 Welcome everybody and with a new map for the Middle East I think we should talk about the new democracy imperative. I'd like always these sessions to be interactive because I think you hear a lot of guests talking on TV channels and in newspapers and I think all of you should get the chance to talk to officials, ask them whatever you want to ask. So we will start with a short round of one question to each of our guests and then the floor is open to you. Please remember that this is an open session. You'll be able to tweet and interact with the people over Twitter or even Facebook as we are in this session. I've also tweeted a couple of days ago and I have some questions. Let me first of all introduce our guests, Mr. Amir Musa, former secretary general for the Arab League. You're welcome. And Mr. Rafiq bin Nabdi Salam, he's the foreign affairs minister for Tunisia. And welcome Mr. Paul Swibwoda, if I pronounce well, that's good. And he's the president of Demosoropa, a public policy institute in Warsaw. Mr. Sinan Ulgun, and he's the former Turkish diplomat, is a chairman of Adam. It's a think tank in Istanbul and a visiting scholar in Carnegie Europe. And Mr. Ashraf Khalil, he's a writer, journalist, he's an independent writer and he just issued his book about the revolution in Egypt. Welcome everybody. We'll be mainly addressing three questions in this session. We're going to be talking about how to build trust and the social contract. What are the fundamentals of reconciling the relationship between Islam and democracy? And the last question we'll be addressing is what are the next steps to build new institutions and governance? I think two of our guests want to speak Arabic. I think three. No, so you took Ashraf to your side. You told me, I like. You're so happy with me. You're so happy that I speak Arabic. So you know that I speak Arabic. I'm going to start with you. You're so happy to be here, so I should still have my self-talk to you. I wonder to have the key in the social strategy and the government. This trust is acting in the world, not only in each and every Arab world. It is a long history of corruption, of wealth that is only held by a few under a dictatorial regime, which led to complete lack of confidence. 18 days of revolution followed by parliamentary elections, presidential elections. Is this enough to rebuild the confidence between the society and the government? Thank you, Rima. You have used the world, the society and the civil society. Do you mean the civil society, Rima? I'm talking about confidence amongst all segments of the society. Society of all its ranks in terms of civil society, parties, governmental institutions, political parties in general. We have to say that we are passing through a transitional period. And a transitional period means that relationships will be quite shaky. The relationship will not be very stable amongst the various elements of the society, whether we're talking about the regime, the government, the society at large. All elements are not fully controlled in such a relationship. And confidence is also shaken in Egypt. And I believe that in Tunisia the same applies as well as in other Arab countries where we saw people rebelling against the regimes. There was a lack of confidence between the governance and the people, the government and the civil society. Throughout dictatorships there was deterioration of services. There was lack of commitment on the part of the governments, which led to this erosion of confidence. And I have seen this in the campaigns. People would come up and say that politicians made promises during their campaigns, but they did not fulfill them. You mean that this confidence, in spite of the elections, is still lacking? Rather than saying that it is not there, I can say that it is shaken. The confidence is shaken. Rima says it is not even there. So in order to rebuild that confidence, we need first democracy. Democracy will give sufficient space for all elements of the society to express themselves. And they will not be mirrored by standards and onlookers. And implementation would not be monopolized by one party or by one side. There will be representatives on the council, on the various councils, in the rural, municipal councils, etc. This will help to build up the confidence that is shaken already. Another point which is important is the following. The performance of the new governments. Will they continue to promise and not fulfill? Or will their performance be far better? That is to say they will commit themselves and that they will implement their commitments. So we have to say that it is a pledge. It's not a promise, it's a pledge. So it's like an acknowledgement of I hereby acknowledge to do this or that. I have to commit to do this or that. It's not only a promise. This is how the governments should address their people, their citizens. The performance of governments, as I have said, is thus very important. Thirdly, we have to change educational systems. Educational curricula and systems have led to this shaken confidence. So it is not only democracy and implementation of or execution of promises, but we have also to include the third element, which is how we can deal with the achievements of the various nations in the teaching of the curricula. Which would give a new character to the relationship between the governor and the governor. Tunisia is the first country that have started the Arab Spring, and I was there and I covered the stories there. I have met with various young people who had PhD, even three or four PhDs while they were unemployed or they did not have jobs. So who is supporting democracy? In order for democracy to thrive, what are the main elements and what are you doing about that in order to build on the democracy? Democracy is a process. We cannot move from one situation to another situation and we will witness the birth of democracy within 24 hours, not at all. However, we have started on very good and solid grounds. We are shaking the foundations of an old regime, which was not democratic at all. The difference between the two regimes in Egypt and Tunisia are only in the degrees of hegemony. Hegemony over all sectors and segments of society that have become tools for some families. It is not very easy to change a regime overnight. We are in the process of doing that. We are in the process of building new foundations based on political participation. What is very important is to have overlapping consensus in Tunisia. Not a single political or social movement under democracy can bear the burdens of governance on its own. But there are certain steps, sir. Yes, we have started to take those steps. We have started off with the holding elections. And we have done all this under a sort of consensus, social consensus, which is unprecedented. We know that revolution leads to the shaking of an old regime. We had constitutions and institutions that were not legitimate. And we had that sort of consensus that allowed us to adopt a provisional government and interim constitutional council. And we held the first democratic elections in Tunisia and in the Arab world. Of course, many elections took place in the Arab world, but they were not true elections, genuine elections. And we were able to build up a multi-party constitutional party in the history of Tunisia based on national