Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen,
It's a great honor to be here today. I want to thank Dr. Robin Niblett, Director of Chatham House, for inviting me and for that very kind introduction.
I am sure that most of you are following the latest developments, and you know that Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain have imposed a political, economic, and social blockade against our country. Some of the audience members here who follow Arabic media outlets will have noticed the double narrative that the blockading countries have been using; one for the Western audiences and one for their people. The one for their people comes as they fail to justify their unjust measures against a neighboring country in the holy month of Ramadan. As you know, sympathy with Qatar is now a crime in some of these countries. It is an indicator of how unpopular this escalation has been in the countries that caused it.
Before I delve into the background of the current Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) crisis, allow me to discuss with you Qatar's foreign policy. Furthermore, I am ready to answer any questions you may have.
What distinguishes Qatar in the region is not its wealth or its natural resources, or its high rise buildings. It is the fact that development is at the core of both its domestic and foreign policy.
Today Qatar has a distinct economic situation and the highest level of transparency, and most importantly the highest level of security and stability in the Middle East and North Africa region. Qatar ranks the first in the world in most efficient government according to the World Economic Forum. Regionally, Qatar ranks first in countering administrative corruption, and the adoption of judicial procedures to protect the rule of law. In regards to human potential, Qatar is also the first.
This development emanates from the principles of good governance as Qatar ranks first in the world in terms of confidence in political decision making, and second in the level of efficiency of the legislative system.
Qatari women have been partners in this development with their participation in the labor force, and access to education has reached unprecedented heights. Today, Qatar is home to the highest proportion of employed women in the GCC, and women outnumber men in university education.
This development was also witnessed through freedom of worship in Qatar, with donations from the former Emir of Qatar towards the construction of the largest church in the GCC. For more than twenty years, Qatar has advanced interfaith dialogue, as Doha has been a platform for dialogue for religious leaders and political factions alike.
Qatar has continued to encourage various political viewpoints to engage in constructive discussions in Doha, providing a platform otherwise absent in the region. Media broadcasters hosted by Qatar have entirely transformed the Arab world, with the Al-Jazeera network giving airtime without prejudice to social and cultural topics, as well as political movements; whether leftist, liberal or Islamist who were otherwise stifled across the region. The need for free nonpartisan media which addresses the concerns of Arab citizens was severely felt. Qatar's willingness to host institutions such as Al-Jazeera undoubtedly endeared the country to the wider Arab public. Qatar's media policies were warmly received by the Arab people, as well as in the United States and Europe. In contrast, they created resentment among the forces that were previously able to control the flow of information throughout the Middle East. This resentment intensified following the popular revolutions, known as the Arab Spring, in 2011. Arab regimes, surprised by the scale of popular protests, chose to avoid accountability by blaming the media.
For the first time in the Middle East and North Africa region, Qatar televised debates, known as the BBC Doha Debates, where no government official or body or broadcasters have any control over what is said at the sessions or who gets invited. It created a forum for dialogue that challenged the status quo. Again, this was something unprecedented in the region.
Today Qatar has one of the most highly educated populations in the region, the highest GDP per capita in the world, a thriving, diversified economy, some of the finest educational institutions in the Middle East if not the world, and of course a World Cup to look forward to in 2022. Above all, and unlike many states in the Middle East, Qatar was not built in oppression, fear, and censorship, and through it all, we have continued to chart our course and take an independent view on global and regional events. On the regional stage, Qatar has mediated in nearly ten regional and international portfolios in less than eight years, from 2008 to 2016. We have exerted diplomatic and political efforts at the regional and international levels in mediating between factions, entities, and countries with the consent of the concerned parties and without interfering in the internal affairs of others; intending to achieve a convergence of views and find sustainable solutions for conflict and differences.
Let me briefly recap some recent events. At the beginning of April, Qatar was subjected to a carefully orchestrated and unprecedented smear campaign designed to misrepresent our policies and positions on critical issues affecting our region. The climax of that campaign came on May 24th, when the website of our official news agency got hacked, and fake quotes attributed to our Emir were posted online. Some fake quotes with my name on them were also sent out on our Twitter feed.
