 Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us for this session on Safeguarding Syria. My name is Lara Satrakhan. I'm the executive editor of NewsDeeply. This session will no longer be broadcast on Dubai TV, but it will be webcast live on webforum.org, and you can watch it on demand on the World Economic Forum's website after this session. We come to this panel discussion with a heavy heart and with a heavy sense of humility. The Syrian civil war has taught us our collective limitations. It's taught us the limitations of the global system, its failure to stop Syria's slide toward disintegration, a failure to stop the bloodshed of well over 100,000 people, and a failure to find leadership and consensus enough to take clear, coordinated action on a diplomatic level to solve Syria's crisis. What's unfolded as a result is one of the great human tragedies of our time. It's a humanitarian crisis with the geopolitical consequences that will echo for generations. And those two dimensions, the human suffering and the security catastrophe, those ramifications, are profoundly intertwined. The misery of Syrians cannot be ignored, both for the humane reasons of our own compassion and also for the practical consequences on regional stability. More than 1.5 million refugees have fled Syria. More than 4 million are displaced inside the country. The UN has talked of having to scale back assistance for lack of funding, for pledges of aid unfulfilled. Looking at conditions on the ground, we see potentially epidemic levels of disease in Syria come summer. Strict sanitation, clean water, has completely broken down in some areas. Syrian doctors tell me they're bracing for cholera. They're already seeing a spike in cases of leshmaniasis, a disease unique to Aleppo province. How will this region cope? How can the international community effectively intervene? What is the right role for players stakeholders like the U.S., Russia and the Arab League? And to paraphrase our program here today, how can stakeholders secure Syria's economic political and social viability as a state when the state itself is arguably falling apart? We'll put that to our distinguished panelists today. I'm pleased to be joined by Alex Alenikov, Deputy High Commissioner for Refugees at UNHCR. Father Paolo Dalolio, a priest with the Syriac Catholic Church. He also goes by Abuna Paolo. He has spent so much of his life in Syria that that's really become his moniker. Sara Lee Whitson, the Executive Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Human Rights Watch. And Salman Sheikh, the Director for the Brookings Doha Center in Qatar. Thank you so much for joining us. Let's start with you, Alex. What is the state of play for Syrian refugees? How is this crisis taking a toll on regional players, both inside the camps and out? You've painted the basic humanitarian crisis here of 1.5 million refugees already who have fled Syria. Our predictions are that if the current rate of departure, and we see no reason why that wouldn't stay where it is, will be at 3 million refugees by the end of the year. Already in Lebanon and Jordan, more than 450,000 refugees, in Turkey over 300,000, in Iraq another 154,000, and then about 80,000 in Egypt. And these numbers will continue to rise. What's important to see in the crisis, particularly for Jordan and for Lebanon, is that most of the refugees are not living in camps. People tend to think refugees flee over borders or put in refugee camps and cared for by the international community. In Lebanon, there are more than 1,000 sites that refugees have settled in, all through the country. Same in Jordan. There are camps in Jordan, but they only take about 25% of the population. This has led to a tremendous burden on local communities, for the refugees themselves to find a place to stay. People are living in really terrible shelter situations. But also for the host communities who have been very generous in accepting refugees, first actually taking people into their own homes and then subsequently assisting them. But we are reaching points of really difficulties of absorption. There are tens of thousands of more children in local schools. The refugee and water resources are being severely affected. Rents have gone up dramatically, wages have dramatically declined. So the ripple effect of this through the community, certainly huge, huge burdens on the refugees themselves, the people that give up everything to flee. But then the ripple of flex into the host communities has also been dramatic. What does that do to the social fabric in those communities? Both the tension between the refugees, the local population, the refugees themselves with these spikes in domestic violence, signs of strain that you never expect? So far, things have gone really remarkably well. As I say, the host communities have been incredibly generous to accepting the refugees and making a home for them. The question is how long that will be sustained. There are indications of increasing tensions in some of the local communities over the things that I've described, schools and infrastructure, which may become worse over summer. Certainly it takes a psychological toll, particularly on people who have been displaced from their homes and those issues then get worked out in unfortunate ways. Abuna Paolo, inside the country, how are people coping day to day? How do you feed your family in the context of this fierce battle? The humanitarian disaster is already, there is huge. But nevertheless, our youth, if they would be here, they will say priority to the right of self-determination of the people, priority to our rights of democracy, priority to human rights in Syria. The humanitarian emergency, huge, awful, cannot hide the decision of the people of Syria to change and is often used just to say, stop the fight, please. The people of Syria say no way back. In those days, the Syrian civil war is