 Two years after the Arab Spring is democracy winning in North Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere. Arab uprisings seem to create unprecedented opportunities for freedom, political pluralism and justice. But most of the region remains defined by political instability, fears of a new authoritarianism and greater violence. Has a new popular empowerment brought irreversible change for the better? Or are there new ominous realities? That's the BBC World Debate from Davos. Is democracy winning? Well you join us at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, where hundreds of business and political leaders are consumed by the world's pressing problems. That includes the uncertain future of the countries in North Africa and the Middle East, as we've just been seeing in Mali and with the terror attacks in Algeria. Joining me, Ahmed Davutulu, who's Turkey's foreign minister, who's a foreign minister of a country which is a secular democracy with a booming economy that bridges Asia and Europe, a nation actively promoting a newly assertive regional and global influence. Navi Pillay is UN High Commissioner for Human Rights born in South Africa. She was the first non-white woman in South Africa's high court, as well as being a judge on the International Criminal Court. From Egypt, Amamusa, foreign minister in President Mubarak's government, then Secretary General of the Arab League for ten years, he stood as an independent presidential candidate, coming fifth behind President Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood. Tom Friedman, foreign affairs analyst and columnist for the New York Times, who writes extensively about the Middle East. He warned a decade ago of how the effects of individual empowerment and globalization would challenge traditional leadership. Ladies and gentlemen, our world debate panel. Now, we've invited our global audience to raise questions via Facebook and Twitter. I also want to hear from some of the doubles audience as well. What are your thoughts and challenges to the panel? But first, a question, a simple question. Get a sense of your views on this critical question. Is democracy winning in so many of these countries? It's unscientific, of course, but it is a helpful guide. Two years after the Arab Spring, is democracy winning in North Africa and the Middle East? Can I just get a sense? Those of you who believe that democracy is winning on balance in that region, your hands, please. And those who don't think it is. I would say more people think that democracy is winning. Amamusa, you've just been a presidential candidate. Do you believe democracy is winning in your country, Egypt? I believe it is going to win. So far, my answer would be yes, but the president, President Morsi, is in his office due to elections and democratic process. The difficulty is I must underline now what we need is a sustainable democracy, not just a democracy that brings a president for once or a parliament for once. We need a sustainable process of democracy. This depends on the position taken by the people. And I believe most of Egyptians now and in the Arab world believe that democracy is the solution. But the other important element is to answer the following question. Are big democratic powers really serious about supporting democracy? All right, we'll come on to that. But it's yes, but it's yes, but from you. Yes, it is yes, but I've met Abu Tulu, your view from Turkey. Yes, democracy is winning because it is a historical process. Of course, history will judge in the future. For we asked two questions when Ebo Azizi burned himself in Tunisia and later in Egypt, the Tahir Momo started. Are these demands rightful? We said yes. They are the rightful demands. What we promised to our people in Turkey. Second, is it are we what which direction should be on the right side of the history? I think it is a historical necessity because it is not only democracy winning. It is a historical necessity. In 1990s, Cold War has ended in Europe. But now Cold War is ending in our region in Middle East after almost two decades. It will end. Cold War structures will go away and democracy will win definitely. We'll get on to that detail in a moment. Navi Pillay. So we've got two saying yes and yes, but what's your view? Is democracy winning? Well, my view is that democracy will not fail in North Africa and the Middle East because these were areas that came out of decades of dictatorship. And when there is such a fundamental change, responding to the calls on the street for civil and political rights, economic and social rights, human rights, there will never be a situation where the dictatorship that reigned before will prevail again. I hear from very many leaders in the area that they know that they now have to respond to the calls on the street. So they're very aware of the messages and calls from the street. I also want to indicate how there have been elections now in Egypt, Yemen, Jordan and Libya and all of them have been observed by international observers as fair. So that's a very good sign for democracy. Tom Friedman, a very different Middle East from where you were a younger journalist, certainly in Beirut and Jerusalem. What's your view of whether democracy is winning or not? Well, I would echo Amherst's point that yes, but I'm hopeful. But I think we have to remember democracy is always about two things. It's about self-determination, the right to vote in a free and fair election. And democracy is about liberty. That is the institutions that protect individual rights, independent judiciaries, free press, free and fair commerce. And those are yet to take hold. But I always remind myself, we in America declared our independence from Great Britain in 1776. It took us till 1788 to get our Constitution. So these transitions were inevitable. But the outcome is not inevitable either, that we will have not just self-determination, that is elections, not just the hardware of democracy, but that we'll also get the software of democracy, which is liberty and the institutions that guarantee individual rights. Not everyone is on side here, but most people think that something's moving in the right direction at least two years on. Let's get someone from the audience who was in Tahrir Square, Mohammed Aldarshan, from Egypt. Is democracy winning? Thank you. Well, when we ask about democracy, it is elections, but it also more, most importantly, accountability. Unfortunately, this is lacking very much in Egypt and other countries. The government up to the president and above lack of accountability, the opposition is faring no better, more interested in infighting than in listening to the people who brought them there in the first place. So the question I would have would be, how do we reset this quasi-democratic, this stunted democratic process and make sure that accountability is part and part of the process from day one? Amamooza, were you part of a genuine democratic process you felt comfortable with? Well, I agree with my compatriot about democracy and what we have to define it very well. It is