In Italy, there was some scandal. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to the Executive Director of Rai Com (that is, a person in charge, not an unknown stringer) Monica Maggioni. The interview was supposed to be shown on the Rai News 24. The time of the show was reported to Damascus, but the broadcast did not go on air at the appointed time. She did not come out later, although Damascus was repeatedly fed breakfast. In the end, the Syrian side lost patience and she published an interview on her own, without coordination with Rome.

Of course, editorial policy knows a lot of geeks. Anyone related to the media as at least an editor, even an author, knows many cases when an explanation was used: “You see, you are right, but this case does not fit the moment.” Or even without explanation - on the principle of "my dear, good, guess yourself."

And in the early Soviet years, one beginning author was perplexed when the manuscript was returned to him with the editorial note “n. P.". He thought for a long time what this means: Nikolai Pavlovich? Nikita Petrovich? - until it dawned on him that it meant "he won’t."

But then the beginning authors, while the leaders of the people hitherto from such fortune-telling were spared. If an official spokesperson interviewed a foreign leader, extraordinary reasons were needed to prevent it from going. Either extraordinary events were to happen in the publishing country, breaking the entire agreed news network - a 9/11 disaster or something like that, or the interviewee said completely impossible things and did not give in to any attempts to smooth the speech - for example, he called the head of the publishing countries an enemy of the human race. Or at least a mediocre mattress.

But the cautious Bashar al-Assad did not say anything like that in this case. The maximum crime in his speech is not a completely reverent attitude towards the United States. Although after everything that the Americans did during the Arab spring of 2011 and beyond, it would be difficult to expect any other relationship.

In addition, Assad did not give an interview to CNN, but to the news division of the public company Radiotelevisione Italiana. Unless to consider that the decrepit Rome is in awe of the new Rome, that is, Washington, and does not allow on television any criticisms of the new Rome, even if they came from foreign third parties.

This, of course, would explain everything. Even the fact that, for example, Assad’s interview is not a protocol speech of a foreign leader, which does not contain anything new and interesting, and without which (if not diplomatic politeness) it could be easily dispensed with, and a speech quite interesting for Italians .

The Syrian leader can be treated as you like, but you can not deny that he survived in difficult circumstances, when many had already rushed to bury him, and that with such persistence he still has a considerable influence on the Middle East.

And these dispositions have a direct relation to Italy. Just because of its geographical location. And a long coastline.

For the refugee factor has not been canceled. For Italy, this is not some kind of abstraction - “like somewhere in Turkey, in the far side, people are cutting and fighting”, but a quite tangible neighborhood, and behaving as if the Syrian leader does not exist (and who then exists at all? invented by MI6 "White Helmets"?), not very realistic.

However, the Syrian leader in this situation is not faultless. Rai Com is a gigantic broadcasting company covering most of Italian broadcasting. News broadcasting, political broadcasting, cultural broadcasting, regional broadcasting, etc. With such an overwhelming volume, you can call it public, you can call it private - in any case, it will be obvious that things can’t do without government. If the Italian government through the company Rai shows Assad his attitude towards him - he has the right.

But then why humiliate ourselves, as did Damascus, which had long sought the promised broadcast? If you promised, and then threw it, revealing strong international impoliteness, it is better to tacitly take notes and go to the next agenda items.

Although it was better to watch the Rai somersaults, of course, was entertaining.

The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.