 Prime Minister, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for having me. Your country is about to celebrate the third anniversary of what was seen to be the great Egyptian Revolution. It appears that the country is still deeply polarized. You have had five policemen shot. You have tensions. You have protests. Help us explain what happened to the Egyptian Revolution? First of all, as you rightly said, this was a great revolution. A great revolution in the sense it reflects a country, a developing country in a global world. And I think this is the first time we can see that the IT media played a great deal. Not only the technology helped, but also the global. Without the support and the manifestation all over the world, it might not have happened this way. Also, those promoters were the young people, which is a new phenomenon which reflects the future of this world. So in a way, it is opening on the new world. And the stakes are very high. And of course we have to pay a cost. And we are paying a cost, but it is worth it. What has already been achieved, I think, regardless of all the problems we are facing, is worth it. I can mention few basic benefits which I personally believe does reflect the opinion of the government. But I mentioned this before when I was free. I think the first benefit, and this is durable, and I think will stay with us, is that Egyptian people now own the country. And they discover how much they love their country. It doesn't mean that they are always mature in manifestation of their love, their project. They are sometimes excesses here and there, but the fact is there. For the first time, the people, the ordinary men, women, old, young, they think they believe this is their country. And every one of them think that he knows what is good for the country. Unfortunately, everyone has his own idea, but the fact that they own the country is a major guarantee for the future. We are different, we have different opinions, but never again this country will be ruled without the consent of the people. When I look at the country, when I look at Egypt. I would like to add what I think. Another benefit is contrary to what is in the general impression, I think Egypt with this revolution ended forever military regime. It will never come to Egypt. Not because the Egyptians discover that they own the country, but the important lesson is that the military people themselves discover that the first loser of a military regime is the military people themselves. So they have immunity. I'm sure even if we ask them, they will never accept it. So this is a great advantage we wanted. The certain advantage I think no less important. We were dealing with political Islam was different variation here and there as a project as a dream, but it was never put to the test. And it was put to the test. And this is a time when we know that a dream is one thing, reality is different thing. What you project is not necessarily what we expect. So this was a very valuable experience for the future, for the maturity of many Muslim countries. No matter what will be the end result, but I think this was a maturing experience. And like all good things, they don't come free. We are paying a price. Sometimes a high price, but at the end we learn the great deal. So this is my assessment of what happened. So looking at it three years out from the revolution. What I'm wondering, I think what a lot of people are wondering about is have things gone in a direction which looks very dangerous in this sense. The Muslim Brotherhood which came to power, which won in a sense three elections in one year. The constitutional referendum, the parliamentary elections and the presidential elections. That party now has been banned. Its members are being oppressed in various ways. And a party that had maintained non-violence for decades now appears to be turning violent. Just a few days ago, policemen were shot. So haven't you now created a situation where the worst scenario is unfolding? Which is that political Islam has no democratic voice. It is itself turning more extreme and violent. And the people who benefit are of course the jihadis who say we always told you democracy was a bad idea. Don't go to the ballot box. Use violence instead. I am one of those who believe that the only way to progress is to commit mistakes. Without trial and errors, humanity would have been left. So we all regret and we are unhappy to see many mistakes taking place. This is the first part of it. This is the cost aspect. But as I told you, without making mistakes we will never learn. I think we are learning. We are learning the hard way. And we have to pay a price and we are paying the price. But the end result, I believe, will be beneficial to ourselves to the coming generation. But what are those mistakes and what are you learning? Was there too much repression? First of all, as I told you, the repression which we inherited from the previous regime educated the people that they must take things in their hand. This is why January 25th, 2011, was erupted. But also there was another experience that people have dreams about the project of Islamic political Islam. And they went through a difficult time in management. Because we have to admit that the Muslim brothers have a long experience over eight decades. And they survived all regimes starting with the British, with the Kingdom and then the revolution and so on. And they were subject to many persecution and they developed a fantastic strategy to survive. Underground, overground, with deceit if necessary, with corruption if needed, with alliance, with all things. But they failed to learn management. So when it came to take power, they failed miserably in management. And I think this is a major lesson for them and for us. So I think with all we are seeing, it's purifying. And it will be a very important lesson for the Islamic future. But how can you draw these people back into the political process when they are either being jailed or being persecuted by the police? So there is over emphasis on the number of people put in jail. First of all, let me assure you that we are insisting in our government to go by the law. This is the rule of law. No one was taken to prison without order of the Attorney General. We are going through the judiciary procedures. It's all brought to accusation by the Attorney General, put in front of their normal judge. They have to ask lawyers to defend them. So it's going through a judiciary. We are not claiming that there are some abuses here and there. We are after all a developing countries. We have all the problems of big democracy and all of this. But we are insistent to go by the rule of the law. This is educational to us. And I think the idea is not those who are accused and they are put to justice. But there are great numbers of other people who believed honestly, sometimes dishonestly. And they have a chance. Another fact, one of the first things our government issued was so-called our program to defend democracy. 