not only the ballot box, it is the respect for human rights, for rights of women, the separation of powers, independence of judiciary, and so many other things. This meaning of democracy, we have not yet achieved. But did you feel part of a genuinely democratic process? Well, the same answer, yes, but not yet to be able to say, yes, indeed, this is democracy. This is not yet democracy. This is the beginning of democracy. And that is why we do need to see good governance in order to support the process of democracy. They do go together. Aghmet Davutulu, do you believe that there was a genuinely democratic process in a country like Egypt, in Libya, also in Tunisia, as we've heard from Navi Pillay? If we had this meeting two years ago in Davos, nobody would imagine that there would be an elected president in Cairo, in Tunisia, in Libya, in Yemen. So we have to be fair to these societies. In two years, they achieved a lot of things. The psychological threshold is over. Now, I fully agree, it is time institutionalized democracy. But the psychological threshold is very important to end this beginning. But there are, of course, there is a long way to go for full implementation of democratic institutions. Tom Friedman, what's your reflection, though, about the ability of the opposition to marshal itself against the brotherhood in Egypt? Well, I think, you know, to our friend's point from Tahrir Square, I'd say two things. A democracy is only healthy. It's only as healthy as its opposition. A new democracy, a part of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt or in Tunisia, it's only going to be healthy to the extent that it is checked by a free press and by a healthy opposition and the fear of rotation and power. That is essential to democracy. And we still don't have that in place yet, partly because we've just had the election. But also, I think one of the great disappointments to members of the opposition and to people from the outside who are rooting for this process has been the weakness of the opposition to come together in his united front as the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, there are a lot of historical reasons for that as well and I'm sympathetic with them. But I think democracy will only be healthy to the extent that there is a really vibrant opposition with an independent judiciary and free press to express itself. Amamusa, are you a vibrant opposition in Egypt or not? When Ahmed was talking about the panel like this and a president elected in Egypt and in Tunisia, of course, and other Arab countries, I must underline the role of opposition and the role of demonstrations and the anger that is holding in with the people in the Arab world that they or we want better, we want more. We have to move forward. We cannot look to the past without looking to the future. There are so many things that mean a lot for us. Democracy is this, is what I'm talking about. It is not only the ballot box as some as the photos in the major newspapers do show. Ahmed, what's your reaction to what you're hearing up here about your country? Well, I think I think that we need to take a look into what we define as opposition to begin with. Not everybody who's not everybody who isn't the government is opposition. And this has in fact weakened the opposition process added to which the leadership has been particularly weak. So where are we heading? Where is the opposition viable as it stands? Absolutely not, sadly enough. Navi Pillay, do you think that this was a brief moment confined to only a few countries in the last couple of years or is there something sustainable now or not? Well, may I also jump in on the question on Egypt, because I issued a statement highly critical of the way the constitutional process was done. Which was last autumn. Yes, there was no national consultation. And one of the points I raised is you have to deal with the accountability, deliver on justice as well as democracy. And so the current constitution then does not have the clause that the previous constitution had about Egypt's compliance with international obligations. Now whether there has been progress and whether it's sustainable in all other countries, we have to of course look at each country differently. I hold Tunisia as the primary example of where they're going. We have our office there. They have adopted a good constitution. They have a 30% quota and many women parliamentarians. So they've addressed the women question. It's true. We've had to work very much because they were putting in language, not of equality between men and women, but complementarity between men and women. And this is the kind of work that needs to be done by the United Nations, international communities and civil societies is to help the skills and knowledge to enable judges, lawyers, journalists, civil society activists to own the process and to participate in the decision making. Well, let me give you an idea of what some other comments are which are coming in from Momo van Bole from Monrovia in in Liberia. I strongly believe democracy is winning. Look at what's happening in the Arab world. Anton Norbert, who lives in Canada. If democracy means just voting, then it is winning, which raises the question, what is the democracy we're trying to define, Tom Friedman? Well, let me say one thing about the sustainability of this moment. I think what is here's what I think is not going away. The people have lost their fear. I don't think that's going away. And secondly, every leader in the world today is in a two way conversation with his people. All right, whether you're a business leader, or a political leader. You know, when I was in Tahir Square as well for the revolution. And when I got home, people asked me, what did I see there? And I said, the way I describe it is that I feel like I saw a tiger that had been living in a five by eight cage for 50 years get released. And there's three things I'll tell you about tiger. One, tiger is not going back in the cage. Two, do not try to ride tiger. Tiger rides for Egypt. Okay, if you try to ride him for your party, your faction, your sect, sooner or later, tiger is going to buck you off and bite you. And the last thing is tiger only eats beef. Okay, because tiger has been fed every lie in the Arabic language, every bit of cat food, dog food, you can possibly imagine. And any ruling party in Egypt or anywhere else who tries to ride tiger for their own interests or feed it the kind of dog food it's been fed all these years, I think we'll discover there's something really unsustainable here. Tiger is not going back in the cage. Foreign Minister Davutulu. Given how assertive Turkish foreign policy has become in North Africa and across the region, do you have a clarity of what you believe democracy and pluralism is becoming in that area or not? Yes, I think this, as I said, this is a historical process. The tiger will not go back. Let's give me an interesting example from my personal life. One day, my youngest daughter, 10 years old, 12 years old, came to my library in my house and saw my old typewriter. She