consensus. And this is something that cannot be underestimated. This is something to be copied not only in Tunisia, but in other adjacent countries in the Arab world. And we have been reading and think tank researchers that there is something exceptional that has happened in Tunisia, which means that democracy is possible in the Arab world. I want to take Egypt and Tunisia as two examples because the concept of democracy across the Arab world is a very broad one and I think we need the whole day to discuss it. Are elections enough to say we're democratic? And in Egypt, only 40% of the people voted. So you have around 60% of people who said nothing about the new president. Or is it a social pact, a new social pact? And what's the European experience when it comes to a social pact? Yes, thank you very much. It does take to tango democracy is a two-way street, a two-way process by means of which the government needs to open up to be as transparent as possible. But the civil society needs to be able to take up that offer, needs to be able to mediate between the different interests. I think what is fascinating for me in the Arab revolutions is the fact that we have altogether new stakeholders in the process. In Europe we thought that the democracy activists would be the agents of change in the Arab world. It proved to be a very different case that different people from the fruit vendor onwards were actually responsible for change. I think that means our concept of democracy promotion in the world should also evolve to keep up with this process. I'm glad you brought up the European experience because in Europe we have a very fresh experience with democracy building. My part of the world has had democracy for 23 years. It's very fresh. In the old days Poland had democracy of the nobility where 10% in the 16th or 17th century, 10% of the population would vote. But that was it. And then we had authoritarianism, partition, semi-authoritarianism, communism. The whole spectrum that we've covered over the years. In 1989 we started building democracy. It didn't seem that straightforward at the beginning. How did you do it? I think three things were most important. The first one was unleashing the entrepreneurial spirit of other people through deregulation. Two million small and medium-sized enterprises were set up in Poland in the early 90s. So that's very important to give people actually an opportunity to share in, to participate in what is happening. Then the institutions. I think the role of the institutions from the very beginning was enormously important as a stabilizer from institutions of democracy like public embutsmen on to banking supervision, which I think is at the moment state of the art. These are the new institutions which we built. So we were able to leapfrog and built institutions which are now some of the best in the world. And that's a success story. And the third aspect is media. And media in the 90s played an enormously powerful role in providing the checks and balances which we're lacking. We had 28 parties in the parliament after 89. That was the starting point. It's not that different from some of the situations in the Arab world. Mr. Sinan, Turkey played an interesting role in the Middle East with the current events. I will exclude Syria because of the proximity of the country to Turkey and limit the discussion to Tunisia and to Egypt. What role can other countries play or the international community play to help democracy thrive, live, and last long? Because what applies to Europe doesn't apply to the Arab world. It's a new concept in the region. Well, I will start with a statement that would perhaps portray a sense of anti-climax and that is humbleness. I think that when we talk about the role of the international community, especially in regard to democracy promotion in the Arab world, we should be humbled. We should be humbled about what the international community can achieve, and we should be humbled about what the Arab world expects from the international community. Now, if we set the bar too high, we are bound to arrive at a point where we would not have fulfilled the full expectations. So I think that would be my first caveat in terms of what the international community can achieve. Now, when we talk about in concrete terms what can be done, again, I think I will be a bit iconoclastic here, and I will not use the term democracy promotion, but I will certainly champion a more holistic approach to democracy promotion. What I mean by that is that the Western approach to democracy promotion has been somewhat toxic. It has been toxic because of its relationship with the former regimes. We see, we even see, you know, the reaction within the Arab societies to this type of overt democracy promotion. It's not that long ago that the U.S., some of the U.S. foundations were brought to trial in Egypt for the work that they've been trying to do. So what I would champion, really, is to take a more holistic approach and prioritize a partnership for economic governance, first of all, rather than the pure hardcore political approach. So instead of talking about how we can promote human rights, instead of talking about how we can build a better political system, which has been really the approach of the West so far, I would champion a slightly different approach and really look at how the West can first help those societies to achieve a better economic future, which I think is indispensable for consolidating democracy, because now there are enormous expectations from the new governments, and rightly so. But those expectations have to be fulfilled. If those expectations are not fulfilled, that is the biggest risk to democracy in the region. Well, unemployment in Egypt is around 40%. Absolutely. So you would hear people on the streets saying democracy and politics doesn't feed me at the end of the day. Exactly. So that's why in order to give more legitimacy to the transition, to democratic transitions, I think the West and the Arab world can certainly work together on a program of good economic governance. Now, there are two additional reasons why I say so. One is when you look at a colleague of mine did a study of the electoral promises of the Islamist parties across the Arab world, the Brotherhood, Nahda, the Pejedeh in Morocco. And the sense that we get from this is that there is an openness to a collaboration with the West on economics rather than on the political side. On the political side, there is certainly resistance. There is resistance because of the sense of dignity in the Arab world. There is resistance because of the former Western approach of supporting the regimes. But there is an openness to work on a joint economic agenda. And I think this is certainly an area which can be built up to work on a joint program for job creation, to work on a joint program of catching more foreign direct investments on regulatory capacity building. All of these concrete issues where trust can be built between the West and the Arab societies but also going back to your initial question, trust can be built between governments and the people. And I think the secret to that trust as the Turkish experience by and large shows is really to achieve economic success. Yes. Ashraf, I just came back from Egypt. I filmed a special edition of Inside the Middle East on education in the Arab