapons?!  We are advancing, why do we need to use it?!  We are in a very good situation so why use it, especially in 2018?  This is one reason.


Second, very concrete evidence that refutes this narrative: when you use chemical weapons – this is a weapon of mass destruction, you talk about thousands of dead or at least hundreds.  That never happened, never – you only have these videos of staged chemical weapons attacks.  In the recent report that you’ve mentioned, there’s a mismatch between what we saw in the video and what they saw as technicians or as experts.  The amount of chlorine that they’ve been talking about: first of all, chlorine is not a mass destruction material, second, the amount that they found is the same amount that you can have in your house, it exists in many households and used maybe for cleaning and whatever.  The same amount exactly.  That’s what the OPCW organisation did – they faked and falsified the report, just because the Americans wanted them to do so.  So, fortunately, this report proved that everything we said during the last few years, since 2013, is correct.  We were right, they were wrong. This is proof, this is concrete proof regarding this issue.  So, again, the OPCW is biased, is being politicized and is being immoral, and those organisations that should work in parallel with the United Nations to create more stability around the world – they’ve been used as American arms and Western arms to create more chaos."


President Assad's RAI TV Interview,  December 9, 2019.


"The war in Syria was about capturing the hearts of the people, and you cannot capture the hearts of the people by bombarding them.  The Syrian army was fighting the terrorists, whether there is side fire that affected some civilians, that could have happened and you can have investigation, but how could Syrian people support their state and their president and their army, if they are killing them"

President Assad interview with RT-UK TV Channel, November 11, 2019.

"The funny thing about that date is that it is the same date when the first delegation, the international delegation that came to Syria to investigate the incident arrived to Damascus, which is only few kilometers from this place; and logically, the Syrian army, if we supposed that it has chemical weapons, it wants to use it, it would not use it on that day, this is first.  Second, they talked about two hundred civilians killed. If you use chemical weapons, you may kill tens of thousands in such area where people are living very close to each other, I mean it’s a crowded area.  Third, that incident only existed in the mind of the Western officials; it’s a narrative that was the pretext to attack Syria.  That’s what I mean. They did not offer any tangible evidence to prove that there was such an attack, and there were many reports that have refuted that report or those allegations.  So, it was only allegation; never, never has the Syrian army used chemical weapons before we handed over all arsenals to the international committee."

President Assad interview with RT-UK TV Channel, November 11, 2019.

"Actually, we invited them to come because we told them, you should come and investigate because we were hundred percent sure that these are allegations; but, of course, the delegation, not always, unbiased, they are mostly biased."

"Why they don’t show it?!  Now, it’s been since 2013, we’ve been here, in the same allegation, couldn’t they prove it after six years?  And every time they say, Syria has used chemical weapons.  Is it possible to be under this precise, let’s say, supervision by the whole Western world and we’re going to use it again and again?!  This is not rational; I mean the whole story, we don’t need it, we are advancing.  Every time they talk about using the chemical weapons, it is when we advance, not when we lose.  I mean, even militarily, you may use, if you want to use such a weapon, I’m not talking about the Syrian Army, because we don’t have it anymore, but logically, you can use it when you’re losing ground, not when you’re advancing."

President Assad interview with RT-UK TV Channel, November 11, 2019.


"This depends on the extent to which the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will provide Syria with the necessary equipment to carry out the process. So far, the process of making this equipment available has been quite slow. On the other hand, as you know dismantling and neutralizing the chemical materials is not taking place inside Syria nor by the Syrian state. A number of countries in different parts of the world have accepted to carry out that process; some have agreed to deal with the less dangerous materials, whilst others have refused completely. Since, the timeframe is dependent on these two factors - the role of the OPCW and the countries that accept to neutralize the materials on their territories – it is not for Syria to determine a timeframe on this issue. Syria has honoured its part by preparing and collecting data and providing access to inspectors who verified this data and inspected the chemical agents. The rest, as I said, is up to the other parties."