was shocked. She said, what is this my father? As if she discovered an archeological discovery. And then I thought I wrote that my PhD thesis with that typewriter and Mubarak was in power. Then computer came, Mubarak was in power. Internet came, he was in power. Facebook came, he was in power, but he was not able to resist Twitter. So now it is over. Therefore, I say psychological threshold. Old regimes will not come back. And now you're sure of that. Yes. Why? Because if there is one very secret term of Arab Spring, it is dignity. Eboazi burned himself because of dignity, not because of food or any other thing. Tahir Square people, same for dignity or in Libya. Now, and democracy is the best system to respond to the search for dignity of human beings. Therefore, democracy is important, not because of mechanisms or other legal frameworks, because democracy is the best system to respect human dignity as individual being. Therefore, even the question is democracy winning is secondary. Is Arab individual winning? Are Arab societies winning? Yes, they are winning because now even if they oppose to the elected president now in Tahir, they can do. They can defend their dignity. That psychological threshold is over. But therefore, I gave the example of Eastern Europe. How many years did it take to have institutional democracy in Balkans? Still they have challenges in Balkans. Similarly, in the next 10 years, we will be having many challenges in the Arab world. But we should not be acting as Orientalist. We should not be thinking that can Arabs achieve democracy? I can say, sure, I with confidently, yes, Arab societies, Muslim societies can have the same level of democratic system because now they are fighting for their dignity and they will do so forever. If somebody does wrong, he will be acted like Mubarak or like others. Therefore, I am sure that Arab masters and Arab individuals will win democracy. I think we're getting a consensus here and certainly some of those who are emailing and tweeting are suggesting exactly that. Yes, but not immediately. Let's broaden it beyond North Africa to Myanmar, if we can, to Yen Monhan from Myanmar. You work as a mentor in Rangoon. Look at the extraordinary changes there have been in your country. Do you believe democracy is winning? I do believe democracy is winning. I wanted to ask the panelists. My country, Myanmar, experienced a democratic transition process the same year as the Arab Spring, but it was a very different process. It was quite gradual and it has been quite gradual and relatively peaceful, fingers crossed, but I wanted to ask you if there are certain universal factors that unite all of these diverse processes that will determine the success of democracy. If so, who gets to decide if democracy has won? Is it the international community or citizens? And to be clear, do you relate to what you saw in the Arab world two years ago, given what happened in your country almost six years ago? Is it the same process or something different? I think it was the same process from a citizen level, but we were lucky enough that the government started to implement reforms before it got to a revolution phase. What about the sustainability of it then? Well, I would say the tiger is still in the cage in Myanmar. The initiative, I think, was taken by people like Heng San Suu Kyi and the president. You're skeptical then, are you still? Well, there's still a long way to go. We will get in there and work incrementally on a rights-based approach, but a long way to go. So it wasn't a call by the people and the voices of youth. And this is why it's so encouraging. The voices of the youth in Cairo and Tunisia was heard by the rest of the world and taken up on the streets across major cities as well. But what we need to be clear is, given what we've just heard represented in Myanmar, whether that generation is satisfied by the kind of politics you see changing. Foreign Minister, do you believe there is a systematic change to politics which can only be for the better or not? Yes, there could be such a change. But the difference, I fully agree, between Arab Supreme and Myanmar, I had a chance to visit Myanmar last summer during the problems in Rohingya region. And I had a chance to meet with president and son and everybody. There, the regional environment is also different. And ASEAN is playing a significant role, like the EU played for the Balkans. And that regional environment is encouraging the system to be changed. But in the Arab world, unfortunately, there is not such an attractive new regional atmosphere. That is the difference. But at the end of the day, there may be different experiences, but the sustainability of democracy will be achieved by the citizens, by the will of the people, not only by the support of international community. Abu Musa, you once worked for President Mubarak. Do you believe it's exactly what we've heard from the foreign minister? Yes, I think so. I think of three things, three points. First, the tiger is not going back to the cage. And with Ahmed, that the previous regime or any previous regime in the Arab world is not coming back. And the third point is what was referred to by the Myanmar representative. You talked about graduality, gradual process and peaceful process. We hope that our process will be peaceful, but it is a result of a revolution, not gradual process. This is the difference between your case and our case. As for whether it would be violent, it would go into violence. This depends on all the parties of the equation in Egypt and in the Arab world, because the Egyptian people will not accept to be duped into a system that brings back another kind of dictatorship. There are so many questions to raise on this very simple question, is democracy winning? Ken Roth, your executive director of Human Rights Watch, you audit what's happening, not just in North Africa and the Middle East, but right around the world. What's your view of whether, quote, democracy is winning? Just one moment, Ken. We're going to turn the camera, first of all, to Ken Roth. Ken Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, your audit. A lot of optimism here, but what's your view? Nick, I'm surprised that we're this far into the debate and we haven't talked about Islam. And that, for many, is the biggest worry about the prospects for democracy in the region. We shouldn't be surprised that after dictatorship when civil society and moderate parties were suppressed, that Islam does well. But the big question is, will, say, Egypt turn into Turkey, where you've got an Islamic ruling party, but Islam is not used to suppress people's rights? Or will it turn into Iran? That's the big question. If you look at Egypt today, we don't really have the answer yet. The Constitution has some problems with it. It basically abdicated civilian oversight over the military. On the key questions for me, of free expression, free religion, and women's rights, the Constitution basically kicks it down the road. It's qualified and it's going to be interpreted over the coming years. I