 I'm Lise Dusset, BBC correspondent, and I first moved to Jordan in 1994. And being here today at the Dead Sea, at the King Hussein bin Telal Convention Centre, at the lowest point on earth, I can't help but remember the stirring words of King Hussein a little more than 20 years ago, when he invoked the urgency of peace by saying world leaders had to do it for the sons and the daughters of Abraham. Here we are, more than two decades on, and it's not just the sons and daughters of Abraham that are waiting, it's the grandsons and granddaughters and grand-grandsons and grand-granddaughters. And the risks and dangers now confronting this region would have been unimaginable in 1994. And yet for all of the dangers confronting the region, and the possibilities too, I think all of you would agree with me here today that the core problem, the core issue to be resolved remains the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And a man who believes it in his core, who has spent a lifetime on this issue, is our guest in conversation for the next half hour and more. Shimon Peres, your life, you're a young man, you're younger, a young man who is older than the State of Israel. And your story is indeed the story of Israel and the region. A man who played the leading role in developing the Israeli military in its early years as a state. A man who also won the Nobel Peace Prize with Yasser Arafat in an effort to make peace. Twenty years on since the Oslo peace process, Shimon Peres, there is no peace, no process. Oslo is doing pretty well, but that is about it. And we would like to explore with you a little bit about how you see the way ahead. But let me begin first with a personal question. You're a man who has always said that you find vacations boring. You have held every top job in Israel. You have served in 12 governments. You completed your term as the Israeli president. How would you describe your job now? To look to the future like always. I think the past is irrelevant. And what happened happened. It's over. Now we have to look with a fresh eye at the new world, by the way. It's not there is just another tomorrow. We live in a tomorrow already. Because in addition to the old arrangements that were basically done by governments and people made their life out of the land of agriculture, there was a set of government, which included the defense of the land, the attack of land, you need armies, you went to war. And all of a sudden we found ourselves in a new age of science. Science is borderless. You cannot make the world again divided by borders. Then again, science cannot be conquered by armies. Finished. Science cannot be commanded by governments. Because it depends upon the people who are innovating and innovating in a surprised way. And science changed even the meaning of democracy. It's no longer, it's not longer enough to say that democracy means that every person has an equal right, equal rights. Today you have to adhere to it. Every person has the equal right to be different. Difference as well today recognized as equality. And look at the global companies. You'll find there an assembly of people from all four corners of the world. And we don't need partitions. We cannot organize the globality in governments. Globality is the major economic rule, but there is no global government or global companies. And they exist based upon norms and behavior. And the global companies know they don't have power. They will not have power. The only power they have is good jobs, good products, telling the truth, serving the people. Even there is no room for leaders today. Because leaders cannot order. Leaders can serve. And global companies today are more serving than ruling. And they don't worry anybody. Previously, if I would come to the country, I would have to say I am Israeli or you are an English or American or whatever it is. Today you're a global company. You don't carry a flag. You don't carry a passport. You are not going to win anything but to win the trust of as many clients as you can. So now the world, half of it is already in the new age. Half of it is in a transitional period. And we can see the cost of transition. We live in a new age with an old mind. And it's very hard to get rid of the old mind. You know, historians previously investigated history in order to learn from history. Today they do it in order to escape history. Let's look to the future. You've outlined some of your philosophy of business, your philosophy of globalization. Many of the men and women sitting here are here in the Dead Sea because they want a better, stronger economic future. But they all know that there cannot be a stronger, better economic future unless there is a better political future. When you spoke at the World Economic Forum in January before the Israeli elections, you said the Israeli elections would determine the fate of the peace process and whether the stalemate would be broken. And you said the contest in Israel was basically between those who believe in a two-state solution and those who are managing a crisis. Well, the Israeli public voted for those who are managing a crisis. So do you believe the prospects for a two-state solution are now lower? If it's possible to manage a crisis, you don't have a crisis. A crisis is a situation that you cannot manage. And every government must go out of the crisis. Do you think there is a crisis in peacemaking now? The government just started. It's a one week old government. And there were already some major events. Not all of them were accepted as great favor, as you may know. And I think when I think about governments, they told you respect to the prime ministers, to the ministers. They must submit to realities because they cannot change them. So to announce a policy is not enough. You have to follow the real trends in life. And sooner or later, I believe that the trend, the new trend, will have the real world. When you're saying what has the policy so far, what we have to judge so far, are you referring to the effort to try to segregate