world. And the majority of it came from Alexandria and Cairo. Correct. We stayed there for 10 days or one week. And while we were shooting, what shocked me most, talking to the drivers, they are the real voice on the street. These are the people that go on the streets every day. A few comments surprised me. And these drivers don't work for the government nor the military as far as I know. A lot of Shafiq supporters, right? No, not this. They said it's too chaotic. It's too unorganized. We miss Mubarak days. So I just want to see or know from you what is the time frame that the people are giving the Egyptian government for things to happen? How often and how many times are you going to Tahrir? Are you going to go to Tahrir Square? I think people are very impatient and part of it is understandable. But one of the things, I remember very vividly a protest last summer in Tahrir Square after the revolution, middle of the summer, and someone was walking around with a sign that said, down with the next president. And we don't care who that is. Whoever it is and whoever comes after that. And I think that is, the country might be ungovernable for the short term. I mean, people have so many expectations. You know, there's already a backlash against the Muslim Brotherhood's performance in parliament and they haven't really had a chance to do anything or not do anything. But one thing I think we've discovered in the last year is that I think Egyptians have a very hair trigger tolerance for instability and perceptions of instability. There's this widespread perception that everything is unstable, that crime has shot up, that it's kind of driving people. That's driving this, oh, I miss the Mubarak days. But it's not a perception. Even I as a visitor felt that Cairo is different now, in a good way and in a bad way. A lot of it is psychological. Crime has gotten worse, yes. But it's still much safer than any American city. And it's still, it is. But people, but if you listen the way people think, talk, you just sound like there's people on fire walking down the middle of the street. And it's just not. It has been a little bit exaggerated and I think the predictability of the Mubarak years kind of put us to sleep. And now we're in this situation where things are unpredictable. How much time are you giving the government? I think this government is not going to have that much time before they have to put something on the table to satisfy people. And it's entirely, it's not ideological. It's security and economy, period. And I think the Egyptian people have been patient for a long, long time and they're done. How often do you go to Tahir Square? I mean, I'm there two or three times a week just because it's the middle of the city and that's my metro stop. I take the metro in from Maidi to Tahir Square. So I'm a daily, I'm commuting. But no, whenever there's something going on there, I go to check it out. I'm fortunate that I can get there in 20 minutes from my house. So, but it's part of my daily reality, is Tahir Square. I'd like to open the floor for questions. Let's make it an interactive session. I think the next question will be about the reconciliation between Islam and democracy. Mr. Amr. Yes, I wish to make a comment on the interventions of the two gentlemen, Mr. Ulgen and Ashraf Khalil. First, I do agree with your approach about the holistic approach to the reform. The problem we are facing is not only an economic crisis but a whole crisis in the life of the society. So we need to have a holistic approach. There is no question about that. Not the holistic approach in terms of what we use, the expressions that we use in international conferences, but real holistic approach that deals with education, healthcare, agriculture, the human development, everything. So that is what we need. Yes, indeed, the West can help Egypt and of course Syria but in particular on that account, the economic need and more than that. That is why in my program, and I still believe in it, I suggested that we as Egypt requests, formally requests, a virtual membership in the European Union. We know we are not Europeans. We are not really seeking membership but what we need is a virtual one. Now, how to do this? The Turks, your country, has indeed succeeded because it followed a certain code that if you want to reform the administration, we ask you to do ABC and D and then it moved from administration to the economy to social affairs and so on, chapter after chapter. I suggested and I continue to suggest and I'm going to tell our new government about this proposal or this idea that the best thing to do is to cooperate with the European Union on the reform that would bring a country from the past and transfer it to the future. The holistic approach, the role of the West, it has to be comprehensive but through this door, the virtual membership in a system. And the third one is about the political side. We do not differ with the Europeans on democracy for example but we have a sad experience that they advised, they worked, they pushed that democracy is the name of the game. You have to follow democracy and when they were faced with the victor who is not to their liking, they forgot about democracy. This is not a way of dealing with things. Opting for democracy is a homegrown thing now. It's not because of the West. We need democracy. Who is the victor who is not to their liking? Hamas for example. When the Palestinians bought the idea that we are going to conduct free elections and they did. Hamas won. They said no democracy, we don't agree. That was a joke and a sad joke. That is why the democracy that we are longing for now is homegrown. It is our need, not their need, not their advice. So it's not an imported democracy. I'd like to take the first question. May I make a brief comment on what Ashraf was saying and what you were saying about the drivers and what the drivers said. They do not mean the return to Mubarak's rule but they were, they miss stability and order but they definitely oppose oppression and repression. So you take it that way. The drivers have told you their demand. They need stability, not the return to the previous one. I'd like to take the first question, please. Go ahead. Please, the mic. Oh, sorry. So we've given the mic first. Go ahead. Give a comment but please introduce yourself. Jamal Fakhra from Bahrain. The problem actually from what I understand from Amr Musa and the Tunisian minister is that there is a full conviction that democracy is the solution to all problems. I believe that what will happen now is the following. There will be a breaking down of the society. There will be factionism. There will be various groups within the society and we will not witness a true citizenship spirit. Unfortunately, we have to admit that democracy is a process and we have seen a transfer from certain groups to parties. The transfer of power has come to parties that do not have any experience and they will practice what has been practiced against them. So do not let us not expect that all our problems in the Arab world will be resolved through this transfer to democracy. Democracy cannot be the only solution. It has to be preceded by a process that would lead to a change of mentality and a true understanding of democracy in the Arab world. We have various problems such as the lack of freedom of expression