think the answer to those questions, whether those rights succeed, will have to tell us, will dictate whether democracy in the end is victorious or not. Foreign Minister Davutulu, of course, Turkey is going through an enormous self examination on this very issue as well. Yes, about just one correction. We never claimed that our party was an Islamic party, because we think it is not right to call a party by a religion because a party may do mistake or may do something wrong. And it is better not to identify. What we have been trying to achieve in Turkey is full respect to all human rights and all democratic values. And what we achieved in the last ten years is that democratization in the sense of a balance between security and freedom and a very dynamic program of economic development, which produces services for the people. That's very important. Otherwise, democracy cannot be sustainable and third very active foreign policy based on our geography, which gives a self confidence to the people. Here, the quest of the people, the search of the people is the dignity as well as economic development together. Whether democracy is successful depends on this, not on other rhetorical approaches. Is Islam a threat to democracy? Do you see that Navi Pillay or not? I don't see Islam or any other religion as a threat to democracy. One can be an adherent of Islamic faith or any other faith and still be a democrat. There has been a myth out there for a very long time that people in the Middle East, people in Myanmar, are somewhat different and do not have the same aspirations for rights as do people in other parts of the world. And it's people who subscribe to that myth who locked up the tiger. So I feel the answer does lie in international human rights law. And there's been a skewed monopoly of resources and wealth by the elite. There has to be an equal distribution of wealth and response to the demands on the street. Amamusa, but that's a critical question which Ken Roth has raised. He says we should have raised it even earlier in this discussion, whether the Islamist tendencies are actually going to distort the advantages of democracy in a country like Egypt. No, not at all. I agree with the judge and I know your point of view and it is a prevailing one. But it has nothing to do with the religion. Democracy is democracy, Islam or Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism. This is a different equation altogether. There is confusion. Until now there is confusion. But it is very clear to us our, the opposition in Egypt that we shouldn't mix things or confuse things. Islam does not oppose nor contradict, nor make it difficult for democracy to flourish. Democracy flourished in Turkey for example. And it is a Muslim country. And it did the same in Egypt years back, decades back. And it was always, Egypt was always a Muslim nation. So please, this confusion, deliberate confusion, of Islam and democracy and conflict between Islam and democracy is a wrong theory. Kedrov, it's confusing. It's a wrong confusion. What Amr Musa is saying is what the opposition would like which I actually agree with is for us Islam not to somehow interfere with democracy. And that is one version of Islam which, frankly, the ruling party in Turkey represents. Another version, which we all fear, say a more solophist version, would justify or use certain extreme interpretations of Islam to undermine basic rights of women, free expression, and free religion. And that's where I worry. And while we all want it not to be the case, that is a threat. And I think we have to be vigilant to that threat. We all frankly hope that it turns out where Islam is just like, say, the Christian Democratic Party in Germany. It's a religious name, but it doesn't undermine democracy. But we all know that there are other versions as well with Iran being the perfect example. He is right in saying that there are people who believe so or who want to have it, the Islamic Republic. And this happened before. But the opposition to that and through democracy, and we believe that the Egyptian people now is moving very steadily away from those theories. They have seen it because it's not a question of Islam and democracy. It's a question of a government that has been elected as the representative of the religious trend and then did nothing. And then there is failure and then people are angry. Therefore it is not the religion. It is how governments perform. Here in Egypt, you will see this shift in the public opinion. It is not Islam and democracy. It is performance. It is serving the people or not. And you cannot do bad because you are Muslim. This is wrong. Or do good just because you are a Muslim or Christian. It is also wrong. It is democratic means, democratic theory, democratic practice and good governance. Well, let me push this because it's clearly a very critical issue. Pew, the research center they did a poll last year which concluded a substantial number in key Muslim countries want a large role for Islam in the political life. Majorities in Jordan and Egypt believe law should strictly follow the teachings of the Quran. Tom Friedman, what other implications do you see in the region? Well, you know, let me try to put it in a little broader context. You know, Isaiah Berlin spoke of the two kinds of freedom, positive freedom and negative freedom, freedom from and freedom to. OK? So I think what we've seen in the Arab world with the various democratic revolutions is the freedom from stage, freedom from, you know, autocratic rule. Now we're in the freedom to stage and the question is freedom to do what? Some people want more freedom to have more religion in their lives and to govern more aspects of their social and economic life. Some people want more freedom to be more sectarian, to be more Shi'ite or to be more Sunni and some people want the freedom to be citizens, OK? Citizens with equal rights and responsibilities. But my own experience in this, Nick, is that I really think I would share Amr's point of view in this sense, I think it's all about the context within which people live their lives, OK? India is the second largest Muslim country in the world. I mean, it's probably more Muslims there than in Pakistan, all right? So Islam reflects itself politically, socially, religiously in a certain way there. I really believe when people live in an environment of security and one with economic opportunity, that's going to be reflected in religion and how they express it. And I would point to Iraq. I mean, you know, no one likes to talk about Iraq because America was there and, you know, it's like, it's like against the law to talk about what happened there. But I think it's very important to actually study the evolution there. When it was rampant insecurity and economic devastation, you had the height of sectarianism. People forget Iraq's third election, the people, the Iraqi people demanded that the major parties run on multi-sectarian tickets, including Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. Both Alawi and Maliki ran on multi-sectarian. Now that's