now a civil, regional war because of the lack of responsibilities of the stakeholder, both on regional and global level. The humanitarian situation is not because of a tornado, it's not because of perhaps quick, it's because of political enormous responsibility on regional and global level. Sarah Lee, you have documented abuses on both sides of the battle lines. What are you seeing in this dissent to brutality? Well, on the side of the Syrian government, we have seen an incredible level of indiscriminate and in some cases deliberate bombardment of civilian areas. In some cases, in terms of aerial bombardment, which in fact has been responsible for less than four percent of the civilian deaths, the vast majority of deaths from indiscriminate attacks are from the artillery strikes that the government has launched indiscriminately. So where the government might think there's fighting, where the government might think is a rebel-held area, they will generally let loose all of their firepower, including quite wide-scale use of cluster munitions in civilian areas, which of course have long-term effects, long-lasting effects. We also have had thousands and thousands of people arbitrarily arrested and detained. Just a few weeks ago in Raqqa, our team came upon some torture devices in one of the government intelligence security centers. Torture devices that Syrian victims had been describing to us for such a long time, but we were actually able to gather these machines used to stretch people to death or to torture them typically to make false confessions. On the rebel side, we've also documented very serious abuses, particularly deaths of soldiers in captivity, deaths in custody, torture and abuses. And of course, recently the now infamous video that we documented of the mutilation of a corpse resulting in the cannibalism by a rebel soldier. And you know, it's, I think, important in any conflict to highlight and to know where the vast majority of the criminal acts of the acts that violate international humanitarian law are coming from, and they are overwhelmingly at the hands of the government. The government has the vast majority of the firepower, and the government has chosen to use that firepower in a reckless, indiscriminate way, and in some cases, particularly in the cases of 12 bakeries that the government targeted over a course of 48 hours attacking, using artillery and air strikes to bombard people waiting in line for bread. One point I want to also emphasize, because it's gotten so much media attention, and I think it's just a note of caution in terms of how important it is to actually get the facts and the evidence of what's happening on the ground are the allegations of wide-scale rape in Syria. This is not something that we have been able to verify or document just as we were not able to verify or document it in Libya. And I just want to express a word of caution in terms of relying on information that has not actually been verified by witnesses. Wherever the violence began, and however asymmetrical it may or may not be, this sense of abuse is now on both sides of the fight has made it so hard for so many Syrians to wrap their head around what's really going on. What is the fallout of that, of seeing both sides commit arguably or potentially crimes against humanity? Well, from our discussions with people in rebel-held areas, particularly in Aleppo, what we see is that it's not just about the violations of human rights or the outright abuses of torture and killings by the rebels that are scaring people off, but rather it's the nature of some of the rebel groups as extremists, as extreme Islamists, and the future that they're promising for Syrians, particularly in Aleppo, that I think has lost a lot of support. And as probably in any situation, the worst face, no matter how small a percentage of the fighting it may be, becomes the dominant one. And so for many Syrians, they have reluctantly made a choice that they would rather have the devil they know than these more fanatical Islamists who they feel are not foreigners to their struggle. Salman, I know you've looked at this quite a bit, the mix of fighting forces on the ground in Syria. How big a role do extremist groups play? How much of a threat are they to Syria's future? Or is it somehow, as times you've argued, somewhat overplayed in the media? Well, first of all, it's good to be with you and good to be with the other panelists. Yes, there's a lot played about the extremist groups. I think Jabhat al-Nusra, for example, is probably no more than about 2,000 to 3,000 people. Hardcore, most of them are either foreign or have come from Iraq in that core group. Of course, the regime has had a hand in this regard. The tribal figures who were on that border with Iraq were telling us a year and a half ago, these people are coming back. We saw them go one way. They're coming back. Maliki's turning a blind eye. And so the regime has helped to create, in my view, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Now, of course, it's got much worse than that. And the ranks of more extremist groups are being swelled by Syrians, poor Syrians, desperate Syrians, particularly in areas in the north and the east of the country. And I have very little doubt that many of those people would choose another way if they could find a way to protect themselves, to bring about their livelihood, to get the kind of relief that they need. But that kind of organization has been lacking on what is called the so-called moderate side. But, you know, when we talk about extremism and we talk about foreign fighters, we cannot get away from the fact that there are probably 5,000 Hezbollah fighters right now who have come across from Lebanon. There are probably 5,000 more, I've been told, being prepared to come to fight in places like Dara and in Aleppo. We can't get away from the fact that there are probably 1,500 to 