Once we sorted out the technical details, we sent urgent messages to all of the news organizations in the region alerting them to the false statements posted on our website. Almost all of them immediately issued corrections and informed their readers and viewers that the fabricated statements were fake news and lies; except for the news outlets in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt which continued to report the fake news as facts.
It is worthy to note that Qatar's news outlets were censored in those countries two hours before the fabricated news was published. Furthermore, officials from the blockading countries were not merely criticizing Qatar's policy, something we have always welcomed, but they were calling for regime change in Qatar, a coup, and inciting hate and violence.
Though the hacking incident was exposed, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates used it as the pretext for launching an unprovoked, unwarranted, and unjustified blockade against Qatar on June 5th. For almost three weeks after June 5th, we have asked for specific demands as our neighbors decided to put the cart before the horse. They did on June 23rd, but only after international and US pressure. They presented us with a list of 13 demands, which they said had to be met by July 3rd. It was immediately apparent to us that they did not represent reasonable and actionable grievances against Qatar, as the United States Secretary of State had hoped. They were not measured and realistic, as the United Kingdom Foreign Secretary said they should be.
Instead, Qatar was asked to curtail free expression, hand over individuals at risk of torture and arbitration, reduce its defense capabilities, go against international law, outsource its foreign policy to Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, and sign an open cheque to the blockading countries to pay an unlimited amount of money described as compensation. The ultimatum demanded not only the shutting down of Al-Jazeera, but also other news outlets based here in the United Kingdom that represent free press for the people of the Middle East.
Reading between the lines; the blockading countries were demanding that we must surrender our sovereignty as the prize for ending the siege, something they knew Qatar would never do. For the record, these demands and accusations were never channeled to us previously. In fact, at a summit of all GCC foreign defense and interior ministers that was held in Riyadh on the 27th of April, and the Ministerial Meeting and Summit that took place in May, no grievances were brought up, and no requests were discussed.
Clearly, the blockading countries did not submit their demands with expectations that they would provide a framework for resolving their differences with Qatar. Had they been interested in addressing the issue, they would have used the mechanism specified in the GCC Charter, specifically the arbitration mechanism outlined in the 2014 Riyadh agreement which they claim Qatar violated. The neighboring countries violated the Riyadh agreement that states that members must take their grievances to the GCC executive body first before taking action against any GCC member.
Most of the demands were of interest to our Arab neighbors, but the allegation that Qatar supports terrorism was clearly designed to generate anti-Qatar sentiment in the West. What about Qatar's policies that deal with terrorism directly? Well, I can say with confidence that we have been anything but soft on terrorism. As the blockading countries know; Qatar has passed stringent laws and regulations to ban the financing of terrorism by private individuals and so-called charities.
We work with the intelligence and security services of the United Kingdom, the United States, and all of the countries in our region to bring terrorists and their supporters to justice. Alongside its security, surveillance, coordination, and sharing of information with its allies in the war on terror, the State of Qatar is also committed to ending the social and political factors conducive to terrorism. Qatar works against ideologies which entrap young men and women into terrorism, as well as the tyranny and state violence which induces terrorism while investing 12% of its government spending on education.
Qatar has allocated 25% of its foreign aid towards education and believes that education is the cornerstone of stability and the most effective preventative measure against extremism. It is why Qatar has invested in educating seven million children in 42 countries. We know that terrorist groups, like Al-Qaeda and Daesh, have put our government and the governments of all the Gulf nations on their list of enemies. More importantly, the challenges of transnational terrorism are not unique to Qatar, and it is a regional and global threat that requires collective efforts and political commitments from all.
Qatar opposes violent extremism that is a global threat to all humanity. However, what other countries fail to grasp is labeling political opponents as terrorists merely silences them regardless of how we may feel about their agendas. It is both unjustified and fails to solve any problem. Not only is this morally wrong, but it would also likely make the problem worse by driving more people into radicalism and diverting the attention away from the battle against the genuine terrorists.