broken down as security has broken down. So I don't think you can talk about religion, you know, acts the context of security and economic growth. Ahmed Davutudu, what's your view of this very sharp challenge? Yes, I think the basic threat to democracy in the Muslim world is not Islam, but it is this approach, this Orientalist approach by some other observers. Because once we analyze Christian societies, we don't make this type of classifications, although we know, even in the United States, there are people who are suggesting to bomb Kaaba. Or there are people in Europe like Bravik trying to create a new holy crusade against Muslims. First of all, we have to understand Quranic teaching. I know Quran. I read all Quran and several times, of course. The basic value of Quranic teaching is human dignity and the basic value of democracy is human dignity. They do not contrast each other. The basic mechanism to find a truth in Quran is collective rationality, what we call Ijma. And the basic mean in democracy to find a solution is collective rationality. Why do we do election? Because we believe that collective rationality does not mislead you. And Islam, we have all these norms. If we go really to Quranic teaching, but if you refer some misinterpretation, those misinterpretation are in Israel. You can see, even the second biggest party in Israel, they try to make, to cleanse all Muslims from West Bank. And you can see in many other societies, therefore, Nick, the problem is mentality. Now in the Muslim world, mentality is changing. And that mentality is respecting to human dignity, respecting, I met with all the youth leaders in Tahrir. They are committed Muslims, but they want the same thing what European youth wants. And we know Turkey is one of the most modern societies in the world with a huge economic success. What they demand, my people in Konya, which is known as one of the most conservative, but they ask us, what do you achieve to make Turkey successful? What do you achieve as services in my country? That is the main demands. And Islam, in that sense, is not barrier, the opposite. If you, if we address to the main values of Quran and Islam, we will see there is no contradiction. And we have to promote this, this approach to close this gap, rather than trying to provocate and trying to create as if there is a huge gap which is not close, which is not possible to close between Islam and democracy. And these are not two criteria to opposite alternative criteria. Democracy is something, a political system. Islam is a religion of values and they do, definitely they do agree on main, on basic issues. Navi Pillay. Yeah, but we do have to address Ken Roth's concern though about the discrimination against women. Yeah, so that I think I would agree with Ken. It's more visible, very many harmful practices against women. On the other hand, it is being addressed. I love that Algeria came up with the quota for women parliamentarians and they have 146 women in parliament. I think it's better than the United States even. I fully agree with this, but it is not linked to Islam or anything. I can tell you there was more discrimination in Turkey when there was some radical secularist approach against Muslim students wearing hijab. This is all type of discrimination is wrong. Whether based on this ideology or the other ideology, I fully agree. Women rights should be supported and that is another of my... I would just add to Ken's point, which is that I don't think the concern of cops, Christians in Egypt for their rights and inclusion under the current government is just an Orientalist invention. There are Muslim parties there that have expressed views that are deeply exclusionary. I think they're not the majority, but I don't think it's just an invention of a foreign Orientalist. Right, but let's keep moving there are so many issues here to at least try and cover and acknowledge. I'm getting a couple of emails here saying that certainly Islam is no obstacle to democracy, but so-called Democrats can use religion for their purposes, especially in countries with a high level of illiteracy and poverty. But let's move it forward to the danger from extremism to Vallinassa, who is dean of the Johns Hopkins School in Washington DC and recently in the US government. The way, particularly after what's been happening in Mali and Algeria, this could all be derailed. We talk about the role of Islam. One moment, Valli. Just the microphone up a little bit, please. The way we're talking about the role of Islam in democracy, I think it's... One more time, please. The way we're approaching this issue of the role of Islam in democracy, I think it's not correct. The issue is not whether Islam is compatible with democracy, but that the Arab Spring has brought to power political parties that are ideological that are committed to Islamic State. The problem is not Islam, it's the notion of Islamic State. And secondly is that behind these political parties, we're now seeing essentially a revival of al-Qaeda. When Arab Spring happened, the perception was that it has finished off al-Qaeda, that the ideological sweep in the region is presenting the youth, the populations with new opportunities, democratic vision, and that the vision of al-Qaeda is gonna die down. And what we're seeing is two things happening. One is that al-Qaeda is coming back very healthy and very aggressive and very virile in places that we didn't see it such as in Algeria. And secondly is that we're talking about democratic institutions, but state institutions in the Middle East are collapsing. Militaries in Egypt, the militaries lost control of the Sinai. In Syria, the state is completely disappeared altogether. And in Libya similarly, there is no state really to speak of. And in Tunisia, the state has been significantly weakened. And we can debate about the politics of democracy, but the reason why I think democracy is in trouble is because of the rise of extremism, collapse of state power, and the fact that political parties are taking over whose ideology has no commitment to democracy. I'm a minister. I believe what Nasser said is right. The Qaeda is a phenomenon by its own. It does not represent Islam or the way Islam or Muslims are being governed. We in fact, most of us hate what the Qaeda is doing. And now we will have to stand firm if they are going back to their practices in disturbing societies. The Islamic religion has nothing to do with this. And at the same time does not contradict democracy and a must underline that when we talk about Sharia, all of us from all walks of national life in a country like Egypt or in the Arab world, we do that out of respect to our Sharia. But we differ about certain interpretations and the uncertain extent, the extent to which we would carry the effects or the influence of this or that rule into our lives. Akbar Davutulu, Turkey is being very assertive in so many of these countries, with money, with political contacts, with support. Is part of your reason for doing that to prevent this kind of move towards extremism, which Valley Nasser has