In response to a question about the possibility of a link between President Michel Suleiman's speech and the rockets fired on Thursday night on the perimeter of the presidential palace and the Defense Ministry in Fayadieh, Fletcher said that these missiles kept him awake all night walking around his house. “[The rockets] sparked panic in the population living in Baabda. I had to console my two sons because of the loud noise [that the rockets] caused. That’s why I’m worried about the motive, since it is not acceptable to fire rockets on a residential area. This in itself is bad. I do not want to speculate if there was a link between the rockets and President Suleiman’s speech. But whoever was responsible, they wanted to trigger a state of anxiety and division in Lebanon.”

In his first response to Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah's speech on Quds Day, when Nasrallah alluded to the British, Fletcher said, “I listened carefully to the speech last Friday, as is my habit. I agree that priority should be given to the stability of Lebanon and to preserve its unity. But I do not agree with the claim that Britain is involved in an elaborate conspiracy against Lebanon. I have always tried to be clear in explaining our approach. We support the stability, sovereignty, unity and neutrality of Lebanon. And if anyone has specific charges against us, I am always happy to respond to them.”

In an interview with As-Safir, he said, “The decision is aimed at persons that we know. Some of them move money across Europe. [The decision] will not affect the Shiite community at all. There will be no problems in issuing visas or in work-related matters. Some political leaders are focusing on that. But I stress that the only people who should be afraid are those behind the Bulgaria explosion and those who instigated them.”

Despite Fletcher’s cool temperament, the British ambassador could not contain his anger about exaggerated political analyses that border on conspiracies. He is greatly bothered when the decision to add Hezbollah’s military wing to the EU terror list is portrayed as a move against the Shiites in particular, and the Lebanese in general.

“Nonsense,” responded British Ambassador Tom Fletcher to Western articles reporting that Western countries want to prolong the war in Syria so that extremists on both sides can exterminate each other.

Below is the text of the interview:

As-Safir: After the failure of the dissociation policy toward the Syrian war, does Britain believe that Lebanon has become an arena of imminent instability?

Fletcher: I am very sad about the pressures toward Lebanon’s dissociation policy, especially after Iran decided to send Lebanese men to fight for [Syrian President Bashar] al-Assad. It is in everyone’s interest to return to national dialogue and [work toward] Lebanon’s interests, not the interests of any other country, whether Iran, Saudi Arabia or even the UK. President Suleiman has mentioned that and he called for focusing on Lebanese unity. I hope that everyone returns to serious dialogue, because Syria’s war is not Lebanon’s war, and hard work should be exerted to keep [Lebanon] away [from Syria’s war] despite the attempts by some to do the opposite.

As-Safir: What imminent danger to Lebanon do you see?

Fletcher: I think that threatening the dissociation policy constitutes a major threat to Lebanon because it allows the Syrian war to move into the Lebanese interior, and there is no interest in that happening. So we criticized those who threatened reprisal operations by Hezbollah and we condemn that. We find it important to return to the principle of neutrality. The Lebanese determination to live a normal life is cause for some optimism. They are trying hard to educate their children and establish new businesses. This generates hope amid the multiple problems, including those related to the displaced Syrians and the smuggling of arms and other matters. It is the love of life and steadfastness which characterize the Lebanese.

We know those who were involved in the Bulgaria bombing

As-Safir: Britain has led the fight to include Hezbollah on the European terrorism list and it succeeded. Nasrallah said that it will not affect the party. How did you benefit from [that move]?

Fletcher: There has been a lot of distortions on that subject, be it from Israel, Nasrallah or other leaders here. I invite people to look at the facts: There was an attack inside Europe and it killed people. We do not accept terrorism in Europe. We have evidence about the perpetrators. The decision [to add Hezbollah to the terror list] was because of this attack. The decision was not just because of Israeli pressure, but for our reasons. The decision was not because of Hezbollah’s participation in the Syrian war, as some in March 14 have said. And [the decision] was not intended to target the resistance, as Nasrallah has said. The answer is simple and clear: It is a message for the perpetrators. It’s sad [that some are] telling the people that the decision targets a certain sect or Lebanon as a whole. This is nonsense, because [the decision only] affects a specific group that carried out the bombing in Bulgaria.

As-Safir: But why didn’t you provide compelling evidence for it?

Fletcher: We have evidence. The legal work is ongoing. We are saddened when the matter is presented that way. We have tried as much as possible to mitigate the damage to Lebanon and protect it from what a small group has committed. Those who are not part of that group have no reason to be afraid. And we have in our possession sufficient evidence to identify the people I am talking about.

As-Safir: Don’t you think that such a decision affects the EU’s role as an intermediary between the various parties, especially in the neighboring countries?

Fletcher: When the European foreign ministers explained their decision, they made it clear they will continue the dialogue with Hezbollah’s political wing. Since the decision was made, my European colleagues have held several meetings with Hezbollah to confirm that the dialogue will continue. It was necessary to respond to the bombing, or else Europe would look weak. I remember that a week before the decision the EU decided to stop funding projects in Israeli settlements and the Israelis were furious.