We are very concerned about how politicized the label of terrorism might come out of this crisis if Western governments do not take a clear position towards this manipulation of concepts and terminology. As I indicated in my introduction, this manipulation has already and will continue to obscure the real source of violent extremism, as some of our neighbors label political descendants as terrorists. We feel that demonizing people who are presenting legitimate grievances peacefully and oppressing movements advocating for peaceful change only drives well-meaning people into the arms of extremists. We think that keeping independent news and information from the eyes and ears of the people only demonstrates fear and weakness.
These issues are at the heart of our disagreements with our neighbors, and they are serious issues, but here is the crux of the matter. We have seen how young people left without hope for a better future turn to violence in the name of jihad, and we have watched as the world blames Islam for this tragedy, and this must stop. As His Highness the Emir of Qatar has said, "the problem is not Islam, it is hopelessness. The causes of that hopelessness are governments that fail to meet the needs of their people"
I know that this message will not be well received in some of our neighboring capitals, but there are serious problems in the Middle East region, and silencing Qatar will not solve them. The answers to our disagreements are not blockades and ultimatums. The answer is dialogue and reason. We in Qatar are always open to both, and we welcome any serious efforts to resolve our differences with our neighbors. The nations of the Middle East, all of us face enormous challenges, both externally and internally. In Qatar, we believe that we have a better opportunity to meet these challenges if we work on them together, and we always welcome dialogue and negotiations.
All that I have described here this afternoon begs the central question – why did the blockading countries take these extraordinary, unprovoked, and hostile actions against Qatar? In other words, why is Qatar's independence such a threat to them? I think it's because we have different views on politics in the Middle East, and about the best path forward for our collective future. In Qatar, we believe that citizens everywhere should have the right to a government responsive to their needs and is representative of their interests.
We are not a democracy, this is a fact, and we don't claim otherwise, but our system of a consultative monarchy enjoys widespread and enthusiastic support from our people. It also facilitates various channels to allow policy feedback, and this is the very reason why Qatar was not alarmed by the Arab people's uprising in 2011. It is why the Qatari government, unlike many of our neighbors, never felt threatened by the Arab Spring movement. It is why we have confidently opened our doors to political groups who are advocating for change whether we agree with them or not, and it is why Al-Jazeera news network helps inform the Arab and broader world alike about the social, political, and economic developments in the region.
For the record, Al-Jazeera continues to look critically at all Arab countries, including Qatar. It hosts opposing and alternative views daily, which is something that does not exist anywhere else in the region. Our neighbors see change and those advocating for it and reporting on it as a threat, and they are quick to label anyone who opposes their governments as terrorists. In Qatar, we embrace change, and we welcome constructive criticism in order to develop. Qatar has never undermined the collective security of the region, as we believe that any threat to the region is a threat to Qatar.
As the 48 hours extension is coming to an end, Qatar continues to call for dialogue despite the violations of international laws and regulations, despite the separation of 12,000 families, despite the siege that is evident aggression and an insult to all international treaties, bodies, and jurisdictions. Looking for a way forward, we must lay out any and all legitimate concerns and discuss the claims and allegations through presenting evidence and engaging in constructive dialogue. Qatar stands ready to participate in a negotiations process with a clear framework, and set principles that guarantee that our sovereignty will not be infringed upon.
Thank you again, ladies and gentlemen, for your kind attention, and now I am more than happy to answer all and any of your questions.
Thank you.
Mr. Niblett: Sheikh Mohammed thank you very much for those fulsome remarks and for putting things in context at the beginning as you did, as well in terms of the kind of philosophy, you argued, Qatar is undertaking in the region. We've got time for some questions, but can I just come in with one right at the beginning, because I think you said there, especially you said at the end, that Qatar believes – we're not a democracy – a consultative monarchy. Is it really about surrendering your sovereignty or do you think this dispute is about Qatar surrendering its foreign policy? The belief that the Gulf Cooperation Council should have one foreign policy rather than competing foreign policies and Syria seems to be particularly where that competition appears to be playing out. Do you think there's something you could be doing differently in your foreign policy that would not make this a battle about sovereignty?