and the civil rights, human rights that have not been respected and even the people who have assumed power nowadays do not truly understand this and this means that we will have negative repercussions. Maybe I can have a very short comment. Farid Yasin, the Iraqi ambassador in France. We have started off with elections in Iraq and the result now is that we had the third round of national elections. I have to say the following, that there is something very important when we talk about elections. The electoral code or law should be very carefully chosen in order to choose the principles for representation on a careful basis or else we will have tribalism and this can be resolved as I have said. If we have carefully studied electoral law, unfortunately in Iraq in the first round of elections that took place in December 2005, the UN has adopted an electoral process or code that has encouraged tribalism and we amended that electoral law. So this is very important, it is very important to take that into consideration. Mr. Abdel Salam, would you like to answer? Yes, I will answer to that query or that comment from Bahrain about democracy that might bring back tribalism and caibism and sectarianism. We don't have magical solutions in the political arena or else we will be dreaming if we think that we will have such magical solutions. We are human beings and we have certain conduct within a certain time frame and we need some time for political solutions to become stable. I don't want to talk about things in a dramatic manner as if we are going back to the old heaven rather than this democracy. Is this dramatic or is this pragmatic when we are talking about sectarianism? It is something that exists in the Arab world. Yes, we have seen this in Iraq, in Tunisia and in Egypt but it is not that dramatic because revolution by nature means that we are shattering the foundations of the old system. To dismantle the old regime means that we will go through a transitional phase otherwise we will not have revolution. Maybe if we don't do that we will have a coup d'etat but not a true political revolution. A true political revolution means a shaking up of the old regime which would lead to political, social and economic problems. It is not that dramatic. We have a clear experience in Tunisia. Who can say that under Bilhane it was better than the current situation even in Egypt. We know that there are difficulties that are linked to transitional period. Let us go back to a discussion that we can really hold. We are not comparing Ben Ali and Mubarak's times and democracy. We are talking about whether democracy is only a matter of the elections or what are the concrete steps. This is the discussion. This is what I wanted to say. Democracy is a process. It is a process, no doubt. But democratic mechanisms cannot be underestimated. Let me please answer the question. Democratic mechanisms are extremely important and essential. Without these mechanisms you can call it whatever you want. It will not be democracy. Democracy is not in the philosophical claims or ideological claims. Democracy is in the pragmatic mechanisms and the checks and balances. The freedom of expression, the independence of the judicial system, these are the foundations of democracy as a pragmatic political system. Let me please go ahead. Thank you, Rima. Thank you, Rima. My name is Al-Monsef Sheikh Ruhu. I'm a parliamentarian in the National Council in Tunisia. I'm deputy chair of the financial committee. I'm in the opposition. I'm in one of the opposition parties. And I would like to respond to some of the questions that were posed going back to the role of opposition in democracy. Democracy is not about democratic elections, electing a ruler to rule as he pleases. Democracy is about electing a parliament that will select a government. But there is always an opposition that has a responsible role to play. My question is, what is the responsibility of the opposition? Opposition is not just to oppose the ruling party. Opposition has to propose as well its opposition and proposition. They say no, but they also give the alternative. Opposition is also not just listening to foreign agendas, like in our country listening to what Europe has to say. Or as our Turkish friend here said, Europe two years ago used to say in Tunisia, the choice is between Taliban and dictatorship. Where were we, the Democrats at the time? Europe today cannot interfere or tries to interfere with some opposition parties to try to break the common ground that we are trying to build in our country. What is the true role of democracy in the Arab Spring today? A true role of the opposition in the Arab Spring today. This is a question that I pose to Mr. Sribouda and also to Mr. the Turkish speaker with us today. What is the importance of rotation in rule and governing? Hamid Tamar from Algeria. I think that I agree completely. The transition period is a process. How long it will be, you ask question? The time. There is no answer to this question. It's historical. It could be two days. It could be two years depending on the country. Depending on the rapporteur force between the stakeholders or within the society. It depends on the history of the country. So it's very difficult to answer. It will last two years or three years or four years. The problem is to observe what are the forces within society which are taking over indeed and be sure that these people who are taking over are in the right direction when it comes really to democracy. The answer of Sia Marmoussa when he said the problem should be holistic. Holistic in the side which is defined by Sia Marmoussa. Because defined in terms only of developing, development, good governance, economic governance is not enough. It's certainly not enough. The previous regime tried to do that. I mean to develop the country. But the problem is indeed was the organization, how the things were undertaken, how the dialogue was going with the other parties. And that's the reason why I think it's more than simply advising to go for development. Turkey went for development, succeeded because they did both. They did democracy and they did development at the same time. They went for Europe but at the same time they were transforming their whole system. That's the reason why the problem is really a rupture and rupture, a complete cut with the past and it should be done very quickly, as quickly as possible. Finally, the question which our Jordanian colleague was saying that probably we have to teach people that there is a learning before democracy, that's nonsense. Because the learning process is with democracy. When you start democracy, indeed, that the learning process will start at the same time. There is no such thing as to wait that people will be ready for democracy, to go for democracy. That doesn't work. We have to jump and when we are in democracy, because democracy is not elections. Democracy is holistic. It means really the whole society should move and given the right to talk, to exchange, to have freedom and to set up. If we don't have that sort of holistic approach. Thank you Mr. Abel Hamid. I'll pass the question to Mr. Paul coming from Mr. Munsif and then we'll hear Mr. Sunan. Thank you very much. Let me just make one plea really, because as I listened to the discussion about chaos, about the risks ahead, one thing