2,000 IDRC-backed fighters, trained fighters that have come from Iraq, Sadrists, and others. So this, as is being said, is becoming a much more of a regional conflict. In fact, what we are seeing, if we're talking about the extremes, is a fight between Hezbollah, Iran, and its backers, and in Syria, where al-Qaeda meets. And this is now, I'm afraid, a situation which can take not just Syria into an abyss, but also the entire region. The region is on a knife edge. And we wake up this morning and find that there are now rockets going into parts of Beirut and across again into the Hommel area. And it is this fight between extremes which we've got to get away from. We've got to find a way to reclaim both the project to save Syria as well as the entire region. Salman, it's quite sobering because you and I have been talking for two years and you keep describing how the situation will descend without any sort of coordinated diplomatic action. And you were right along the way, and unfortunately we've seen the worst-case scenario in your mind play out. But now going into this somewhat hopeful, if cautiously optimistic push for a new round of diplomatic talks, the Geneva II talks where they're being called, can you give us a snapshot of what kind of diplomatic momentum might be there? Yes. You know, just on the first point, I have been saying for a year and a half now, if we're not careful, if we allow the Syrian situation to drift, containment is not an option, it has to be towards a resolution. If we're not careful, Syria can act as a catalyst for a zone of conflict from the eastern Mediterranean shore to the Gulf waters. And that is precisely what is happening. And I say this, knowing that it's going to be very hard to stop it now, who can stop it? If we see three concurrent civil wars in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, for example. With regards to the diplomatic push, I know there's a lot being discussed with regard to Geneva. I actually want to quote to you something that I was told last night by a friend, a Quentyn's colleague in Damascus, who frankly is pretty close to elements of the regime, not because he's a supporter, but just because he happens to be there and knows these people. And he said to me, look, if anyone thinks that this regime is taking Geneva seriously, they're beeping crazy. They're not, they're not taking Geneva seriously. The delegation that they send, if they do send one, will be something so weak that it shouldn't be taken, being able to have any empowered way of negotiating. Secondly, the regime is insisting that Assad stays, that there will be elections next year. And what I'm being told is that the outcome of those elections are probably already decided. Seventy-seventy-five percent will vote for Bashar al-Assad. It's already been calculated that six to seven million people will not be able to vote. They're either displaced or across the borders. And the ones who will be most likely to be able to vote are the ones in the cities. And yes, there is a large gray area here of Syrians who have not gone either way. And certainly in that environment, we're not going to see them sticking their heads up and voting to get rid of Bashar. Alex, you're hearing this, and I'm sure it's very sobering for you. This is going to be a driver of a humanitarian catastrophe. You're trying, you're struggling now to stem. You've talked of, the UN has talked of borrowing from other budgets to help Syrians. Why the shortfall? Why has it been so hard to rally help to this cause? Well, first, let me say that we're aware of these numbers and these predictions, which is why in a few weeks we'll be releasing what will be called the Regional Relief Plan Five. It's our fifth iteration of that. It'll be in the several billion of dollars that we'll be identifying as needs for the rest of the year. We have raised substantial amounts of money so far. There's more to be done. I think an international commitment makes those numbers actually realistic. I think we could get to that point if there's a commitment from governments and also from, now that I'm speaking at the World Economic Forum here, from the private sector, which has been largely absent so far in the fundraising, but there are tremendous resources represented in this room and this conference that if pooled together could make a really huge difference on the humanitarian side. Short of that, what we need to do is we prioritize our work and obviously we prioritize it towards emergency care and lifesaving activity, but there are many other needs, whether it's education or as I mentioned, psychosocial work or others, livelihoods work, community building so the communities don't fall apart with the influx that needs to be done, but ultimately the answer here has got to start with a commitment by the international community to end the violence one way or another, but if I could just take one more second. I'm going a little further than your question. Even if the violence were to stop today or soon, the impact, the consequences of it will be felt for years. There's no reason to think that people will begin to immediately return to Syria given whatever divisions remain there, but also the destruction of homes and communities and livelihoods, and I think we're facing a situation of massive displacement for years to come in the region that has to be factored into the long-term consequences here. We are still wrapping up the Balkan displacement from the 1990s. These processes last a long time and will be with us for a long time and will need to be dealt with and supported for a long time, but that means also opportunities for investment, if I can use that word here for solving these problems at the local level. Sarah Lee, when you look to the long run, how do you foresee a Syria that can pull itself back together again on a social level, on a political level, when there have been so many