HE Foreign Minister: First of all, Qatar never compromised the collective security of the Gulf Cooperation Council, and this has already been witnessed in the past decades. Regarding the independence of Qatar's foreign policy, I think this is a significant factor in this disagreement, or conflict, resulting in the blockade of the State of Qatar. You cannot impose foreign policy, because you are a member of an organization. Even when it comes to the European Union, which has a more coherent foreign policy, there are some differences between the different countries and this has never been accepted by any sovereign nation. As I mentioned in the statement earlier, we believe that the main issue is not about terrorism. The main difference is opposing differences and trying to silence the other's voice. Maybe they see us as punching above our weight, and I think all these things should be taken into consideration when it comes to motives for the region.
Regarding whether we are a consultative monarchy or we claim that Qatar is more progressive than the other nations. In the Gulf, we have seen that Qatar has a constitution that was voted for by the people, and this constitution stated that there would be an elected parliament. There are a lot questions regarding when this parliament election will take place. It was supposed to take place in 2013 when we had the transition of power between the Father Emir and the Emir, and there are some legislative developments in place, and the desire and the political willingness of the government is there, so things might be realized soon.
Mr. Niblett: My first visit to Doha was in 2009, and the discussion then was about there being a consultative parliament and that it would be happening very soon. Then we have 2013 and another reason not to do it, and now it's 2017. So this surely sounds like an ambition that does not actually distinguish Qatar.
HE Foreign Minister: There are some legislative issues, which we have to work on. We want to do something that will serve its purpose, and currently, the people have all the means to send their feedback to the government and to the leadership of the country if there are any issues. I mentioned we are not a democracy, but we are responsive to our people's demands. This constantly happens in Qatar on a continuous basis. The people have access to the leadership at least once a month and to the top leadership. They don't need to appoint a representative for the time being to deliver their demands when they have this direct access. The people in Qatar do not look at the issue with the urgency that you, a person on the outside, view it.
Mr. Niblett: Direct access when it's a nation of 250,000 -230,000 nationals is a lot more possible then, say if you're Saudi Arabia. Some differences perhaps give Qatar the flexibility that others don't have. I'm sure many people have questions.
James Fallacy: Your Excellency, Sheikh Mohammed, thank you very much for your speech. The question is, today Qatar Airways has not been relieved of the laptop ban in the same way that Etihad and Emirates had. Do you think this is the result of a message being sent to the White House to put pressure on you as a result of the tremendous amount of money being spent on corporate lobbying and PR by the UAE and Saudi Arabia?
HE Foreign Minister: These procedures are done through the agencies, called the TSA procedure, which usually sends a team to inspect the security procedures in every airport. I believe they arrived yesterday in Doha, so this is an ongoing process and I believe it is irrelevant to the entire situation.
BBC Reporter: Welcome, your Excellency. In your remarks, you mentioned that some of the demands were meant for the region and some were meant to gain sympathy in the West. Without prejudicing the mediation done through Kuwait, I wonder if you could tell us a little bit about your response to those demands which you submitted in Kuwait on Monday. Secondly, I wonder with regards to your emphasis on not promoting terrorism, would you say that when the new Emir came into power in 2013, you looked at the financing of groups and countries like Syria. As you know for a long time money was just being thrown in, and nobody knew where it went, and some of it did go to groups which are on the UN sanctions list.
HE Foreign Minister: Regarding the first part of your question about our response to the 13 demands. We mentioned yesterday at the press conference that we cannot disclose the content of the response out of respect for the Kuwaiti mediators. Just to let you know, it is within the framework of the international law and does not infringe on the sovereignty of the State of Qatar.
Regarding terrorism financing and all the allegations mentioned in the list of demands, and in their statements and media. I believe that this is something being used to gain sympathy from the West and is a more sellable accusation, so they will find support for the measures they have taken against the State of Qatar. Qatar has committed itself and all the reforms that took place in the country to stop funding from reaching these groups whether in Syria or any of the conflict zones. There is a lot of legislation being reformed and changed, and any person involved in such acts is being prosecuted and convicted, including the people who are on the United Nations sanctions list.