comes to my mind. It's not cherish the symbolism of the Taqiri Square. Cherish the symbolism of what happened. That's really the most important and invaluable thing that you've got. The know-how you can bring from other places. It will take years, it will be difficult. But the most important thing you have is this immense incredible narrative that was created. And if you look at Eastern Europe, if you look at a country like Ukraine that wasted its chance with the Orange Revolution. And now it's gone. Nobody is going to listen any longer to any opposition figures who think that experience could have a rerun. It's over. So once you create a grey zone and you make too many compromises, you waste that opportunity. Opposition is extremely important in building the mainstream consensus and addressing the real issues. And I think that's an advice to both the governments and the opposition from our experience. Focus on the real issues. Don't create additional problems. You will have enough problems of your own. And it will take years. It will be difficult. In 95, 6 years after the Polish transition started, I remember one of our top columnists writing in January of that year predicting what's going to happen during the year that we will either go through the needle's eye to the west or we will get stuck in the mud of Pińsk, Pińsk being a town in Belarus in the east of the country. That tells you a lot about the existential uncertainty which we still felt 6 years after the transformation started. Which is justified because of the immense scale of the transition. Mr. Sinan, there were some questions and criticism probably or points raised if you would like to answer. Indeed. Thank you. First I want to react to Mr. Musa. I wish the EU had farsighted leaders as you because when you bring aboard a concept like virtual membership that's a very appealing idea but I don't think that the EU today has the intellectual capacity to respond to that and that's from a pro-EU person. Secondly, on the role of the opposition many people actually define the quality of democracy by the quality of its opposition not by the quality of its government. So I think it's really a fundamental question. It's really the question that divides whether the democracy that we are going to build or that you are going to build is going to be a liberal democracy or an illiberal democracy and I think the jury is still out on that. I think Tunisia has really done a very instrumental clear step towards building a consensus-driven liberal democracy because it is only in that type of society driven by consensus and not by majoritarianism which is also a risk for my country by the way not driven by majoritarianism but driven by consensus believing in the checks and balances believing in dissent and therefore believing in the role of opposition. So if you have a leadership that does not believe in checks and balances that derives to opposition then what you're going to end up with is perhaps a democracy but a shallow democracy an illiberal democracy. Just a quick question here since you're talking about checks and balances is the image of Hasni Mubarak being tried enough to make the Egyptians believe in the judicial system in Egypt and think that as of now all politicians will be tried will be held accountable to what they're doing. Clearly no because the risk and that's why I gave the example of Tunisia which to me is a very good example of a consensus-driven democracy. The risk in Egypt is majoritarianism so the risk therefore is for one political movement to basically capture all the state institutions and that is why again we come back to the role of the opposition which is why I think it's very important to try to think thoroughly and intelligently from the outset about what sort of checks and balances can be established that can sustain the threat of majoritarians. I'd like to move to Islam and democracy because all our discussion is taking us to Akhwen Muslimin in Egypt and the Islamist parties and taking over but just one word from Ashraf. Yeah I just wanted to follow up very quickly on some of the points that have been made in that this idea of a holistic revolution in Egypt I just think what I'm seeing in Egypt and I'm curious about to come to Tunis and see how it's gone in that I think one of the biggest problems that's happening in Egypt is I don't see an acknowledgement from my fellow Egyptians that we were all part of the problem that we need to fix ourselves and we need to fix our interactions with each other and the failure to just treat the society with a sense of ownership something as mundane as just the rampant littering that takes place in Cairo. This is big, this is indicative of something and so there is this perception that the problem was all at the top and so we've changed the names at the top and now we're done and it's not that way we were all part of the problem all through the corruption spread all through the nepotism spread all through the nepotism which squanders so much talent in Egypt and drives some of the best people out of the country that wasn't, well Barak didn't do that personally we all did that to ourselves and I don't think we're anywhere near acknowledging that as a society I'd like to move to the relationship between Islam and democracy you hear a lot of stereotypes in the streets among people that very soon all women have or must be veiled women's rights will be in jeopardy because the Muslim Brotherhood are taking over I'm going to move so there is this fear of the Muslim Brotherhood that now there will be an Islamic rule that is spread over the region and the Christian and Shiite minorities and other ethnic minorities women and rights are all going to be squandered what is your comment in this regard? let me answer in English first of all, the issue is irreceivable as a question irreceivable the relationship between democracy and Islam and as if Islam cannot produce or deal with or coexist with democracy this is a wrong perception and the repetition of such why wrong? there are examples around the Arab world because there is this experience in Turkey for example this is an experience and it could be repeated and not only in Turkey Egypt was exactly in the same position as Turkey in the full half 20th century the first half of the 20th century democracy and elections rotation, constitution the supremacy of law all that was in Egypt before we started the era of Kudita so the question is not between Islam and democracy but between democracy and dictatorship Islam should bring us back to the basic tenets of that great religion as the principles as a philosophy as a religion to pray with etc but it cannot oppose and there is nothing in the Muslim literature being the Quran or any other document that opposes the freedom of people to select or to human rights, fundamental freedoms etc the problem is not Islam itself it's the interpretation of Islam and we cannot deny the fact the issue is put wrongly I'm not sticking to the question here the thing is when we see Salafists across the Arab world or extreme hardliners what image are you giving to the rest of the people? I will answer by saying what about the neo-conservatives in America that are saying everything wrong about Christianity, Islam and in fact humiliating other philosophies so there are those extreme these are those what