abuses and so much distrust on every side? Well, one would have to take a very, very long-term view, and one need only look at Iraq and the situation in Iraq, 10 years after a full-scale military intervention, 10 years after a brutal civil war, after a very, very short window of relative peace. The country is on the brink of civil war again with the number of deaths and killings in the past month rising to the levels of the height of the civil war. There are no easy answers to this, and since I don't realistically see the international community taking a long-term view, for example, a long-term peacekeeping force presence throughout Syria, I think that we have to anticipate that the conflict in Syria will last quite a long time, regardless of what any immediate victory outcomes look like. Abuna Paolo, I know many people are referred to you as the revolutions priest, we know where you stand very passionately, but when you look at Syrian society as you've come to know it, how do you see sides coming together again? Is there a middle that can create some understanding? I was north of Aleppo with a man called Jihad Rezaal. He had lost his brother in the battle and he has lost his arm in the battle, and we were working in an initiative to propose reconciliation to his Shiite neighbors, and even to ask the Kurds that are in the area to be the moderator of the reconciliation. He lost his second brother in that day, and the second day he was in front of the television saying, this is our hand, come to reconciliation. Those are real Syrians. We need a real court of international justice because even Carla del Ponte, she is using the fact that perhaps the chemicals have been used by the revolution. The responsibility of these things fall on the regime and those who are protecting the regime. We need an international court that will make stopping and finish with these crimes of the regime and the other side. We are not interested in having crimes on the side of the revolution. The revolution is infiltrated by extreme groups that have been created by the regime and sent to fight in Iraq and in Lebanon. We know them. Everybody knows, they don't like to see. We need to work and Ramadan is close to come. Next month, in July, we have to pray this year. All of us, Jews, Christians and Muslims that we are the family of Abraham, for the reconciliation between Sunni and Shiite. Everybody should make iftars and offer possibilities of meeting at home everywhere for Muslims, Sunnis and Shiite to reconcile. Everybody has responsibilities in this civil Muslim war. Everybody has a responsibility in this reconciliation that is so needed. And then we're speaking with people that are hard workers, people of strong will in work, please. Create a free Syria chamber of commerce. Create new possibilities. The youth that are not dead are handicapped and discouraged because of the situation. Let's create new hope for Syria or Syria will be dangerous for all. Salman, any new ideas you want to pipe in there on how to bring people together and make it? First of all, I will take Father Paolo's advice and have an iftar where I bring my Sunni and Shiite friends and others, Christians, my Catholic wife, all together. I think that's a very good idea and shouldn't be underestimated. I've always passionately believed, listening to Syrians, that a political solution at this stage does not lie between a regime opposition dialogue. Simply, the regime is not going to negotiate in good faith. But where it does lie is very hard work. But where it does lie is giving Syrians the opportunity from all backgrounds, from the major constituencies, the economic elites, the independent sheikhs and priests and others, the tribal leaders as well as Alawis, Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, Druze and others to come together to find a space for a very serious discussion on where their interests lie with regards to the future of their country and how they can rebuild it. It's essentially a negotiation which needs to take place between them and to arrive at a new equation for sharing power. I believe it's possible. You know why? Because you just hear Syrians. Syrians are Syrians first even to this day, even despite the effort of certain parties, especially the regime, to tear the social fabric of Syria apart. And so this has to be done seriously. This has to be a serious process of dialogue. I believe the international community has not paid enough attention to this. On the margins, we have been running certain dialogues. Others have in this respect. This requires a lot more international and regional support than it has. And I'm afraid to say that even the official Syrian opposition has not yet provided a venue for that kind of dialogue. Until we get there, I'm afraid we're going to continue to see that political solution being elusive. A broad-based track to civil discourse that you're proposing. That's right. And even to make it track one and a half, I believe that the United Nations should have been doing this from day one. The United Nations has legitimacy. It's probably the only thing it has. It doesn't have money. It doesn't have arms. But it has legitimacy. And if it could provide a space and a venue for Syrians to come and to talk and the rest. And in that respect, I don't believe that the Special Envoy has been doing enough, frankly. When you look at the Syrian opposition and the Syrian National Council based abroad, how much legitimacy, how much leverage do you think they have on the ground? Could they even practically negotiate a ceasefire? Well, I think we have to be honest here that the main legitimacy of the Syrian Opposition Coalition, which is, as you know, is still discussing its expansion and its leadership and everything else today, Istanbul, its main credibility and its legitimacy comes from the international community and its foreign backers. What is lacking is