From President Bashar al-Assad’s interview with Agence France Presse AFP 20-01-2014.

 "Our relationship on this issue will be with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Syria is not required to provide guarantees to the world or to the organization, it is required to deal with specific mechanisms or to abide by specific mechanisms stipulated in the chemical weapons convention. And as I said before, Syria is committed to all agreements it signs."

Interview with TeleSUR TV, September 26, 2013

"We also have the confessions of the terrorists who brought some chemical agents from neighboring countries into Syria. These confessions were broadcast on television about a week ago."

Interview with TeleSUR TV, September 26, 2013

"Any country or army which possesses chemical weapons, generally has special protection measures to stop the weapons from falling into terrorist or enemy hands. We are not worried about this problem. Our chemical weapons are stored at safe places that are perfectly controlled by Syrian army."

CCTV Interview, September 23, 2013

"Last week we joined the international agreement of preventing chemical WMDs, and part of this agreement, the main part, is to not to manufacture these armaments, not to store, and not to use, and of course not to distribute, and part of it is to get rid of those materials, the chemical materials. Of course, when we are part now of this agreement, we have to agree on that chapter."

Interview with Fox News, September 19, 2013

"In one word, we didn’t use any chemical weapons in the Ghouta, because if you want to use it, you would harm your troops, you would have harmed tens of thousands of civilians living in Damascus."

Interview with Fox News, September 19, 2013

"Over 10 years ago, Syria presented the UN with a proposal for a WMD-Free Middle East; this was because the region is turbulent and has been immersed in wars for decades. Thus removing unconventional weapons would be rational in order to enhance stability, at that particular time the U.S hindered the proposal."

Interview with Rossiya 24 TV channel, September 12, 2013

"The fact that Russia has proven itself to have an insight into events in the region with high credibility as a reliable major power encouraged Syria to work towards signing the Chemical Weapons Convention."

Interview with Rossiya 24 TV channel, September 12, 2013

"When we proposed a project on the elimination of WMDs in the region, the US opposed it; one of the reasons was to allow Israel to possess such weapons. If we desire stability in the Middle East, all countries in the region should adhere to these agreements, and Israel is the first that should do so, since Israel has nuclear, chemical, biological and other types of weapons of mass destruction. No country should possess weapons of mass destruction. That would protect the region and the world from devastating and expensive wars in future."

Interview with Rossiya 24 TV channel, September 12, 2013


''We are against any nuclear weapons in the region.  We have Syrian draft in the Security Council since 2003, about freeing the Middle East from any WMDs, of course, including Israel.  But we cannot talk about Iran destabilizing the region if they have — if you presume they’re going to have nuclear bomb, something I don’t believe in.  Why ignoring Israel?  Israel started this problem — Israel is the only country who has nuclear bomb in the region, not Iran.''

From H.E.'s PBS Interview  (May 28, 2010) 

 "We agree on the right of all countries to possess peaceful nuclear energy, in addition to freeing the Middle East from all weapons of mass destruction… Syria's viewpoint is that they should begin with inspection in Israel, and then they can talk about the remaining countries."

 From H.E.'s Press Conference with His Turkish Counterpart, H.E. President Gul, (May 8, 2010)

  ''We are among countries that signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and any initiative must be built on this agreement which clearly entitles any country to possess peaceful nuclear energy while at the same time defining mechanisms to monitor the activities of this country,''

 From H.E.'s Press Conference with His Turkish Counterpart, H.E. President Gul, (May 8, 2010)  

''The problem that this file has been going through for years, along with the whole region, is that countries which came up with initiatives, especially western countries, have bypassed the NPT with respect to monitoring and brought the issue outside the IAEA to the Security Council, and when it comes to the content of the initiatives presented by these countries there was ambiguity regarding any country which possesses this energy and replaced this reference with trust and that we trust or don't trust this country…A simple question: Who trusts these countries in the first place, and who gave them right to tell who is to be trusted and who is not?