you call extremists so not only in Islam but the experience with the neo-conservatives in America is the saddest experience in the recent years they have killed or trying to kill the rights of the Palestinians and any right that we in the Middle East or in the Arab world have Mr Rafi, the problem is because of these long dictatorships the Muslim Brotherhood or the Islamist parties were the only parties that were well organized they're ready and when the chance happened they just took it there's a fear of the one party rule again to what extent are you working on it's not only the Islamist parties taking over there are the minorities there is the opposition there's the civil society and the youth what are you doing? Let me first go back to the previous question related to Islam and democracy because it's very interesting to answer such problematic I think Islam and democracy are contingent subjects Islam like any other great religion is subject to different interpretations this is what precisely you said all depends about interpretation is it good interpretation of Islam or bad interpretation of Islam personally I strongly believe the only way to compete or defeat bad interpretation of Islam by good interpretations open, tolerant interpretations of Islam Islam always is subject of varieties different strategies of interpretations of course there are rigid extremist view interpretations of Islam vis-à-vis other forms and other strategies of interpretations democracy also is a contingent process the main thing in democracy is the procedure of democracy itself check and ban as power whatever the philosophical or ideological claims of democracy and this is what makes democracy valid has a universal validity it works within a Christian legitimacy either in a protestant legitimacy or catholics and then within other cultures and religions and it is possible to work within an Islamic context we already see this such experience in Turkey as well there is great possibility to have such reconciliation on the ground of democracy in the Arab world related to the political Islam I strongly believe that what is called political Islam or Islamists are political actors are not metaphysical creatures they are deeply affected by the socio-political environment in which they are functioning good and healthy political environment could give you a good Islamist a closed dictatorship could you provide or produce but you know Islamists and other extremist voices of Islam I'd like to take more questions please can you pass the mic I have the mic go ahead I'm Lebanese I live in Egypt my question is to Mr. Amr Moussa what is it that most surprised you in the elections in Egypt in the Egyptian elections were you surprised by what happened and what was it that most surprised you what would you do differently in the elections about vote splitting maybe the liberal parties or liberal bodies or people seem to be more liberal could have formed a coalition in order to prevent vote splitting so what is your comment on both questions thank you thank you very much let me come back for a minute for this Islam and democracy I believe that Islam is democratic I just said no you raised an important point about minorities dealings with minorities yes indeed it has nothing to do with real Islam but with the people that are claiming to implement such thing this has to do with bad management with bad culture with lack of proper education minorities they have nothing to do Islam has full respect of that but it is those political Islamists that are confusing the issue totally now about the coalition of liberals in Egypt it will come liberals were divided and divided because of special interests the lack of maturity in fact the Tunisians have dealt with the problem which is almost the same more mature reactions than we did in Egypt so I agree with Rafiki what he said and Egypt needs to reorganize its political society the liberals until this moment have not yet come together to say here we are the liberals this is the front and we have to do that and I'm one of those who will try to do exactly what you are asking for the time is of essence because we're talking about minorities I'd like to hear Fadal thank you Rima I am Fadal Nabil Haddad from Jordan I'm very Arab, very Christian and very Catholic maybe I did not pray enough for my friend to win all he got is 3 million I agree it's your fault it is when we talk about minorities I would like to clarify my own the position of most of the Arab Christians Arab Christians had never had a problem living with Muslims when the Muslims were the moderate and I see around the Arab world many of them but unfortunately these days what we see is the Neo Muslims the Neo Islamists if we want to go by the new terminology of the Neo Christians what what do you see gentlemen the future of the Arab Christians and how would you assure them of their presence if you see in the house of democracy in Cairo the democracy that brought Salafists to the house of democracy where 15 million cops were not recognized when one minute of silence was not accepted by the Salafists while we see 1400 years of amicable coexistence between Muslims from Jordan where I believe that Jordan is a model for coexistence between Muslims and Christians where are the good Muslims and where are the good Christians in this case thank you I'd like to take more questions before taking answers please to go ahead thank you name is Emre Darman from Istanbul Turkey two of our panelists have made a very passionate argument that Islam is in fact compatible with democracy let me read the question a little bit if we are not talking about Islam if we are talking about religious ideology is the argument still as passionate in other words does anyone on the panel believe that as religious ideologies take prominence in the concept of a political party whether that be a majority party or the opposition there is a step away from democracy simply because of the dogmas associated with any religion please can you pass the mic to Jamal Khashoggi Jamal Khashoggi I have a question to Mr. Amr Moussa I'm a Saudi journalist we hear people in Egypt calling for ideas and ideologies that are undemocratic so for example cancelling the elections a presidential council and the candidate Ahmad Shafiq is also making calls against the Muslim brotherhood it's causing polarization within the Egyptian society which means that it will be difficult for him if he wins the elections to work with the parliament with the majority of Muslim brotherhood candidates what do you think of these issues cancelling the elections and these other points the three points that you raised now cancelling the elections I'm against that because and many people I think the majority in Egypt despite the ambiguity that people feel currently in choosing between two choices that are both two choices but we cannot annul the elections if we do that it will be going back to square one do you think this is possible as Sreema yes some people are talking about this but I don't believe that this is a decision that will be taken because the elections have already started the reelection has started with the expatriates I think yesterday was the last day so we've already started the reelection process the second round for presidential council I believe that yes some candidates are asking for