the support inside the country. And what is lacking is a real presence inside the country. And that is a big gap. Now, they are attempting to do that. But I'm afraid there seem to be in a perpetual state of reorganizing themselves. And that's not good enough. Again, they are trying again. We hope that they can bring the right leadership. We hope that they can organize. And there's some good people who are working very hard in Southeast Turkey and other places looking at how to develop a relief and aid and all the rest of it inside the country. But the simple fact is they don't have enough of a presence inside the country. They don't have enough credibility as a result. Let's open up to questions. Anyone from the floor would like to pipe in with an intervention. Gentlemen up front. Yeah, I have a question for you. Could you introduce yourself? Yeah, my name is Karim Suway. I'm from Lebanon. I'd like to ask some kind of question about this on everybody's mind. Why is the U.S. not intervening in Syria? We saw it being paralyzed in Tunis, fumbling in Egypt, leading from the back in Libya, but really not doing much in Syria. And at the same time, we hear the Secretary of State coming to this specific forum and talking about the Israeli Arab conflict and launching new initiatives. How can they really pretend to resolve a 50-year-old conflict when they cannot even stop a bloodshed next door? Thank you. Well, it starts with the leadership. It starts with Barack Obama. Barack Obama has been extremely reluctant. He doesn't want to get involved in the complexity of the Syrian crisis. There are many in the leadership who don't want to own Syria. So what they've been trying to do is to work in a multilateral fashion. They've been trying to work with the regional players, but you're right. They have not shown the vision and leadership that is probably required in order to chart a course which is sustainable over a period of time. There's another word, Iraq. The legacy of Iraq is burned deeply into the soul and the hearts of many of the American decision makers. Many of them have been to Iraq by the military or on the civilian side. And the mistake that was made there, the illegal war that was Iraq, is a legacy that we are living with today. That doesn't mean that a terrible dictator like Saddam Hussein should not have been got rid of, but I'm afraid what the outcome of what has happened in Iraq and 10 years on, I'm afraid we still have, in my view, a broken political system which still requires a third party broker is a terrible, in my view, legacy of that particular conflict. And then, of course, it is trying to find the right path, the right course. We've had two tracks, and those two tracks continue. There is the effort to find a political solution, and then that's the political track. Then there is what is described as assistance or the military side to the opposition both in the exile as well as on the ground. And I have to say, I've noticed that there is a developing consensus now. Despite all the efforts regarding Geneva, and I believe Secretary Kerry is trying desperately hard to work with Foreign Minister Lavrov and the Russians and others to forge something, but I believe as we are talking peace, people are actually preparing for more war. And it's that particular track that is probably going to strengthen. And I see a developing consensus. And you heard yesterday for Senator McCain, but even more importantly from Senator Menendez, the chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, there is a consensus that you have to change the military balance in order to arrive at a political solution. And I tagged that with a greater level of comfort that Western powers, the United States and Europe in particular, are showing towards Salim Idris and his commanders. And I think it's almost dictated by the situation on the ground that we will see that track emerge in the front in the not-too-distant future. Sara Lee, is there something other than intervention that the U.S. should be doing? Are there steps along the way that are being missed? Absolutely. And it's almost a little frustrating that there's almost complete focus in the media on the issue of military intervention, should we or shouldn't we? Have we not learned the lessons of the illegal Iraq war, or should we repeat them and so forth? And so much drama and focus on, oh, the poor Syrians, what can we do to help them? And yet there's virtually nothing being done, actually, to help the Syrian civilians who are bearing the brunt of this war. So, for example, I'm sure we can hear from the UNHCR just how much of the commitments to funding for Syrian refugees have been met. The international community that is so willing to send arms to Syria, are they willing to take care, at least in the short term, of the refugees in Syria? The answer is sadly not. How much and is there enough funding for cross-border aid to reach Syrians who are in rebel-held areas who are not getting much of the aid that the UN is able to distribute? Sadly not. What efforts are being made to seek prosecution of Syrian government officials, for example, for pushing a resolution that would refer the situation in Syria to the international criminal court? That's not happening at the General Assembly either. So, you know, let's show some real credibility and some real concern for the Syrian civilians before, at least, or at the parallel track of talking about what we can do to further arm the region. Sorry. I just want to interject. I completely agree. I would take it even further, though, the failure of the international community, the failure of the Assad regime, first and foremost, to protect civilians is a legacy I think we're going to live with for a very long time. This kind of killing of civilians. I was working for Kofi Anand in 2005 at the UN, but we had this big summit focused on the responsibility to protect, focused