so eloquently just highlighted, which is so much sharper today than probably we would have been discussing two or three weeks ago before Mali and also Algeria. I fully agree with Nasser's approach and analysis. Today, what we are facing in our region is during this transformation, these state structures are dissolving and getting collapsed almost. Therefore, from the very beginning of Arab Spring, we had a clear strategy. We said during the transformation, we will support the demands of the people everywhere and we will use diplomacy for this transition. After transformation of our election, we decided to have special relations with these countries and we established high-level strategic council meetings with Egypt, Tunisia, Libya. And now we are preparing for Yemen and Morocco as well. High-level strategic council meetings, all ministers are meeting together, co-chaired by two leaders. And we are matching these ministries and usually the other side requests from us about our own experience, how to reform health system, how to reform financial system, how to reform educational system. In the last 10 years, we made many reforms and we are sharing our experiences. Delegations are going and coming. Just to give an example in Cairo now, we are trying to share our experience for municipal administration to clean the city because daily life of the people should change. There should be a visible change in order to make democracy successful. Therefore, we made two agreements with Tunisia and we gave 500 million dollars, 100 million donation, the rest, soft loan with Egypt, two billion dollars as a financial assistance as soft loan. We will be doing more, but more importantly is to exchange the experience in order to make these new democracies a success, especially Egypt. Egyptian democracy must be successful. Otherwise, we will be facing much bigger problems. Therefore, Turkey will be supporting all these, not only by word or by statements, but on the ground to work together to reform the system. Nick, I think it's great what Turkey is doing to help with institution building. It's hugely necessary, but it's not sufficient. The sufficient thing for any functioning democracy to be sustainable is trust. I trust that if I elect you to office, you'll vacate office when I leave, it's not rule or die. And because of the way democracy came in these countries in this very abrupt way, okay, and in places where there has been no Mandela and no midwife, no midwife to mediate the trust between different communities that were kept in many cases in fear of one another. And I always go back to the movie Invictus if you've never seen a great Hollywood movie about Nelson Mandela. And there's just a wonderful scene in the beginning where the new head of sports, ministry of sports, for the ANC, new Mandela government, they wanna change the name of the national rugby team, most important sports team in South Africa from the spring box, which was the name of the white regime. They wanted to give it an African name. And Nelson Mandela in this wonderful scene in the movie lectures his followers and says, no, we're not gonna do that. We must surprise them. We must surprise them. I guess what I missed most in the Arab Spring, nobody has surprised me. Morsi never came out and said, you know what? Didn't he surprise you when he suddenly announced taxes and what he was gonna do last November? No, he didn't surprise me in the evolution of the constitution as I said, which to me is so important that when you don't have trust that everyone agree on the rules is really, really important. And he I think could have bought himself so much space and time. Had he come out and said, you know, I've heard you. I've heard your concerns. You know what? Let's take three more months. We've been over a country of 5,000 years. Let's take a few more months and write this constitution in a way that everyone will feel embraced of it. I'm a Musa, let me be clear after what Valinas has just said and others are saying as well. If the next generation can't get work, the young men, the young women, if the reserves run out in Egypt because the economy is collapsing, do you fear, for example, that there will be a drift towards extremism in the new democracy or not? Yes, certainly. But I want to make an observation, I believe it is necessary to comment on what my friend Ahmed was just saying. The relations between Egypt and Turkey are very strong and are due to be stronger and stronger. This is a country that we love and they play in a very soft way as compared to the Iranian rough way. But anyway, what I want to say is that the help, the policy, the active policy towards Egypt should be between Egypt and Turkey and not between the party of Adela in Turkey and the party of Adela in Egypt. Egypt and Turkey, not the parties, not the affinity of policy, but the necessity that both countries become allies, good friends and can serve the region and stability in the region. Let's move on with some other points. Giorgio, you were Foreign Minister of Singapore until a couple of years ago. There was an election in Singapore. You're no longer Foreign Minister. I've heard you talk about how quite shocked you were about the impact of the next generation on a political change in a place like Singapore. What have you learned as a former politician now about the ability of politicians to cope with this change in the democratic framework? Democracy as a broad movement is unstoppable, but we shouldn't make it into an ideology. The test is whether we achieve good governance and whether or not we achieve good governance, which is the point Amri Mousa talked about, depends on how we adapt democracy to specific situations. You cannot disregard Islamic values in Islamic society, it's just not possible. And in a country where there are tribal, ethnic, religious differences, these have got to be taken into account. If you just implement a simplistic one-man-one vote, then the minorities will feel that democracy is oppression by the majority. So in the end, you need democracy with Arab characteristics, you need democracy with Myanmar characteristics, you need democracy with Chinese characteristics. So I would not... I think that the granularity at which we analyze democracy and its specificity are very important. What have you learned about the ability of the political class to adapt to this immense new pressure from the street? Well, technology, the social media, the internet have altered power relationships between individuals, among human beings. And because of this, all structures everywhere are being corroded away. And democracy is easy when you are tearing down all structures. It's much more difficult when you're building new structures to look after the livelihood of ordinary people. And I think Arab society is going through maybe an accelerating first phase, but the next phase, the construction phase, would be hard work and it won't be so simple. And unless the processes adapt itself to specific circumstances, you'll run into a lot of trouble. Let's go to India, can we? Let's... Can you