There are travel bans imposed on those mentioned on the sanctions list, their accounts have been frozen, they are under 24/7 surveillance. A report is submitted to the United Nations according to the measures of the resolution, and they are prosecuted in court, and some have already been convicted. We have taken action against them all. The people who are listed by the United Nations and are considered to be Qatari have not been prosecuted yet as they are not in the country, so we cannot impose any measures until they return. There is an individual who went to Syria in 2007, and has never returned to Qatar since then. Qatar's government funding never goes to any radical groups because our funding is always channeled through an agreed mechanism between the group of countries who are supporting the moderate opposition. This mechanism is to support the moderate opposition in their resistance against the brutality of Bashar Al-Assad's regime. Qatar's position on terrorism financing is firm, and we believe that allowing anyone to run freely with terrorism financing will represent a threat for Qatar more than anyone else.
Mai Yamani: I'm an academic member of Chatham House. My question is about the future of the Gulf Cooperation Council. We see that when it was established in 1981, the flourishing but fragile states were going to be united against Iraq at the time, but especially Iran. It was like the tribal saying of "I and my brother against my cousin, and my cousin and I against the outsider." Now we see the fracture and this crisis, so what is the position of Oman and Kuwait? Also, what impact is this crisis going to have on the future of the Gulf?
HE Foreign Minister: We have to look back on May 21st when we held the GCC Summit and then two days later the cyber-attack on the news agency. We agreed that the Gulf countries should have a common strategy in addressing the threats to the collective security of the Gulf countries. It was followed by another meeting with the President of the United States showing that the Gulf countries are essential and strategic allies for the United States, and we have to address one common threat which is terrorism. All those countries agreed on a set of agendas. Then suddenly one day, we saw that there is a diversion from this goal in the form of attacking Qatar instead of addressing terrorism. It represents more obstacles in the way of concentrating our efforts in fighting the real terrorists through the Global Coalition of Countering Daesh and others. It raised the question about the future of the Gulf countries as their priorities are fighting among themselves and to hijack the decision-making ability from an independent country. It is a historical exercise where big countries try to bully the small countries.
I think not having a proper dialogue, which leads us to a sustainable solution which respects the country's sovereignty and based on equality; will set a precedent that might be a challenge for other countries in different regions. The international community should not allow for something like this to happen. Whatever framework or social contract in the future between the Gulf countries should be based on principles that protect each country's sovereignty.
Oman's position has been against any problem or crisis arising at this challenging time where we have enough conflicts around us; Kuwait's position is the same. They are both trying to help with de-escalation and bringing the issue back to the table to negotiate a just solution for all the countries.
Mr. Niblett: You described earlier that Qatar takes a different approach to dealing with political dissent and creating opportunities rather than demonizing groups. Is part of the problem here within the GCC is that you take the same approach with Iran? That the relationship economically and politically is closer and therefore the foreign policy is sufficiently different. What can you say about Qatar's policy towards Iran specifically? Could it be different? One of the first things on the list of demands was to evict any members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Is there something different about the policy with Iran that our audience should know about that is part of the problem?
HE Foreign Minister: The first demands show just how baseless this list is. Talking about severing ties or downgrading the diplomatic representation of Iran, or expelling the IRGC who are not present in Qatar. I invite anyone of you to come and visit Qatar and see how many IRGC guards we have.
Let me tell you more about our policy towards Iran. First of all, it is a neighboring country, and we cannot change geography. We cannot cut Qatar and move it to New Zealand or somewhere else. We have to live alongside each other. We have a shared interest with them; our gas field is a partnership between Qatar and Iran. We have a trade relationship with them, which is ranked fifth among the Gulf countries. 96% of the GCC and Iran trade is with the UAE, which is one of the blockading countries which is asking us to sever ties with Iran.