on the responsibility that lies with governments, with states, not usurping sovereignty, but holding out further action if that is violated. And I'm afraid we've allowed this situation to go on for two and a half years, and here there's plenty of blame to go around, of course. But the simple fact is, we've not been able to protect civilians, and most likely, many more are going to die in the months and possibly even years ahead. Alex, last I had checked, the pledges made in Kuwait for Syrian refugee aid, only 50% had been received. Is that gone up or is there still a shortfall? I think for our overall funding, we're at the 60 to 70% range overall for the last appeal that we had, but with the new appeal that's coming, obviously, that number will go down, will go down considerably. That's what you've raised, but of what was pledged, has everything been delivered? Not everything has been delivered. A lot has been delivered. There is much more that we need, but I do want to recognize the large amount of money that has come in to help us do the work that we need to do. But there will be much, much more that's needed. Questions? Gentleman in the back. The community did not support up till now clearly the Syrian refugees residing in Lebanon, Turkey, and Jordan. How can we expect that the international community would support reconstruction of Syria, particularly that the cost in Syria for the destruction that happened amounted to over 200 billion USDs? Shouldn't we, shouldn't the international community consider that Gaza that has been destructed also has not received any money, with the exception of Doha's assistance and UAE's assistance? The other question I want to ask, if Al-Qusir has gone to the hands of, gone from the hands of the Syrian regime, isn't the card now in the hands of the regime for the upcoming capture few more questions or we launch into that? Isn't the real problem that the state in the Middle East has really felt to look after the interests of its people? And this is quite a deep internal problem that we don't find accommodation between different groups where minorities in both Syria and Iraq come and be in power under a different name, Arab nationalism, what have you. And the aspirations of the people are suppressed for a long time. It is really not in my view, she has any problem as per say. It is the monopolization of political actors of the fault lines within societies to manipulate it to the political advantage. As Mr. Sheikh said, that supposedly, Shia regime in Syria used these extremists to kill Shias in Iraq. So that is a proof that it is not so much to do with Shia Sunni. It is more to do with the political manipulation that she respected Sunni Imam. Sheikh Buti was blown off in his mosque by the Sunni rebels. And this was glorified. He wasn't blown off? Okay, let me finish. Okay, let's say we don't know who blew it. But the fact is, his killing was glorified on Al-Jazeera and other Arab Gulf TVs. And that glorification, whoever did the job is actually helped to raise tensions and sectarian conflicts in the region. The point I'm trying to make is that the political actors, the regional, and to a lesser extent the global political actors, they are using the fault lines in Muslim societies to actually manipulate their political purposes. And in effect, it really has nothing to do with religious or sectarian complex, per se. Thank you very much. Thank you for the comment. Okay, Valdal, monitor. What is the role that Israel should or should not play, if at all, since Israel is a close neighbor of Syria? Israel has been involved whether we like it or not, we Israelis. And it seems that there is still a debate going on in Israel whether we should support the, as you described, the devil we know or take the risk of supporting the devil we don't, whether he's a devil or an angel. I'm not sure. But if you and Israeli, what would you, any of you advise us to do or not to do? Let's start with that one and we'll work our way down starting with Salman. Okay. It's good to see here, Akiva. Well, first of all, Israel should do its best to stay out of it, if it can. Now, some would say that there is an effort being made to actually draw Israel into this. We know that Israel has set its red lines and it seems to be acting on them. From what I understand is the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah. In many ways, we're seeing the conflict between the Israelis and Hezbollah and the Iranian shift into Syria. The second red line is with regards to what goes in the Golan. And we're now seeing regular, almost exchanges of fire after so many decades of quiet. And the third areas with regards to chemical weapons, and of course Israel was one of those that raised the alarm with regards to their use. So it should try to stay out of it. But it should also give up on the old paradigm of better the devil you know. And this goes more broadly for, I think, for Israel's posture. Israel's posture is likely, we're surrounded by all these threats. Let's circle the wagons. Fine. I would say with one exception, that is, you should move towards a just solution to the Palestinian issue. That's probably the best contribution that Israel can make in terms of realizing the two-state solution. But it's also important, I think, that we hear from Israeli leaders speaking much more openly about how people in Arab societies are getting rid of their dictatorships. How they are getting to realize their rights. We know the fear and foreboding that Israel leadership and even society has. But this has to be recognized. Maybe nothing else. But this has to be recognized from an Israeli perspective as well. I think Shimon Peres, who I believe is here later today, has actually spoken like that. But we've never heard anything like that from Prime Minister Netanyahu. All we've heard about is of course the rising fear of Islamist extremism. My fear is that