I just watched Syrian President Bashar al-Assad be interviewed by ABC‘s Diane Sawyer. Assad has always struck me as a smooth talker, clearly someone who has mastered the art of political parlance. He is very adept at avoiding questions, hedging his answers, and playing to his audience.
When he talks about Iraq, for example, he manages to deny any culpability for insurgent violence while presenting himself as the only Arab leader who could possibly bring about an end to the conflict. In this interview, Assad did what he always does: he resolutely denied that his government allows insurgents to enter into Iraq, but he also argued that political pressure from Damascus might bring about an end to the bloodshed. This doesn’t really make sense, if you think about it. If his government does not support the insurgents nor any of the anti-government forces (which he claims), what leverage would Assad have to wage a peace agreement?