presidential council they lost the elections but they want a post they want a post in a presidential council to get a position that they did not get legitimately through the ballot box I will not accept this you're either elected or not elected this is democracy in my opinion as for the mobilization on the part of certain groups well yes because there is high tension and the differences between the candidates were minor in a few digits and many of them are tense especially the main two candidates in the second round but we hope that we will not have any confrontations Sinan? the word that hasn't been expressed here when we talked about Islam and democracy and that's secularism because what this country has proven is not secularism Laicite what this country has proven is not that Islam and democracy is compatible what it has proven is that Islam, democracy and secularism is compatible now as a Turk when I look at what is happening in the Arab world what you need to prove is something that we haven't you need to prove that Islam and democracy is compatible because we don't hear about the debate on secularism we don't hear in Egypt we don't hear in Tunisia so what you need to prove is exactly that that in a context where you don't have secularism unlike Turkey that Islam and democracy to replace secularism by pluralism that's going to be the core concept around which Arab democracies will be built how do you protect pluralism in this context which is key to the protection of minorities all sorts of minorities not only ethnic minorities religious minorities but also lifestyle minorities and therefore it really boils down to how do you build the institutional infrastructure that will be necessary to protect that pluralism there will be strong enough to withstand in the future today and in the future attacks against state capture so that you don't end up in a liberal setting in a majoritarian setting that's what I wanted to highlight if we can just take a comment on the European experience when it comes to this to pluralism and what's interesting he mentioned social pluralism not only the religious one or other facts like people want to be Islamists they pray probably 5 times a day but they're not veiled their women are not veiled and women are left to be as they want to be not forced on them I would have more trust in democracy dealing with the politicization of any religion because the experience shows that if you invest in a democracy then people at the end of the day will not put the trust in parties who abuse the links to religion you need safety nets that for sure safety nets in the constitution in a certain set of rules and also in safety nets such as the institution of an abutman maybe in Egypt one would need that type of new institution that would adjudicate between the different minorities an institution to which one could refer if one's interests are encroached upon I haven't seen any answer to the question that the father posed and actually myself coming from a minority I hear a lot of comments fears especially when you talk to Christian Syrians when you talk to Egyptian Christians when you talk to Shiites Alawites what is the Arab world what are Arab leaders doing to calm down minorities with all that's happening in the region I believe we have to reach this stage of unity in diversity and that the society will be more powerful with the diverse groups that form our society unfortunately in the recent years in particular after the invasion of Iraq the sects and sectarian conflict became very or came back to the central this is one of our major problems in the Arab world major problems that we have to deal with the sectarian strides and this competition between sects yes indeed I recognize what father Nabil has just said indeed there is a serious problem we have but with this awakening of our societies the new revolution that change will have to deal with that issue as an issue of priority and we hope that forces the negative forces within and without the Arab world will not play havoc with this issue yes please I would like to take more questions go ahead my name is Usama I'm afraid I'm in just this party from Egypt and I will talk in Arabic please allow me to make a very quick comment on the minorities I would like to bring to your mind the following what have the previous regimes done vis-à-vis all these issues they had control but they have not made any real or concrete achievements when it comes to minorities and even in Egypt there is an issue that has always been brought to the forefront such as the latest event against the church and the media has played its role even in the terminology that we have hearing on TV channels you have to choose between a civilian representative and religious representative while they mean military and civilian there is no religious rule or government in Egypt they talked about compatibility between democracy and secularism and pluralism there is no contradiction between Islam and democratic principles we know this for a long time now but we have to remember that the previous regimes have also suffered of this issue and we have seen sometimes some examples of lack of good existence but there have always been a good coexistence between the Christians or the minorities and the Muslims we have three types of countries countries with no constitution countries with half constitutions countries with constitutions that do not work and this applies to women's right mobility and even parliamentarians in Egypt the parliament in Egypt has no capacity to I'm sorry I'm running out of time one last question please I'd like the participants to give me one or two steps towards building new institutions and good governance if you think about things you would do meanwhile I have a very quick comment and a quick comment to father Nabil about the Salafist in Egypt and elections I think that in the presidential elections we have seen that political extent political Islam has been punished because they only rallied 40% of the votes and this shows that the coexistence that we had for 1400 years have won the day and we know that a country, a big democracy such as the USA has elected Bush twice imagine that so Egypt hopefully will have a better future you have talked sir about the liberal coalition do you consider Shafiq as part of the liberals you expect that Amr Musa will be embarrassed by such a question will be cornered not at all I have a question are you trying to vote a new party what is the next step of course I am thinking of all these options maybe we can have not only a party but a front as the lady from Lebanon has said a front of all the liberal parties and liberal assemblies of course this relies on the results of the elections since you have given me the floor let me comment on what he has said from Turkey not that majoritism majoritism has been used he mentioned this majoritism and he was against that and in favor of consensus the consensus needs a different background for the people and readiness and maturity culture you can say so also culture and democracy is based on majority rule and opposition as has been said opposition and the majority rule but not to put away minorities there is no minorities our society is responsible for whatever happens to the minority we are responsible we cannot put that on foreign intervention we are