Israelis and Palestinians on buses in the West Bank? No, no, no. That was a terrible mistake. And even the prime minister himself condemned it. And he said clearly, as I do, this is against our own laws. It is in contradiction with the Declaration of Independence of Israel. In the Declaration of Independence of Israel, all people are equal, have the right. And we have two million citizens who are Arabs. So what? So they are, I mean, there are citizens with the same rights like any other citizen. And they have 13 member in the parliament. And they are being counted. And also what you said about peace, I know, let's not forget there was something that we shouldn't forget. It's true that we have to have peace with the Palestinians the sooner the better. It's no way in my judgment to achieve it without the two state solution. But don't forget that we have already two agreements of peace, one with the largest Arab country, Egypt, and other with our nearest Arab neighbor, Jordan. And it holds on already a long time withstanding many difficulties and many disappointments. Either them or us doesn't matter. But it's a piece. War never ends. Peace never stops. Help us to understand Israeli society. Now you said this morning that a large majority of Israelis would like a two state solution and absolutely believe this. Yes. But everyone here would have watched the Israeli election. And of course, we're going to accept the verdict of the Israeli public. But the vote seemed to swing in the final days when Prime Minister Netanyahu made it clear that there would be no Palestinian state on his watch. What are we to understand then about the Israeli public? Are they moving? Are they truly still believing in a two state solution? Or how do we interpret their vote for someone who said it would not happen? Prime Minister Netanyahu just this week, the foreign minister of Norway and the foreign minister of the European Union, it made clear that he didn't give up the vision of the two state solution. So it's not dead. Now counting depends how did it find. If the Prime Minister says I am for a two state solution, I would say he belongs to the majority. He's appointed a chief negotiator, Sylvan Shalom. Yes, he's on record saying he does not believe in a two state solution. We all know it took Nixon to go to China that history can bring surprises. Well, I don't think that you can be a member of a government without following the policy of the government. Private views are private views. They were the Prime Minister declares on behalf of his government to foreign ministers. I think the rest of the members of the cabinet have to follow suit. You probably know better than any other Israeli leader, the difficulties and the challenges of making peace. We've heard from President Obama this week, he's done an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, in which he talked about how the present situation was at a dead end. How would you see, how would you advise to try to revive this peace process and if it's possible to do so? The best way is to start as soon as possible the negotiations between us and the Palestinians. We agreed on many points. It doesn't start from zero. There is also an interesting document that was published by the Arab League by this audience calling for peace. Some points are acceptable. Other points are controversial. So we have to negotiate the controversial points, but we don't start from nothing. And I believe that what should be done, I just saw the president of the Palestinian people and he says he's ready to go to negotiate without prior conditions. I think it's a right approach. When you call for talks, should these be direct talks or should it revert to what John Kerry had brought about, which was mediated talks with the United States? Well, we have had dark talks with the Egyptians, and it succeeded. We have had dark talks with the Jordanians, with King Hussein, God bless his memory. And they wind it up as a success. I think we have to follow the same way, better to speak face to face. Because actually, when you negotiate, you're looking for alternative solutions. Then you see that two parties cannot solve, cannot agree. And you think you have two options. One thing that I would advise to every negotiator, never forget there is a third option that you didn't think about. And that may be the option that will be accepted. Because when you have two options, you have already two oppositions to the options, either by the other side or in by yourself. And you have always to introduce creativity and ingenuity to overcome the bridge. And I remember I was active in the two negotiations. There were problems we thought we cannot solve. The last moment, we found a way out overcome them. And for that reason, I think direct talks is the best way. I don't know what President Abbas said to you today, but what we know is that the Palestinians have begun to look at another option joining the ICC pursuing statehood through the United Nations recognition in European capitals, because they say, we've waited 20 years since Oslo, we cannot wait any longer. What do you say to them? I say what I think, namely, that the ICC is not necessarily machinery to make peace. There's another task, whom to blame. But it is not as simple to ask the ICC a priority to blame somebody. Because one of the rules of the ICC is, if they found that the government that is being accused has investigated the case herself with the proper group of charges, that's another story. So ICC has to start and understand the postpone that the considerations. But ICC is a problem. That's the reason, for example, like the United States is not a member of it. You cannot be a law enforcer if you don't have laws. We don't have a book of international laws. And what about their quest to get recognition in various European and other capitals? I think... Country by country, a Palestinian state is born, but not on the ground. I am not sure this is a very wise way for the simple reason, because at the Security Council, there are