The Emir of Qatar stated clearly in the General Assembly in 2015 that there needs to be a serious dialogue between the Gulf countries and Iran. Qatar's position has always been to have a healthy and constructive relationship with Iran and based on non-intervention of the other countries' affairs. We don't accept intervention in our affairs, and we don't accept intervening in any other country's affairs. After the re-election of the Parliament in Iran, the President of Iran sent a message to Sheikh Sabah asking him for engagement in dialogue with the Gulf countries. Sheikh Sabah has led these efforts to reach a common position. Qatar participated, along with other Gulf countries, and was implementing the GCC leaders' position to develop the principles and roadmap to engage in a GCC-Iran dialogue. Qatar has nothing different than the other Gulf states; it shouldn't be a different position as this is what we agreed upon in the meeting. If they have their own unique position, then we are not aware of it. Qatar's position is always calling for dialogue and creating a constructive and positive relationship with Iran and with all other countries.
William Peaty: Your Excellency, you have many friends in this room, and many friends of the GCC as a whole amongst them who would love to see this dispute resolved through negotiations, and we wish the mediation of Kuwait every success. From what you and others are saying, as a former diplomat, it doesn't seem to me that is a dispute that will end soon. There is much talk about upping the ante, such as financial sanctions and other sanctions against Qatar. Are there circumstances in which you could see Qatar cutting off the gas from Qatar to the UAE through the Dolphin Project?
HE Foreign Minister: I think that Qatar's supplies to the UAE and Oman, make up approximately 30% to 40% of the electricity in the UAE. 80% of Dubai's electricity comes from the Dolphin Project. We mentioned earlier that even if we had political conflict, we cannot mix the cards. It is Qatar's future reputation, and we are not willing to put this reputation in jeopardy. By allowing ourselves to use whatever economic power we have as political leverage on other countries. Second, we don't see that the people of Dubai, or the UAE, deserve to be affected because of this political conflict. We are sure that they will be affected if we are to cut off the gas supply.
We believe it was a huge mistake for the blockading countries to impose these measures against the State of Qatar while representing themselves as liberal economies and open skies. They are now using these means as political leverage to pressure Qatar and other countries to cut off Qatar and follow the same course.
Our bet is on the longer term where Qatar is seen as a trustworthy economic partner for any company and attracts foreign investments, and their bet is short-term in the form of pressuring Qatar.
Jonathan Rudman: Channel 4 News. Minister, wasn't the final straw for the Saudis your decision to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in ransom money to free Qatari princes; money which may have ended up in Iraq. Second, are you worried that you will be suspended from the GCC?
HE Foreign Minister: Regarding the money that is in Iraq. We have clarified this issue officially from the government of Qatar and the government of Iraq. The funds were going to the government of Iraq and are in their possession and are not with Qatar. If we were going to pay ransoms, we would not do so visibly and transparently. There were some misunderstandings regarding the issue, and the Prime Minister of Iraq has stated unequivocally that no funds went to any militia. I visited the Prime Minister of Iraq right after the release of the hostages. We don't see that the Iraqi government deserves to be accused of facilitating those groups, because they need support from us and all the Gulf countries. We have to help them in their fight against terrorism, and be a reliable partner to them. We need to fill the vacuum that has been left by the Arab countries, and this is a role Qatar was willing to play, but because of the hostage issue, we couldn't afford to do so. However, now we are coordinating very closely with the Iraqi government.
They cannot make such a decision, because it must be by consensus.
Wael Tamimi: Alarabi TV. Welcome to London, Mr. Foreign Minister. The countries that are blockading Qatar are convening now in Cairo, and we hear that they might reject the response that you handed over to the Emir of Kuwait on Monday. Are you prepared for such a scenario? More sanctions, isolation, and divorce as they call it. What happens next? Second, has Qatar been, at any time during this crisis, under any military threat from these countries? Thank you.
HE Foreign Minister: Regarding the meeting of the blockading countries that is taking place now in Cairo. We don't know what they are going to come out with. We have done our part when we submitted the responses, which is out of respect for the Emir of Kuwait, as such demands are considered offensive to any country. Our part of the job is already done, and it is now their turn. They are the aggressors, and the ones who launched the attack on Qatar by imposing all these measures.