move the microphone across? Let's go to India now to Ashni Monod, because obviously India, the biggest democracy in the world, but many people feel that the Indian democracy is failing at the moment. Well, recently we've seen a lot of people protesting in India, a huge explosion of democracy and expression of it, people protesting violence against women, but the government has stuttered and has maintained silence and hasn't responded adequately to these issues. So my question would be, how do we actually... How do we get governments to deal with women's rights and issues and freedom in the developing world, without which we cannot even consider it to be a true democracy? This business of whether the political class can handle the enormity of what is expected from the street for a minister. Yes, just to respond in half a second to what Amr Musa said. Yes, it is a relation between Turkey and Egypt. Whoever wins election in Egypt and sits in Cairo as government, they are our counterparts. And our main goal as Turkey is to make success stories in new democracies. And everywhere we will be cooperating, together, shoulders to shoulder with all the new democracies in the region. But that's why I'm pressing you on this point about whether the political class who are in power can adapt to what is expected of them. Yes, this is a big challenge. The challenge is between the old attitudes, because bureaucracy is still old, old bureaucracy. There is a new political elite coming. There are demands from the people. And it is the ability or inability of this new political elite to manage the old attitudes of bureaucracy and the rising demands of the people. And there will be a new, therefore I say psychological threshold is over. But now there is a huge challenge to change the attitudes, to break the resistance of old bureaucracies and to make them more reformist. Reformism starts from mind, but goes into the institutions. So Navi Pillay, when you go around to countries trying to persuade them, they've got to change their attitude, particularly on human rights. Do you still feel there's this enormous problem of behavioral resistance to this new inevitability? Yes, there is. But I would like to say that democracy is not a quick fix. And therefore we see challenges even in old, well-established democracies like India. But the fact that there were these huge street protests is a demonstration of democracy. And in my own country, South Africa, we took the opportunity of receiving help from the international community to have a very good constitution. And I like the word transformation because that offers the scope for complete change, for progressive change. And my message is it's all there, the economic, social, and cultural rights, civil and political rights. These are the aspirations of everyone in any part of the world. And who wrote all these into international law? Member States did. So the very governments who spelt out these rights are not delivering those rights in their own countries. So it's my job to remind them this is your obligation. Tom Friedman, you warned in a celebrated book 10 years ago that the political class was gonna have to change its thinking and then you hear George Yeo say what he said and what he went through in Singapore. What do you see about the ability of politicians two years on? They didn't understand what was happening then. Do they understand what's happening now? Well, I think, you know, reality has a way of imposing itself and it has, you know, across the Arab world. As I said, we're all in two-way conversations now. I, as a columnist, am in a two-way conversation. President Obama's in a two-way, no more one-way conversations just top down. But I think, you know, when I hear my friend George, you know, I'm reminded I actually came to Cairo via Davos from Singapore. I was visiting Singapore the week of Tahir Square. And I felt like I had come from a country where on any given day the entire government can be debating how better to teach fractions to third graders. To a country where that thought had never crossed the leader's mind. Now that is very relevant now because we're discussing, you know, the fate and future of Arab democracy. And Lord knows, you know, I'm rooting for this in every way possible. But the world hasn't stopped. It's gotten more connected. I just wrote a book about America because I'm worried about my own democracy right now. And what I'm, and the theme of this book is it's called That Used to Be Us. I'm worried about my own country. And one of these- Obama said very clearly in his inaugural speech on Monday. He said, quote, we will support democracy from Asia to Africa, from the Americas to the Middle East. Right, but the question is how we do that. And I think the thing that is needed most in terms of the kind of aid we can give is, you know, this is about giving people the tools, I think, to realize their full potential. China is not waiting. India is not waiting. America is not waiting. We live in a world where average is over, okay? We live in a world where the high-wage middle-skill job is disappearing. And what worries me so much is the Arab world is taking a necessary, I understand, but a timeout from what's been happening in the schools in Egypt? What's been happening, you know, in the universities? Are people getting the skills and education they need to thrive in this world? Well, let me pick up on that very point. Kishumar Babani, dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School happened to be in Singapore, of course. But you've got a very important point because the analysis that you're building on are of democracies in the West and how they fail, really, to understand this new reality because they're not very good at it themselves. Yeah, I must say, Nick, this has been a fascinating debate. One more, the microphone's not working. Here's another microphone. We're changing microphones. That's to say, that's okay. Now we can hear what you said. Okay, I was saying this has been a fascinating debate. Say it again, please. And it really is really... No, I don't want you to keep lauding us, but for the editing purposes, could you start where you started, please, again? Okay, I'm trying very hard to look serious, by the way. Okay. Start again, this? Okay, no, seriously, this has been a fascinating debate. It's really brought up the complexity of this view. But one dimension that's really sadly missing in this debate is that why we all agree, all of us agree that democracy is the best form of government. But Winston Churchill also warned us that democracy is the worst form of government, except for the alternative. And the lesson that we are learning in recent years, and I'm glad Tom referred to it, is that the most advanced democracies today in Europe and America are struggling. And they're struggling, I mean, it's amazing that the United States of America, which used to be the beacon of democracy for the world, is now caught in this amazing political paralysis, and it can't make fundamental decisions about debt, about fiscal balancing, because of