Israel will be increasingly drawn in. The transfer, the continued transfer of weapons to Syria by the Russians will likely elicit a response. I think that's a very dangerous situation. And it will also probably be drawn in because, as was mentioned earlier, the UN peacekeeping regime, which has survived for so many decades, is going to come under increasing strain, particularly Andof, whose mandate is up for renewal at the end of June. And also, UNIFIL. In that regard, I note that the Lebanese army is thinning in the south. And the amount of harassment of UNIFIL itself is increasing in that local area. So these are all dangerous situations. But as I said, Israel should try to stay out of it as best it can. Sarah, any thoughts? I guess two things. One, to strongly agree that Israel should stay out. And bombing Syria is just about the best thing that Israel can do for President Assad right now. And more importantly, given that Israel has zero legitimacy in the region, to be a legitimate commentator even on the region, it would need to first withdraw its settlements and its occupation. Because otherwise, it's nothing but an extra source of conflict and new instability in the region. On the point that was made about governments deliberately taking advantage of sunnishia splits and so forth, the situation that we see now in Syria, the catastrophe, the inability of the opposition to become a cohesive opposition that reflects the aspirations of the Syrian people, that's not an accident. That's a direct byproduct of Syrian government policy to keep civil society weak, to keep independent institutions illegal. And it's not a unique approach either. This is the operating toolbox of many, many governments in the region. So we can look at the cracked vases of Syria now on the floor and sit here and bemoan what should we do about it. But I would urge you also to consider what can we do now to prevent new Syrians throughout the Middle East? And how can we build societies where there is resilient independent civil society with free expression, where independent civil societies can exist and are not banned and you don't go to jail for participating in a demonstration or insulting the king or the president or forming a political opposition group? If we don't want to see future broken vases in the Middle East, let's also think about what we need to fix in the governments that have not yet collapsed because they are rigged to ensure that transitions are not possible, that formations of opposition, that the cohesiveness of civil society is not possible. Father Paolo on the question of Israel. Thank you Lara. First of all, sir, they recall us that there is in this moment a town with people like you and your family attacked on a radical desire to eradicate these people. They are on their own fields, they are in their own homes and their right to stay there is negated. The people of Kuser are asking you to take care. Israel, Israel is not out. Who says that Israel is out? It's fully in the game. There is a showing of teeth with the nuclear issue of Iran and there is everybody knows a negotiation under the table going on with Iran and United States and Syria is organically part of the game what can be offered to Iran in Syria in order to have something from Iran on the negotiation of nuclear issues and so far. So from the point of view of the Syrian revolution, Israel is helping and backing the repression of Bashar al-Assad regime because it's not assuming the responsibility to help a people and neighbor. There is in our having laws, duties related to the rights of your neighbor to be assisted and we are not assisted. Even the chemical issue is not a red line anymore. It is a pinky line or something nothing coherent. The future of Israel is expressed by the goodwill of democratic Israelis caring for the good of all the people in this region that is to all of us. Divide et impera is not a good political to divide your enemies in order to have an interest on the geo-strategical level is a moral mistake and in the long term is a geo-strategical mistake. Alex I know geopolitics isn't your wheelhouse in particular but from a humanitarian standpoint is there a kind of assistance or a constructive role Israel could or should be playing? I really think I'll stay out of that one if you don't mind. Any other questions from the floor? In the back. Why the Red Cross cannot come in? Why your institutions cannot help the Syrians on the ground? In the end the humanitarian structures are used by the regime. Thank you Paolo for your input. I can't speak English but I won't ask my question in Arabic language because I'm working with the Arabic department in Anadolu Turkish Agency. My question goes to Mr. Alex. We have interviewed the Prime Minister of Jordan and he said that the Security Council has refused or has during its first session actually refused to send a mission to Jordan or to any other country where there are many refugees from Syria. What is the role played by the High Commission for Refugees in this case and another question to Mr. Al-Sheikh when it comes to Arab Spring countries? I have heard many colleagues ask why doesn't the USA intervene militarily in Syria? Don't you think that the Arab revolutions maybe have failed in the Arab world and that many countries are blaming the USA for this failure? This machine wasn't working so I didn't really hear the question. If you could repeat the question I was asked. My part in terms of why doesn't the US intervene militarily I think is what I heard. Well again you have a president who doesn't want to do things without an international mandate and to in effect not have the to break international law. It is a bit odd though that international law and crimes against humanity and war crimes are being committed every day and yet the international community is still not being able to respond. With regards to the specific question