 From H.E.'s Press Conference with His Turkish Counterpart, H.E. President Gul, (May 8, 2010)


''We have a clear stance in Syria: we do not wish to see any nuclear bombs in the Middle East Region; there is no need for this. Of course, we also do not want to see the nuclear weapons, which Israel possesses. I do not think that Iran is seeking to possess a nuclear bomb; it does not need that. Iran demands her right to the technology level only. Syria and Turkey are signatories of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT); and every country has the right to develop a peaceful nuclear program and to enrich Uranium. I reiterate once more that there is no need whatsoever for any party in the region to possess a nuclear bomb.''

From His Excellency's Interview with the Turkish 'Hurriyet' Daily, (November 8, 2009)

 ''I reiterated Syria's firm stance as far as the freeing of the Middle East region from Mass Destruction Weapons.''

From His Excellency's Press Conference with the Croatian President, (October 28, 2009)

 ''Dealing with whatever nuclear file in any place of the world should not be subjugated to the personal mood of officials, or to a specific political agenda. It should be dealt with in accordance with the Non-Proliferation treaty stipulations. In Syria, we have declared principles as far as nuclear issues, and Mass Destruction Weapons in the Middle East. Syria for long has been calling for the freeing of the Middle East from Mass Destruction Weapons; Syria in /2003/, as a non-permanent UN Security Council member at that time presented a draft law, a project as to free the Middle East from Mass Destruction Weapons; this Syrian project is still in the UN drawers! Due to the lack of support by the basic States for this project, and in contradiction with what they talk about as far as the issue of Iran!''

From His Excellency's Press Conference with the Finnish President, (October 22, 2009) 

“That uranium did not come from us. Perhaps, the Israelis dropped it from the air to make us the target of precisely these suspicions. If we had in fact had something to hide, we would not have allowed any inspectors into the country.”

From His Excellency Der Spiegel Interview, (January 19, 2009) 

  “Mohammad El-Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], has denied the existence of nuclear installations or of a nuclear reactor, as the IAEA has also. This naturally corresponds to what Syria announced earlier several times following the Israeli raid. It’s a question of a military position, and we didn’t say it was a civilian position, but it has never been a nuclear site. The statements of Baradei have settled the matter. Before the visit of the IAEA’s inspectors we were giving continuous explanations and after the inspectors took samples from the river and the building itself and performed analysis and tests, none of the Israeli and US pretexts and lies turned out to be true.”

 From His Excellency Monday Morning Interview, (September 30, 2008) 

 “The Syrian stance stems from the necessity of freeing the Middle East from Mass Destruction Weapons; this means that Israel should not possess nuclear bomb; hence it is the only state in the Middle East  that has nuclear bomb; Israel itself has initiated such a kind of a race,”

From His Excellency Interview given to the Iranian TV  (September 17, 2008)

 “We support every country in the world to have peaceful power, and not Iran only. We do stand against Mass Destruction Weapons (MDW); we have presented in 2003 a draft to the United Nations Security Council for the disarmament of MDW; this draft was shelved! Who opposed it was the United States, because it includes Israel. As for us, we are against MDW, whether for Iran , Israel, or for any country.”

 From His Excellency Interview given to the Qatari ‘Al-Wtan’ Daily  (April 27th 2008) 

"I think Iran is a strong country without nuclear weapons. Secondly, we do not think the Middle East needs more troubles. Thirdly, we submitted a draft resolution to the Security Council to make the Middle East a zone free of Weapons of Mass Destruction. That is how we see it as Syria."

