» Wednesday, November 22, 2006Lebanon
Asked what was the latest thinking on Lebanon – what happened, who was to blame, and could we ever trust Syria again, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that the honest answer at this stage was that we did not know, and it would take time for the truth to emerge. In terms of Syria, we had made it clear, and Sir Nigel Sheinwald had made it clear during his recent visit there, that Syria’s conduct in Lebanon was one of the criteria by which we would judge whether they were playing a constructive role in the Middle East as a whole, or not. Reiterating that, however, should not be taken as pointing the finger at Syria, because what we should not do at this stage was make assumptions. However, that was the bottom line in terms of our approach to Syria. The Prime Minister strongly believed that it was still important that we tried to get a process going in the Middle East. It was always the case that unless people tried to make progress, then progress would not be made. Progress was never inevitable, and that was what we had found in Northern Ireland, and indeed, as we might find again on Friday. We always had to push for progress, and that was what the Prime Minister was prepared to do. The terms, however, on which the Prime Minister would do so, vis a vis Syria and its involvement in Lebanon had always been clearly stated, including by Sir Nigel Sheinwald. Asked if the Prime Minister was planning to visit the region before Christmas, the PMOS replied that as he had said yesterday, our intentions remained unchanged. The Prime Minister still believed that it was vital that we tried to make progress in the Middle East. If that meant taking risks, then risks would be taken, but the boundaries were very clear about what constituted acceptable behaviour. Asked again if the Prime Minister was planning to go to the Middle East, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had stated whenever he was there earlier in the year what his intentions were, and that he would do. For obvious reasons, the PMOS said that he was not going to get into upcoming travel plans. Asked what the Prime Minister would say to Prime Minister Siniora during their talk later today, the PMOS replied that as the Prime Minister had done whenever he was Beirut, the whole point of going to Lebanon when we did was to publicly express our support for the democratically elected Government of Lebanon, and for its ability to have its sovereignty recognised throughout all of the country, without foreign interference. We genuinely did not know who was responsible for the assassination of Minister Gemayel, but clearly, what it was aimed at trying to do was to undermine the authority of the Lebanese Government, and that we believed was totally unacceptable. We fully supported Prime Minister Siniora in his efforts to try and maintain the authority of the Lebanese Government. Briefing took place at 14:00 | Search for related news Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says. |
The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...
Search
Supported byRecent Briefings
Archives
LinksSyndicate (RSS/XML)CreditsEnquiriesContact Sam Smith. |
No Comments »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Post a public comment