though I think there is an increasing case that is being made for surgical strikes that would we know the number of sites where for example the probably 300 plus SCUD missiles are now being fired towards their own Syrian populations. We also know where the airfields are so there are those and you heard it very strongly from Senator McCain yesterday that that is the direction that the United States needs to go into. It's not yet the majority view in the US but I suspect it would gain ground the longer this goes on. As I said I think the political track may well continue but it will be the military options which will come into play. I'm always a little bit hesitant having watched and having described the Iraq war as illegal to to advocate that kind of military intervention also because it can lead to many more complications but as in the case of Bosnia took four years it took 200 000 people killed it was starting to destabilize a wider region you saw that a group of countries led by the United States did militarily intervene and I suspect if we continue to see the trajectory of this conflict the only difference of course is that this is a much bigger regional conflict now and so in that respect you're going to see the United States still probably be hesitant but it all depends on what happens with things like chemical weapons or Islamist extremists and can I say the red line regarding chemical weapons it's not by it's clear it's not their use by the regime it's them falling into somebody else's hands and when we talk about weapons falling into the wrong people's hands I have to ask the question who said that the regime having all of these weapons is in the right hands I mean from the start I find it an extraordinary debate can I just say one thing on the humanitarian I think new terms a new consensus has to be forged for humanitarian action in Syria you know UN General Assembly Resolution 146 passed in 82 which upholds state sovereignty is not working here in the case of Syria so there's this endless debate about cross border operations and cross line this does require the key security council countries first and foremost but also the other BRIC countries the non-aligned movement the Chinese the Indians the South Africans and others for God's sake coming together because these people are suffering in an absolutely horrendous way Alex I'd love to hear before you go into cross border I'd like to hear your thoughts on this seemingly widespread sentiment that the UN's is somehow is aid is somehow co-opted by the regime or that somehow assists in the patronage networks of the regime this seems to be a widely held fear or concern in the region wow do you respond to it well the fact is that most of the aid we are able to deliver inside Syria goes in government control there is no question about that those those are the facts it doesn't mean it's going to necessarily to regime supporters it's going to people in areas that we can have access to so there's we can't make that easy assumption would we like to be able to get to opposition areas absolutely we would and there are two ways to do it you can either go through Syria through what we call cross line operations which we have done now more than a dozen times at great risk because the people who are running these convoys the UN teams and the NGOs who are involved in doing this are crossing battle lines they're being shot out they're endangered by both sides as they undertake these activities and we'd like to be able to do cross border operations from Turkey from Jordan from other places to reach the opposition areas currently we are not able to do that under the UN rules because we don't have the permission of the Syrian government to enter into their sovereign space that could be overturned by the security council if there were a vote from the security council the emergency relief coordinator that Valery Amos has asked for a vote from the security council to permit us to do that it hasn't been forthcoming it could be granted by the Syrian government could permit this we want the access the father is talking about here we want to get to every single person we can reach and we have people on the ground who are undertaking life threatening operations inside Syria to get to as many people as we can possibly reach to close us out today Salman could you respond to one of those floating fears in the region that somehow Syria is going to disintegrate into statelets an Alawite statelet of Kurdish statelet it's one of those things one could never imagine but starts being talked about and somehow conceivable do you think that could ever happen in Syria well de facto it could though of course I think many Alawies given the chance would not want to hold themselves up in what is really an unviable state it was tried in the 1920s it didn't really work it can it really sustain itself especially given the security fears that it faces and yes with regards to the Kurdish situation already in northern Iraq we have a de facto situation where big oil and regional players are leading to perhaps a changing of the map with regards to Iraq itself the point I want to make is it's not just a patchwork of de facto statelets in Syria this can go all the way again from the Mediterranean to the Gulf a series of of de facto zones and statelets which take into account the north of Lebanon or the south of Lebanon which take into account a Kurdish entity even something in the south with regards to others and with regards to Iraq in my view that's not a very stable state of affairs in my view the catalyst for this is Syria in my view the person and the regime that is most responsible for this is the Assad regime and the quicker we can find a way of moving on on finding a transition that works in Syria the better Salman Sara Lee father Paolo and Alex thank you so much for your time and insight please join me in a round of applause for