members that can put a veto. Better to go. We are for a Palestinian state. We think it should be recognized. But we suggest the recognition will come after we agree, not before a dot instead. Otherwise, you go again in another controversy, and people are becoming angry and protesting, but as itself. You have to, first of all, agree and then to recognize, because we have complicated problems. And just to give a recognition as an expression of words doesn't serve the purpose. I think everything should be judged on the record of doings, not on the record of declarations. Do you understand the Palestinian frustration then to say, we've waited 20 years, and so they're judging it by the record that there isn't a state now, and they believe it becomes less and less possible by the year. Look, I can understand the Palestinian frustration. I hope the Palestinian can understand our frustration as well. And not that I want to go into an argument, but I want to make people understand why is there so much opposition to continue the peace process? One day, the most unexpected person, Ariel Sharon, who was the greater settlement maker, stood up and to the surprise of everybody, he says, I am going to leave Gaza. We had 22 settlements there, 8,000 settlers. We are going to leave unconditionally. It was a tragedy in the eyes of many people. To bring back the 8,000 settlers back home, we have had to spend over $3 billion, and we have to send 75,000 policemen with integrity. Yet we did it completely. Gaza was handed over to Palestinian lands. None of us, including myself, can understand then or now why after having back everything, and Gaza becoming completely Palestinians. Why did Hamas started to fire missiles against us? Against mothers? A million mothers that couldn't sleep a night with their children? Why? We are not in Gaza. So, you know, frustrations is not who is announcing it with stronger voice. But you must be sensitive when you negotiate to the outside as well. This is, I mean, as you know, the issue of Gaza. And now, excuse me, just, and you know, that's one of the problems people say, how can you trust? Suppose we shall do like it in the West Bank. And we shall give away, give back the land, some of the land. And they'll start shooting at us. It's very hard to convince the people. You know, the people are saying to me as a negotiator, for example, says, yes, we are for peace. Yes, we are ready to pay the price. Why are you paying so much? Why are you so naive to believe everything? Or can I convince him that I am a great negotiator? Very hard. I can convince them that we are not paying too much, but we are really making peace. And you know, it's hard to convince the people. Peace is a little bit like love. You have to close a little bit your eyes in order to get to the wedding. And not look back. Gaza, as everyone in this room knows, the situation in Gaza is a complicated history, including control of the borders and control of the sea. But we're not going to, for the purposes of this conversation, we won't. No, Gaza is not complicated. We recognize Gaza as part of the Palestinian land. In Gaza, the borders are clear. And we are not there. So what is complicated? The complication comes from something that complicates the life of all of us, Arabs and the Jews alike. And that is terror. The problem in Gaza is not territory, but terror. And it is in many other countries, like in Syria, like in Iraq, like in Yemen, like in Libya. We have a common problem. And I think we have to draw in forces to bring an end to terror. To terror is to killing innocent people in the thousands. And blood is flowing in the streets. Or to see a million refugees, all of a sudden, men and women and all the women and young boys are losing their homes. That is the great problem today. This is again, try to help us to understand the thinking in Israeli society when they when Israelis look at Gaza, then they are members of the government who start advocating the annexation of the West Bank of unilaterally drawing the lines of the West Bank of one state solution. Different options are being being proposed by leading members of the Israeli government. Are these serious options? Would they would they have a chance of being implemented? Options have the character of not being implemented. It's an option. So people are free to suggest whatever they want. We have to refer to facts and deeds. The problem in life is never what to be. The problem in life is always what to do. And I would refer to the doings, not to the speeches. I mean, the Middle East is not short of speech makers. Some of them are even a little bit exaggerating. It doesn't matter. But what really counts are the facts. Let me bring it to the business community. Since many people here are from the business community, you talked today about how glad you were to be back in the Dead Sea. You've come to many of the world economic forums. And I think many of the people who are coming here will remember that one of the hopes of this forum, and in fact, you can describe the forum today as one of action and hope, was that it could serve to bring together Israeli, Palestinian and Arab business people to have a better economic cooperation. But in fact, it hasn't had that impact. Nine wefts on. That dream, that ambition, which seemed to make good economic and financial sense, has not been achieved. I think you are right, but only partly. Because today there is a dominating economy. It's the global one. And the global economy, there are no Arabs, no Jews, no black, no white. It's as I have said, an economy without borders. And an economy without differences. An economy which is based of a fair play, transparency and honesty. And there are a great deal of business already between the economic forum here, or like many other global companies, that there are corporations already, much more than people know, but not enough that people hope for. So we have to push it ahead. I think we have really to conduct our peace negotiations on two levels, a two deck bus, one the