13 points asking first of all not to exclude anyone provided we agree on a court of conduct. We have first of all to agree that there is no mixing between religion and politics. There is no discrimination against different color or face or whatever or belief. We have to admit and commit our belonging to a global world in which there are universal rights, human rights. And that is democracy is much more than the rule of the majority. Democracy is not mechanics only have election have ballot balls. Democracy in fact is the respect of human rights. But also human rights is not enough if it is not coupled with economic justice. So we put about 13 points, those who are accepting these points, who accept. Provided they have not committed crimes, they are most welcome. We ask them to come back. So I think there is a chance for the masses of their adherents if they are honest and they agree with these principles, which are universal principles that will be most welcome to join. As a matter of fact I was told I was not in any political position in July before in 30 June. But I was told that the people in charge at that time offered Muslim brothers even to join the cabinet and they refused. So there is a refusal I understand that among those who are in the leadership they feel that they are too much committed. But of course I think it is hope and it is my desire to see all of them to come back in a secular country democratic where there is room for everyone provided he abides by this university. But the leadership of the brotherhood is all in prison facing charges. Facing charges, if it is in charges they are before the justice. If the justice acquitted then they will be as welcome as anyone else. If they are charged as guilty we can't do without it. So it's a matter of judicial. Let's talk about human rights. Amnesty International has just put out a scathing report on Egypt arguing that there is absolutely massive abuse of human rights, that there is essentially no freedom of assembly, there is essentially no freedom of speech left in the country. I must say that what I have seen is that there is a little bit of distorted picture that we see. I haven't seen much of blame on the number of explosions that are taking place on the pipelines, on the government building, on the schools, on these metro stations. So as if this is, I can see many manifestation of workers coming to in front of the prime minister office because they are reclaiming increase of salary or whatever. No one attacked them. There's only one fixation that there are some activists to taking to prison. It might be some of them are innocent. But I feel it's a bit unfair that of all what we see in Egypt explosions in Mansoura, the demolishing building of the police office, explosions in the pipeline for the 20s or 24 time, killing today there is killing of police, four or five policemen. Of course, when they are killed, they were receiving bullets, not sending bullets. No one talked about the things. Do you feel it's fair? I would like to see the full picture. I was really happy to be told that there are some journalists and to have to give them some explanation according to the information I had. Those journalists who were arrested were violating the law of the country, broadcasting without permit from a hotel in Egypt. So they were put to the attorney general and the attorney general according to the law put them to trial and they will have the right to ask for a lawyer and to have just trial. But there are so many reports of journalists who are being rounded up or prosecuted for no reason or you have this distinguished scholar, Ahmad Shaheen, who taught at Harvard, who is now being accused of being a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. But there is really no evidence to suggest that. No, no, they are trial. But I wonder of this many journalists who have, to my thinking, about one eye only, they can see arresting of journalists. They have the right but they don't see the bombing. They don't report about explosion on the pipelines as much. So I am not denying that in any country of the size of Egypt, don't forget, we are not Switzerland. This is a country with 25% below the poverty line. We are not highly educated. We are not exposed. But nevertheless, there is no fair picture, balanced one. And we have a referendum which by all means was looked upon as very clean, very transparent. Of course there are small mistakes but by any standards, it's the cleanest, the most transparent in our history. You said that Egypt has said goodbye to military dictatorship and yet it appears that General Sisi might run for the presidency. If he runs for the presidency, how is this different from Mubarak taking off his uniform and becoming president? No, the difference is great. Before Mubarak decided to run for presidency, almost no one in the country knew him and definitely no one asked him to come. But the problem is that Sisi, as far as I know, he is under a popular pressure asking him to come. This has happened to some extent with De Gaulle, who is a general. But don't tell me that De Gaulle was looked upon as a general in the Second World War, the same was Eisenhower. These are national symbols in a very crucial moment where they move the popular feeling. And they go to them because they believe that they can bring. But this is, I might agree, I might not disagree, but this is a fact that those who are pushing General Sisi to run are not in the military camps. Definitely they are in the streets, women in the first place. Don't forget his answer, man. Do you think that you mentioned that you thought Egypt was a secular country? Or that you wanted people to sign up for the principle that it is a secular country? What I'm struck by is when you look at the polls that Pew does these surveys of testing the kind of cultural values and values of people, Egypt usually comes out very high on Islamic values. So for instance, we just saw a couple of weeks ago on how women should cover themselves. And Egypt was actually more conservative than Saudi Arabia in wanting women to be covered. When you ask whether heresy should be punished by imprisonment, Egypt has these astonishing numbers. So I wonder, do you feel like you're wearing a suit? Do you feel like you know the country? It seems like there's a much deeper well of religiosity