a total polarization. Now, what's going wrong here? So I think the lesson that we should learn about democracy essentially is that it is the best form of government, but it is also the worst form of government, and we should be aware of the dangers and difficulties of democratic transitions, and someone should write a book about that and give it to every new country that is making the transition. Let me go to Salih Shetty from Amnesty International. Salih Shetty, let's get the microphone to you, picking up on that point, but what are your concerns? Let me get the microphone, the camera to you. Salih Shetty of Amnesty International, your concerns when you look at the way democracy is developing or not? I think it finally boils down to how power is distributed and managed in a society, because look at Greece, and you're talking about countries which have elections. Greece, which is supposedly the birthplace of democracy as we understand it, isn't a big mess. The people of Greece are really upset with the way it's being governed, and the reason that's happening is that there's a handful of people who have obviously misused the resources and the consequences being felt by those who are the weakest in the society. So if you have societies which cannot allow people, particularly those who are the bottom of the pile, they don't have a voice, if they don't feel that they have a right to participate in decision making, elections alone are not going to solve the problem. So in fact, my provocative question to the panel was going to be that if you're a democracy and you've had elections, does that make human rights violations in your country any less harmful? Foreign Minister Davutoglu, of course you are under pressure, partly as part of your accession to the European Union from our business, apart from the other media, because you do detain quite a lot of journalists, human rights and democracy. That's of course a very important question, but first let me address to the first comment. I fully agree that transformation is not only an individualist. There is a huge transformation in Europe as well. Democracies are being transformed based on the economic crisis. Now the accountability is the basic value of democracy, but who will be accountable for the economic crisis in Greece? European Central Bank or Greek government? After a while, there will be more and more questions about European democracy as well. Who should be addressed or blamed at the end of the day if all decisions is being taken by Brussels? In fact, this is a transformation of Westphalian system. In the Middle East, the psycho-spico system is changing. In Europe, Westphalian system is being transformed. About human rights. And Turkey. Yeah, yeah, about human rights and Turkey. The main mission of our government was to extend human rights and democratization in our country. No democracy or no country is perfect in that sense, but our way, our objective is to increase the level of human rights and to prevent any human rights violation. This is the basic mission of Turkish government or any government, but of course there are many tests. Sometimes we have to address and we have to take more and more concrete steps to make our democracy, especially regarding human rights, much better than before and closer to the perfect. And there are many challenges. One critical human right is equality for women in the democratic change. Barbara Stocking, chief executive of Oxfam. Yes, I'm very concerned about what's happening. Say again, please, Barbara. I'm very concerned about what's happening with women's rights. At the beginning of the Arab Spring in Egypt, I talked to our colleagues who were in Tariah Square and the thing that moved them the most was that they were standing equal with men. The men were treating them very respectfully. They said, this is a new start. They said, this is never going to go back. Now, they don't say that to me now. They say they are very, very concerned about what's happening in Egypt, but in the Arab world, across the board as well. And I'd really like to know what the panel think about that, but most particularly what those of us outside can do to try to help reinforce that because this isn't just about what each party believes. This is a deep set of beliefs in society that's a very big change to make and who's going to lead that? How can we help that from outside? Navi Pillay, do you see resistance or do you see at least embracing of the principle by and large? You know, the stereotypes are there. I was so pained when I heard the former Minister of Singapore speak of one man, one vote. Women have been voting for some time. One person, one vote. Yes. What the international community can do is sustained assistance. International NGOs, for instance, Oxfam, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch can play such a role in strengthening national human rights activists so that they could speak for themselves. Whether a woman follows a particular religion, no religion, or comes from a developed country or not a developed country, pain is pain. They hate to be beaten and they want equal salaries for equal work. So the claim of rights is the same, but they need to learn to articulate this for themselves and to convince their governments to give them participation in the decision-making process. And finally, Amamusa, do you fear what Barbara Stocking is saying that actually the equality of women is beginning to slip in the democracy you're seeing developing in your country? Quickly, please. Yes, indeed. We need to do more. And the Constitution did not succeed in assuring women of their equality with men. And that's why we left the Constituent Assembly. That's why we protested. We have a distance to go, but we are not starting from scratch. Egypt has a lot of rights for women, jobs for women, contribution of women in the society, but we are still in the first 50%. We want to cross the threshold and move on through the Constitution. That's why we are asking for an amendment for the articles dealing with women in the Constitution. Amamusa, thank you. Let me just quote you one email that we've received during this debate. Democracy is not instant coffee. Democracy will not win unless it's inclusive, serves its people and is just. And I can see everyone nodding at that point. Thank you all very much indeed. Two years ago, here in Davos, the meeting became mesmerized by the extraordinary events in Egypt and Tunisia. Two years from now, will there be less or more democracy in North Africa, the Middle East, and right across the world with other nations where authoritarian leaderships are out of touch? Well, that's it from this BBC World Debate. Thanks to our panel, to all of you who have contributed your thoughts and questions. And many more I know had ideas. And our global audience around the world, on television, radio and online. What is clear is that the journey to democracy will remain difficult and unpredictable and is far from guaranteed. From me, Nick Gowing, here in Davos of the World Economic Forum. Thanks for joining us. Bye-bye.