responsible to correct that this has nothing to do with Islam we as a society Muslims and Christians and others we are responsible for that but the point about majoritism I believe we have to take it up this is a serious point that needs further discussion perhaps you can promote the need for a panel for majoritism as opposed to consensus I will take one intervention from each one of you and start with you Ashraf that you would do it if we give you the mandate in Egypt and we ask you what is the first institution you would like to build in Egypt that helps democracy and good governance what is the first institution my answer is going to be slightly counterintuitive I am going to name the institution that I would get rid of in order to help democracy in Egypt I don't in a functioning society I don't think there should be a ministry of information I think they do more harm than good especially in Egypt you can talk to me about creations like the BBC and that's a unique situation obviously Jazeera is government owned but they do decent work I think the ministry of information has been a force for evil I can't tell you the minders that come with us when we are shooting in Egypt every time we are trusted by a lot of the country there is huge chunks of Egypt that get all their information from state television and al-ahram and I just want to see it go away so you start with the media I would appoint if I had the power I would take Muhammad al-Bardai or someone of that stature and give him the job of being Egypt's last minister of information give him two years to tear it down interesting what are the steps for the Arab world of the Middle East first two steps but before that very quickly just to react to what Mr. Moussa said on majoritarianism I have a better word for it it's called the fetishism of the national will the belief the belief that if you get 50% plus one you can do everything including oppressing the minorities so that's why I am against majoritarianism in terms of the steps two steps one to build whatever the political cost may be a competent and independent judiciary because if you have such a judiciary that will give at the end of the day belief in the people that they have somewhere to go domestically an institution that will fundamentally protect their rights no matter what happens at the level of the executive no matter how bloody quote-unquote the political discussions and the debates are and the second one is the press a vibrant press so that we will know what's happening in the society a press that becomes inquisitive a press that can report freely inclusiveness comes as a close second because that's as I mentioned the very spirit of the exercise the very spirit of what has happened so building platforms for social consultation on the key issues I think will be tremendously important let me just make one word about Europe which was which was mentioned I was glad that Mr. Boussa mentioned the knocking on the door of the European Union because it shows that Europe still preserves its attractiveness in spite of all odds and I think that's the right way to proceed because one needs to be demondared towards the European Union that's our experience from the accession periods I think the European partners were sick and tired of the polls the checks and the Slovaks knocking on the door one needs to have a pretty clear list of what you need, what you want from Europe that's the way it works but for Europe this could be a formative experience to be honest in the current situation whether a membership application is a good idea I have my doubts the Moroccan membership application in the 80s the Europeans were flabbergasted when it arrived virtual I know, I know but at the time the agreement was made that the Moroccans didn't send it and the Europeans didn't respond in order not to put it in straight forward terms but one needs to be demondared towards Europe and there will be a response because Europe needs to be active in the neighborhood just as much as the neighborhood needs Europe what are the steps Mr. Farid what are the steps virtual means virtual asking to be a member of the European Union virtual reply from the European Union and wait for a virtual reply I think the best step is to build or restore a new social and political contract between political actors and between the rulers in the Arab world we suffered for a long time ago a certain uproots and alienation of the political institutions if you look at the case of Mubarak and Ben Ali it is a kind of upper tide system maybe the only separation that we have in black and whites but we have a tiny political elite who controls and monopolize the political and the social system and I think building in this the first priority is to set up a new social and political contract between the institutions of the state and the society because the state is becoming an uprooted institutions a heavy machine of oppression of dictatorship and that's why I'm saying here it's time to build a social bridge between the state and the society alienation between rulers and the and the rule means no possibility to build a real and solid democracy since democracy means a consensus between different political players there is no such possibility to have a solid and strong democracy within a context of ideological or political polarization and we're ready to see it in European cases if you see at Ukraine nowadays when you have such polarization in the strategy of politics about internal as we have foreign policies you have such possibility to build a real and solid democracy that's why the first step is to have to restore social and political contract last word I'll have a lighter comment since this is the last word I noticed that you told Ashraf if we appoint you as president you should say if we elect you as president now we are talking about democracy too late it's out of the question for him to be elected yeah of course the second I won't call it mistake but observation about this in from Ashraf you ask him what would you do so he answered by I want to do away with so in fact we want to build we want to build and this is the spirit that we have to express this is very important do away with the ministry of information that was okay yes it has to be done but this is not the main issue we start with the constitution so many other things that we have to build in our country and within the Arab world in general third observation is about what you Mr. as just said functioning democracy the word functioning it's very important because we had the form of democracy and we can have it again elections and we can have it but it has to be functioning so one of the words that I would add with your permission to my vocabulary from now on is functioning democracy functioning actions functioning policy and this is what we need to not only to plan but to have it functional and to implement it this is what we need in the Arab world and don't be afraid about the minorities in the Arab world after all you are not a minority we have so many beautiful girls in the Arab world I don't think beauty is what defines me a friend when I was talking to him about this session he said emotional democracy versus constitutional democracy I leave you with these two words has it been an emotional democracy or constitutional democracy so far and thank you all for attending