The most important objective is starting on — building the relationship between Syria [and the] United States, because in the past 100 years, it wasn’t a very good relationship.

We were looking for common interest between the United States and Syria, and we found that we have a lot of common interests that we can build on, [such as] security interests and economic interests.

The stability of Syria will impact the entire region, and the instability of Syria, as well, will impact the region.

Stability is linked with the economy, and the economy, or economic development, is linked with the lifting of sanctions.

This discussion has been going on for months now, and I believe that we reached good results. But we are still waiting for the final decision.

To start with, fighting is not something shameful if it’s done for noble objectives, especially if you are defending your own land and the people who are suffering from injustice.

I believe this is something good that people should be commended for.

I have fought so many wars, but I’ve never caused the death of an innocent person.

And when somebody engages in fighting, they should have a very strong ethical background.

The region was affected by the policies — Western policies and U.S. policies — and today, we have so many Americans who agree with us that some of these policies were a mistake and that they caused so many wars that were pointless.

Syria just got out of a fierce war, and it was living under dictatorship and the harsh regime that controlled the country for 60 years.

We are going through a transitional period right now, and in transition, there are situations, conditions and laws that are different from stable countries.

For example, the Civil War in the United States — after it finished, were things stable after one year? Or did it take so long, so many years after the war?

We are in the stage of rebuilding the state, and restoring and rebuilding the law. But I’m not saying that there are no problems in Syria. It’s not the end of the story.

There are individual interests of certain groups that want to have independence or autonomy. Some of those parties, they want to find justification for their interests, so they use their denomination or their faith as an umbrella.

They talk about an existential threat for their denomination or faith.

In Syria, we have been living in coexistence with different groups, different religious groups, for 1,400 years. We’re still existing, and we still have that diversity.

We were in a war with [the Islamic State] for 10 years, and we did that without coordination with a Western force or any other country.

Syria today is capable of shouldering this responsibility. Keeping Syria divided, or having any military force that is not under control of the government, represents the best environment for ISIS to flourish.

I believe the best solution is that the U.S. troops present in Syria should supervise the integration [of the SDF into the central government’s security forces]. The task of protecting Syrian territory will be the responsibility of the state.

Syria got into war with Israel 50 years ago. Then, in 1974, there was a disengagement agreement.

This agreement lasted for 50 years. But when the [Assad] regime fell, Israel revoked this agreement.

They expanded their presence in Syria, expelled the U.N. [peacekeeping] mission and occupied new territory.

Israel has conducted over 1,000 airstrikes in Syria since Dec. 8, and that included bombing the Presidential Palace and the Ministry of Defense. But because we want to rebuild Syria, we didn’t respond to these aggressions.

The advances that Israel made into Syria are not coming from [their] security concerns but are coming from their expansionist ambitions.

Israel has always claimed that it has concerns about Syria because it is afraid of the threats that the Iranian militias and [Lebanon’s] Hezbollah represent.

We are the ones who expelled those forces out of Syria.