than... No, because I think there is misunderstanding. I think Islam is one of the most secular religion in the world. We don't have a clergy. And the sheikhs are called in Islam, El-Islam, he is the Savon. So in fact, what is the difference between what I call a theocracy and secular? And not you believe in God or you don't believe in God. You believe in one religion or not. But there is no church. There is no clergy. I do one who is empowered to talk alone on behalf of God. So, but I believe I am a secular person. I do believe. But I go very well with anyone who is atheist or Christian or Jews or Buddhists. In as far, he doesn't claim that he own alone the monopoly of the truth. There is no clergy in Islam. It was born, I think one of the historians said that Islam was born reformed because the problem with religion is not that religion. Religion as a metaphysics like any philosophy, like anyone who projects what he thinks of the universe. It's everyone, but there is one who tells you we alone know the truth. There is nothing of the sort. So when you tell me that this is a secular Egypt while deeply religious, I don't see any conflict in this. Tell me how you think this, how does this all end? Because right now where Egypt is, the government has much of the Muslim Brotherhood leadership in jail. As I said, this is a party that won three elections in one year. It has its supporters have gone underground. There are some resorting to violence. Others not participating in the political system, boycotting the referendum. Meanwhile, the government maintains its control. There is some significant popular support for the government. Will this just continue to Egypt's one underground, one overground? No. How does it, what happens? No, no, no. There is a bigger one, a smaller one. It's not two halves, first of all. The other thing I think Egyptians are fed up of this and they look at the constitution, not only as constitutional documents, human rights, and it's coming back to normal. People are fed up. They want to come up to normal. They want someone to look into the economic situation, to take care of the infrastructure, to improve education, to find jobs for them. So I think by the conclusion of the steps of the roadmap, people will go back to normal life, running their way, finding more opportunities, asking to recreate a friendly environment for investors, both from inside and outside. So we have done our job of changing the regime. We decided that what we need is a normal constitution, an ordinary one. We are part of this global. We are part of this world. We are open. We are looking for peace, not only in our region, but all along. But also we understand that there are differences. There are different interests. We might disagree with our neighbors, but there is always a peaceful way to think it. We would like to remove anything of unnecessary confrontation. That violence is not the solution. That there is always a solution which everyone benefits. It's more than zero-sum game. During the last years of Mubarak's reign, he had this economic team of reformers. One of them said to me privately, you know, when I started this job, I assumed that the biggest opposition to economic reforms would come from this sort of socialist mentality that still remains among many of the bureaucrats in Egypt. He said, I found that wasn't the case. The biggest opposition to reform came from the army, which turned out to have its fingers in every economic part in the country and was very resistant to our opening up various industries. If that is the case, isn't the prospect of economic reform doomed in Egypt because the army has an even greater position in this current government than in the previous one? I'm not responsible for whatever said by my previous colleagues, but what I see is that the real enemy for a market economy and efficient is not specifically army, but the bureaucracy. What we need in Egypt, two things complementary to each other. A strong state, not a big state, and an efficient market. And they are not in opposition one to the other. They are complementary. We want a strong state to help the market to be efficient against its own defects and faults. And to prepare the ground infrastructure and creating the legal environment, the political stability that is needed. But efficiency and creativity and assuming risks, it cannot be done except in the market. But also this cannot be left to the market unless there is a regulator, someone who works for the whole society, social justice, distribution. So the problem is that we always have two extremes, even too much bureaucracy which killed the market or too ambitious profit-seeking market, monopolizing which do not like not only the bureaucracy, but only real competitors. So it's a difficult job, but in Egypt I think the main problem will not come from the army, but from the bureaucracy. Don't forget, after all, one of the most modernized sectors in Egypt is the army. The army is dealing more than many other sectors in Egypt with higher technology. They are exposed better. So to put the army as if it is a backward factor is unfair. Of course I don't say that the army is angels. They are not, none of us is. But it is modernized and could be a modernizing factor. It is very disciplined, but I believe I don't have enough evidence is that the army will be the first to reject any idea of a military regime. They are more than many other people have open-minded to the world at large rather than inward-looking. Final thought, you come to this job in an unusual way. What have you learned, what surprised you the most or what have you learned the most as Prime Minister of Egypt? First of all, I was not too innocent because I worked in a previous government in the after the revolution as Minister of Finance, so I discovered firsthand how difficult things are. But what I found in my new experience is that no matter what you do, you will always fall short of the expectation. And people, particularly those who don't know, they have always solutions to say. And with the development of the new media, they can talk about solution for everything and they have immediate solution to resolve the problem of the country in a week. Problems to solve the energy problem, Nile problem, population problem. The only problem I have in that is if we accept one of them, the country will go down in days. So there is a correlation with the expansion of the media, particularly the new channels, that whatever you say thrilling and showing that you know better than everyone else, you have a wide audience and the ministers are assassinated. Prime Minister, thank you so much. Thank you very much. Have a seat.