They shouldn't expect the first step to be from me; I should expect them to take the first step towards engagement. Whatever measures they are going to take, there will be international laws that everyone should respect. The international law doesn't allow any countries to do what they are doing right now against an independent state. We believe in respecting international law, and that international organizations, in the end, will put an end to this and get justice for the State of Qatar.
Whatever measures they are planning to take, Qatar is ready as we have already received their first shot at us. We are going to do whatever it takes to protect our people, which is what any country would do.
Mr. Niblett: You've got the World Cup coming up in 2022, that presents an additional form of pressure. One would normally think countries put under sanctions can maybe play the long game; we've seen Russia and other countries. What vulnerabilities do you think Qatar faces right now? Specifically, could you play out the long-term? Could you handle this for three, four, five years?
HE Foreign Minister: I think that what we have done in the past few weeks since the beginning of the imposed blockade is to develop different alternatives, and continue to do so to ensure the supply chain. In the short term we will face extra costs, but in the end, we are working to make this a sustainable solution. Whether the blockade continues or stops, we must rely on ourselves as a country to ensure we deliver a World Cup that will attract the entire world.
Mr. Niblett: You may end up, as a result, relying more on Iran and Turkey for alternative supply chains and protection that then exasperates the very conflict we're in at the moment.
HE Foreign Minister: We have Kuwait and Oman, as well.
Ashraf Sadiqi: Independent analyst and member of Chatham House. You had Donald Trump's visit on 20th of May then within two weeks there was this blockade. Did Qatar miss tell-tale signs when Donald Trump was in Saudi? Second, Qatar and Iran appear to give more freedom of speech to their citizens. Is the West helping you out in terms of these difficult times to protect these fundamental human rights within Iran and Qatar? What is your understanding during your visits to the European capitals?
HE Foreign Minister: I mentioned earlier that nothing was raised in the Ministerial Council of the GCC or the Summit or within the bilateral meeting which took place between the Emir and the President. We didn't see anything raised from the United States government, and we believe that this conflict originated mainly from the Gulf countries imposing the blockade in coordination with Egypt. One of their many reasons for this blockade is that we violated the Riyadh Agreement after Trump's visit, but they used other reasons as well.
Regarding freedom of speech and visits to the European capitals. There is an understanding that the blockade is illegal and wanted to stop free speech and media in Qatar, and primarily to control our independent policy making. The institutions hosted in Qatar, think tanks, and universities have all been questioned in 2014 during the riff which resulted in the withdrawal of the ambassadors. We understand the views of the European countries and the United States that the Gulf countries are their allies, so they want this issue to be solved, which is what we want. They want to support the GCC, and this is something we always call for.
From the humanitarian aspect, we have a lot of issues as a result of the blockade on Qatar; we have more than 12,000 humanitarian cases and families separated in Qatar. This blockade has resulted in children living away from their mothers, wives living away from their husbands, and families torn apart due to these measures. There are other issues, like silencing voices that show support for Qatar. They talk about terrorism, and what they are doing is intellectual terrorism. You can't prevent people from expressing their views if they show support for another country. We believe all these measures taken against Qatar expose the real reasons behind the entire move.
Abdulla Hamoud: Journalist and member of Chatham House. I have a problem with the concept of the blockade as people are traveling in and out of Doha. It doesn't look like a blockade; it's a boycott. It looks like Qatar is upping the stakes to make life difficult. The second point is regarding the November 2014 agreement which was signed by Qatar. I'm not sure if any of the 13 demands was in that agreement and whether it was dealt with or not. The third point is related to the Turkish contingent in Qatar. What can the Turkish soldiers do that the Americans in Al-Udeid base could not? Is hyperactive Qatar overreacting?