national, the other the global. One should not be instead of the other, and the other and one should be before the other. It can be done simultaneously and parallel. And that's why I have much respect for this meeting and gatherings. But even with global companies, we will find today, global companies who come from different nations and are going to many other nations, even if they don't have good relations. Because the global meetings, you don't have confrontations. We have really cooperation. We started actually the first meeting. And I think that also affected very much the global forum. And that was a very large gathering that took place in Casablanca. There were 4,000 people from the Arab world, from Israel, from elsewhere, kings, ministers, businessmen, entrepreneurs, it was a great success. And many connections started there. And they existed this day. You know, usually, the business people are not as anxious to publicity as the politicians are. A politician must, unfortunately, keep his name on the headline. Well, there wasn't. And the companies give their name on the balance sheet. There was a time about 15 years ago, where in Israel and in Palestinian areas, they said, let us try, let us the business community try to make peace, because the politicians are failing. And then they too became frustrated and disappointed. Why? Peace came followed with Egypt and Jordan. And our joint business. And there are also joint business between among individuals, from many Arab countries, from Israel, from elsewhere. Because business is business. And conflicts are conflicts. They are not the same. And I really believe that the global economy gives us a chance not to wait until the peace negotiations will be completed. But right now, to deepen the relationship, because I want to tell you what one learned, including myself, is you cannot escape poverty just by agriculture. The best way to escape poverty is by high tech. And two large countries that were among the poorest on earth, China and India, escaped poverty, not by foreign aid, but by introducing technology and high tech. There is no reason why Arab countries or not Arab countries will not do alike. And they can do. Then again, I would like to say there are 400 million Arabs in the Middle East. 60% of them are below the age of 25. As the President Assisi says today, they are the future. Many of them are ready on their way to enter the new age. 144 millions of them have smart phones. If you have a smart phone, it's like having X-rays. And I think they are the future. And I think they will save their countries. And all of us pray for them. Because the better the Arabs will have it, the better relations we shall have with the Arabs. And we are very much interested to see the Arab world flourishing. And we feel like many Arabs, that the tragedy is terrible, that leads to nowhere. I, there are different religions. I don't know any religion that says that to cut the head is an order from the Lord in heaven. I don't know any religion like it. And I think also the religious leaders have to raise their voice. Because the terrorists are very smart in their public relations. And they tempt many young people to come and become terrorists telling them a simple truth, cut the head of people and those of the problems. It's nonsense. And I think the leaders, the religious leaders must come together, raise their voice. Tell the young generation it's wrong. It's a sin. It shouldn't be done. And believe me, we are on the same front. Exactly the same front. That was changed in the Middle East. The terror today is the real call, the real challenge to all of us. They are endangering lives of all of us. Well, let's finish this conversation with one last look ahead by you. This of course is a forum which wants to look at the opportunities, the potential in the region and not the problems. And yet the problems are there. We have the advance of the so called Islamic State in Iraq and in Syria. There's the unresolved Israeli Palestinian peace process and an American election is looming, which means America's eyes will will be elsewhere. So there is a window, a very important window right now. How would you see the next six months ahead? Because these are business people, they want to know what for their planning, what is going to happen in the next six months? What will you leave to them today? I can't tell you what I wish it will happen. But I'm not sure I can tell you what will happen. I don't have this extra power. I wish in the six months, the Palestinians and the Israelis will meet together and conclude the negotiations that was started and right now interrupted to renew it. I believe in if it will be successful in six months, we may have peace. If we shall have peace, I believe then there will be a united front of all of us to stop the tragedy, the danger and the ugliness of terror. It can happen in one month, it can happen in six months, maybe it will take more because none of us is a master of what's happening. There are some people, even in Israel maybe, who think that you can master a status quo or you can manage a crisis. It's nonsense. If you can manage a crisis, you don't have a crisis. If crisis is manageable, what is the problem? You have to get rid of the crisis and you can get rid of the crisis by a positive door and not just by a negative submission. And that's what I would wish to see in the coming six months. Most companies like to have a plan B, so you've given them plan A that peace will work in the next six months. Give them the plan B, what if it doesn't work? We have to try harder. I don't have any answer. Shimon Peres, at 91, you have been trying for a very long time. 92 now. Thank you very much for sharing your wisdom. I think we would all want to believe that peace is possible. I think everyone in this room knows and has lived through some of the difficulties and challenges, but everyone should try harder, but hopefully the situation will become easier. Thank you very much for spending time with us today, Shimon Peres.