As-Safir: Some saw that as a barter with Israel. What do you think?

Fletcher: No. The timing of the two decisions coincided.

As-Safir: Are there coincidences in politics and diplomacy?

Fletcher: Yes. In Lebanon, many believe in conspiracy theories. They are true some of the time but not all of the time. What happened were just successive events.

As-Safir: Some Europeans fear for the security of UNIFIL soldiers. Has Britain thought about that?

Fletcher: We are paying money in order to finance UN-led peacekeeping operations. I don’t think that it is in anyone’s interest to harm UNIFIL. Hezbollah has clearly said that it doesn’t want to see UNIFIL targeted, and this is important to maintain the stability of the South. We are watching out for extremists regardless which party they belong to. And UNIFIL is working hard for the sake of stability and to establish good ties with the people of the South.

Lebanon’s army and oil

As-Safir: What are the practical results of Gen. David Richards’ visit to Lebanon last month?

Fletcher: We support Lebanon’s stability and we wish to support the Lebanese army. We asked the Lebanese army command what they need in order for them to contribute to countering the specter of war. Gen. Jean Kahwaji listed a few requests, of which I remember transportation vehicles, communication equipment, protective devices and control towers. We have given the army all of that. We also announced last week a new aid package worth $120 million to support the army and Lebanon. Of course, the military needs to do more to remove the specter of war from this country.

As-Safir: What about the British foreign and energy ministers starting two-dimensional seismic surveys to explore for oil and gas on land last February?

Fletcher: One of the things that makes me optimistic about Lebanon is that it has natural resources in its sea. This means that Lebanon has a bright future. But to get to it, a transparent system should be set up for the management of the gas sector and this what the [oil] companies are waiting for. Israel is 15 years ahead in that area with regard to planning and oil extraction. Croatia is also seeking that, in addition to a number of countries that compete with Lebanon. Political excuses should not be allowed to freeze Lebanon’s interests. It is required that tenders be immediately launched to allow the [oil] companies to compete. This is what Lebanon’s energy minister is trying to do. That must be accelerated in order to create confidence among the interested companies before they head to other countries.

As-Safir: Do you think that the delay in forming a government affects that?

Fletcher: There is danger in the delay. The companies want clarity about that.

As-Safir: How is Britain helping in the crisis of the Syrian displacement to Lebanon?

Fletcher: It is the Lebanese who are paying the exorbitant displacement bill, not the politicians, but the Lebanese people as a whole because they are providing extraordinary hospitality. The tragedy would have been greater had the Lebanese not [absorbed refugees] in every corner of Lebanon. We announced the provision of $275 million for Syria, including $120 million for the displaced, of which Lebanon gets $75 million. That is being disbursed through the EU and the concerned UN organizations.

A British “no” to the arming of the Syrians

As-Safir: Britain asked the EU to lift the arms embargo on the opposition. But here you are backtracking out of fear that the weapons might fall into the hands of Islamist extremists. Are these not disappointments for you?

Fletcher: You talked about Britain’s disappointment. The major disappointment for me is the presence of more than one million displaced Syrians, displaced families and 100,000 dead. This is the real disappointment. Look at the scene in Homs and Aleppo. It’s a great disappointment to me, regardless of the politicians’ opinions. No one knows how things are moving in Syria, which is continuously wobbling. Sometimes the regime makes advances and sometimes the opposition. All that must be done is to help those affected by the war and to try to push the parties to talk to each other. The lifting of the ban was to pressure the regime and the opposition toward dialogue. It was an attempt to create a new dynamic for dialogue. Many countries are sending weapons to the Syrian regime. The Syrians don’t need more weapons, but more dialogue. We are again trying to push toward dialogue, and this is what will happen in the end.

As-Safir: There have been many articles about Western countries wishing to see the Syrian conflict extend for years in order for the extremist groups to exterminate each other in Syria.

Fletcher: The least that can said about that theory is that is it nonsense. And I’m trying to be polite in describing these articles. They mean nothing. They are offensive and they make me very angry. I have read some of the ideas contained in these articles. They are crazy ideas. And anyone who believes them is crazy. We are paying a lot of money to absorb the repercussions of the Syrian war in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey and we are making efforts to stop the Syrian conflict from spreading. A long war does not stop extremism. There are extremists in the opposition and in the regime. And we want to protect people who are in the middle, meaning those who are far from being extremists.

As-Safir: Is the region about to be divided? Will there be a new Sykes-Picot, for example?

Fletcher: That’s a very dangerous idea. First, I don’t wish to defend the Sykes-Picot, but I will defend the concept of the state — the Syrian state and the Lebanese state. It’s a mistake when people start thinking about re-demarcating the borders between states, because they risk committing the same mistakes we made when we decided to demarcate borders. I wish to be able to defend the [current] states. And I wish to keep the Syrian state intact even though we reject what the regime is doing to its people. But we support the state and the people of Syria.