From HE’s Interview with PBS TV, (March 30, 2006)  


"As for Iran's nuclear subject, Iran has the right to possess nuclear power for peaceful purposes according to international conventions.‏‏ ‏ Iran says this explicitly and implicitly that its target is a peaceful nuclear power and not the military. The justification, which we hear from some foreign officials, is that they fear of Iran's possession of military nuclear power. Let us suppose that this wording is correct. What about Israel's nuclear weapons? They say Israel possesses hundreds of nuclear warheads.‏‏ ‏ If we are anxious, we have to be so from Israel, firstly because it is the only party in the Middle East which possesses the nuclear weapons.‏‏ "

From HE’s Interview with Turkish TV‏ , (December 28, 2005)

"On the other hand, Syria's stand was and is still for freeing the Middle East region from all all weapons of mass destruction. In 2003, we submitted a proposal to the Security Council, when Syria was a temporary member-state to make the Middle East region free of WMDs.‏‏ ‏ This proposal was firstly rejected by the US.‏‏ ‏ If they were anxious about the presence of WMDs, let them approve the Syrian proposal, or to keep dealing with the region in double-standards, may be much more double. They have scores of standards as I believe. This wording will not reach a result.‏‏ ‏"

From HE’s Interview with Turkish TV‏ , (December 28, 2005)


"As to the nuclear issue, we cannot talk about this issue in terms of how one country is thinking. We have to look at it in the larger framework of the Middle East. First, if the nuclear issue is within the peaceful framework, it is the right of every country in this world. There is nothing that prevents any country in the world from possessing nuclear reactors for peaceful purposes. And Iran says clearly that it wants this reactor for peaceful purposes. It says this in public and behind closed doors. ‏" ‏

From HE’s Interview with Russian TV, (December 12, 2005)


"As to the nuclear weapons issue, which is the point you raised, we hear this talked about in order to mean that Iran wants the peaceful reactor in order to obtain nuclear weapons. We cannot look at the question in this way. We have to think in a more comprehensive manner. We have to see the whole region. If we do not want to consider the issue on the international level, let us at least look at the Middle East. If we say that in the Middle East there is one state which has the right to possess nuclear weapons, then all states have that right. If we do not want to see nuclear weapons in any state in the Middle East, we have to carry out a disarmament operation in all these countries, and I mean Israel here. Israel is the only country in the Middle East which possesses nuclear weapons. We in Syria launched an initiative at the Security Council in 2003 in order to make the whole Middle East free of mass destruction weapons.‏ ‏ "

From HE’s Interview with Russian TV, (December 12, 2005)


"We in Syria thought that there should not be any mass destruction weapons, including nuclear weapons in the Middle East. But it is not sufficient to look at this issue from a theoretical perspective. There has to be practical application. If some countries are concerned because they suspect that a certain country, Iran or any other country, wants to possess nuclear weapons, they should use the same logic with Israel. Otherwise, decades later this region will be unstable and any technology will in the end be transferred to other places. I am not talking now about the near future. This might happen decades later and the world will pay the price one day. That is why it is better to take up the Syrian initiative at the Security Council, which was obstructed by the United States. I believe that it is better for all the countries of the world to support this initiative and to introduce amendments which can of course be subject to discussion.‏" ‏

From HE’s Interview with Russian TV, (December 12, 2005)  




"Our response to the accusations directed against us came in the form of a draft resolution proposed to the UN Security Council to remove the mass destruction weapons from the entire region. The Americans opposed it and were very upset. We have been raising this issue for a long time, and we have big interest in it, so do countries of the region with the exception of Israel. We are in a state of war with Israel, so this must be within the framework of a comprehensive work. The problem between us and Israel is not only a military parity. I think the most dangerous problem is the political parity and the balance of forces in general, including the economic, technological and social balance.”

 From HE’s Interview with Al-Arabia TV, ( June 10, 2003)


 "Besides, while refraining from joining of Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, Israel continues its threats to use mass destruction weapons generously offered by the United States of America."

From HE’s Message to the 15th World Festival of Youths and Students, (August 8, 2001)

Dr. Mohammad Abdo Al-Ibrahim


Web Site

hafez al assad speech