HE Foreign Minister: I heard many opinions about Qatar trying to exaggerate by calling it a blockade and not a boycott. I can tell you that what has been imposed on Qatar is illegal. When you are blocking the only land access I have to receive fresh food supplies, it is a blockade, not a boycott. When you block international skies and not allow my flights to fly over, it is a blockade, not a boycott. A blockade doesn't mean that people can't leave the country, we can leave the country as we have only one access via the North border with Iran. We are ensuring food supplies by air because Qatar has the resources to do so; otherwise, the country would be in a boycott, not a blockade. Qatar is paying ten times the cost for shipping from our government funds because we have funds for it. If Qatar were not at this level of income, it would not be able to cover the needs of its people from food and medicine. A blockade was imposed on Libya and Iran some time ago, and they were never cut off of medicine or food or stopped people from flying in and out of Libya.
When you have a mother holding her seven-year-old child pulled away, and not allowing him to travel with her or allowing him to stay with her, this is a blockade; it is inhumane and illegal. I'm sorry, but no one can call it a boycott.
Regarding the Riyadh Agreement of 2014 and the 13 demands. The Riyadh Agreement never stated that there are demands pointed to one country. It is an obligation on all Gulf countries. We have an agreement that states a framework, which should prevent the Gulf countries from having any future conflict, and to provide sustainable solutions for any conflict to be solved. They stated an arbitration mechanism in this agreement to avoid any escalation measures that they never invoked. If we are going to talk about the violations of the Riyadh Agreement, it will take me until tomorrow to list the violations they have committed. Finally, the Riyadh Agreement never mentioned any measure to compromise the sovereignty or independence of any country.
Regarding the Turkish military cooperation or Turkish base or whatever they want to call it. The Americans are not sufficient for our country. We should ask the question: why is it harmful to the Gulf if we have Turkish military cooperation? Every country of the Gulf has military cooperation with other countries. Qatar has military cooperation with the United States, United Kingdom, France, Turkey, Canada and a lot of other friendly nations. Turkey is a NATO member, Qatar is using this cooperation agreement to use Incirlik Air Base in the Global Coalition Against Daesh. Qatar is using this for our military training. Why would our military training harm other Gulf countries if we have a Turkish presence in the Gulf? There are countries in the Gulf who have Russian presence, and maybe third countries will raise complaints. We don't see a real reason behind it unless they want Qatar not to have military backup.
Florence: Member of Chatham House. Your Excellency, you have pledged a significant investment in the UK in the lead up to Brexit. Do you have a message to the public here in the UK, to perhaps reassure the public about that and to investors holding significant investments in your country and the wider region?
HE Foreign Minister: Qatar and the United Kingdom have around a 100-year-old relationship. We have confidence in the United Kingdom's economy and have already invested 40 billion pounds in the United Kingdom. It is part of Qatar Investment Authority's strategy, and also shows our confidence in the United Kingdom's economy and our commitment to the partnership between Qatar and the United Kingdom, despite any steps taken by the United Kingdom.
Robert Gardner: Chatham House member. Does America have a foreign policy for the Middle East? If it does, what is it? Second, regarding the World Cup. What positive points did you put forward in order to obtain the World Cup if it's played in the summer?
HE Foreign Minister: I can only answer for Qatar. Qatar and the United States have a very strong and strategic relationship. We are partners in defence, security, political coordination, economic and cultural cooperation. We have six US universities, 11,000 US soldiers, the largest air base, and center of command for the Global Coalition. There have been many efforts undertaken between Qatar and the United States. We believe that the United States' policy, that we have known for decades, has never changed. The Gulf countries are important countries for the stability of the region, and a reliable partner for the United States.
Victor Ballmer Thomas: Former Director of Chatham House. There are four countries involved in this act of aggression against Qatar. It is very hard to think that Bahrain or the UAE would have taken the initiative; that leaves two countries. Which of them are the ringleaders or are they both equally responsible?
HE Foreign Minister: With all due respect to all four countries I cannot undermine any of them. We believe Saudi, and the United Arab Emirates mainly drive this campaign, and I think those are the countries we have to engage with to uncover the real motives and grievances behind it. If Egypt or Bahrain have their reasons, they are welcome to present them. I think the primary driver is Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Any mediator efforts have focused on them, this what we have noticed and not what we know.