 جيد afternoon everyone and thank you for joining us for this session. The session will be in English, however there should be translation devices around. If you allow me I'll just open with a couple of words in Arabic to welcome everybody. أهلا وسهلا سيداتي وسادتي للجميع الحضور. يشرفني اليوم إدارة. I'm honored to moderate this closing session of the first day of interesting and crucial discussions for the region. We need to greet the Jordanian people and wish them a good day and congratulate them on their Independence Day. Which will be the language of the session. نحن here today to discuss the foreign policy outlook at perhaps one of the most interesting, intriguing and critical times for the region. It really is one of those moments when you try to think what could be more pressing. Is it Syria or is it Arab Israeli peace or is it the unemployment that so many youth suffer from? And the list goes on and on as I'm sure you've seen from the amazing panels that we have here at the Dead Sea. But really I think it's critical to be here in Jordan where you actually feel the pressing issues and you can actually see them from different viewpoints, whether it's in Mount Nebo or whether it's in Umqes or other locations of Jordan. And of course Jordan has been bearing the brunt of many of the challenges in the region, whether it's the refugee issues or security issues. But I think Jordan is also a good example of how the region continues to succeed and continues to grow despite the challenges. So beating the odds is perhaps another example of how this region stands out from the world. Today's session will be hopefully quite interactive and we really encourage all of you participating here in the Dead Sea but also those of you not lucky enough to be here in Jordan with us to join us through Twitter and email. It will be hashtag WEFFP in order to be with us and send in your questions which we hope to incorporate. There are many issues to discuss. The main theme is in this regional context how can leaders bolster security and enhance international cooperation which is quite vague but I suppose in a way allows us to take it in different places and we're lucky to have such a distinguished group with us. I will start by introducing first of all, well I'm going to do this, we were going to do this alphabetically but I think it makes much more sense to do it according to those sitting in this order so I will be starting with Senator Robert Menendez who is Senator from New Jersey and Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee at the Senate. Next is Mr. Nabil Al Arabi who is Secretary General of the Arab League. We have Senator John McCain who is Senator from Arizona and Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and then we have Mr. Amr Moussa who is the former Secretary General of the Arab League and also former Presidential Candidates in Egypt and I was saying to both Mr. Al Arabi and Mr. Moussa before we came here it's great that we have the predecessor and the successor on stage this is the new Arab World Order that we can have both of you on such good relations and sitting together and on very friendly terms, there we go this is the Egypt that we aspire to and then of course last but not least Mr. Francis Maud who is Minister for the Cabinet Office of the UK and so the way the session will run is we'll be having a discussion first and as a journalist I'll try to be civil and not hug all of the time and then we'll open the floor in about 45 minutes to your questions so Mr. Al Arabi if you'll allow me if I can start with you regional context there are so many files that you're dealing with at the moment but there's also a sense that this is a new Arab order that is emerging there are states that are changing and states that those are worried will fail and there's new alliances in the region how do you assess the region at the moment? شكراً قبل أن أتحدث على الموضوع لابد أن أتقدم إلى الشعب الأردوني بخلص التحنيقة بمناسبة عيد الاستقليم to address the question that you have asked definitely you are a new world order which was brought about by what is usually termed the Arab Spring the Arab Spring if I may I am allowed to say a few words about it I'll confine my remarks to the following it has permeated the whole Arab world not only those with regime change has taken place the country that regime place has taken place the all including Syria which no change yet they are all they were all governed by autocratic regimes power for many years and all came about by military coup d'etat all of them some of them delivered some did not deliver but there has been a change it's something that happens sometimes in 1848 in Europe in 1989 in Europe something similar to that not exactly but something similar that happened but it needed to be happened because all the people throughout the Arab world are entitled to live in peace in democracy are entitled to see human rights respected but there is a change there ultimately they are all going through turmoil now different stages, different countries and according to it each country has its own specifications but ultimately what is what will happen is that full fledged democratic society will take place where government will represent people who work for the people and be run by the people this has not reached we have not reached that stage yet I hope it will come but the perennial problem in the Arab world is Palestine if you want me to address it later I'll do it if you want me to address it now you're afraid to address it now of course because there one has to recognize that the people the Palestinian people has been living under occupation for a very long time and this is not accepted in our modern world they are denied all the rights and they are entitled to peace and security like everyone else and they have declared very clearly that they are willing to live in peace next slide to Israel both should have peace and security because security cannot be achieved unless it is reciprocal it has to be taken that into consideration we are hoping now that with this new atmosphere it will be looked at that way it's not acceptable anymore to go step by step they have been doing that the parties Israel and the Palestinians for the last 20 years they know each other very well now and what is needed now is to make sure that the occupation will end nothing will be resolved unless the occupation ends do you think sorry but do you think that given the state that the Arab world is in today whether it's what's going on in Syria the Lebanese domestic problems can we see an Arab-Israeli peace so we see the Palestinians among themselves that have struggled with reconciliation and on the other side of course the Israelis have many concessions that are still not even being discussed seriously enough so do you think that the state of where we are in the region is leaning towards peace first of all I do not think to use concessions for what Israel has to do is acceptable because it's not a question of concession you are supplying another country and denying the people the right this is not a concession when you go back to what the Security Council has unanimously agreed upon in 1967 but to answer your question yes I think the time is ripe now and since the whole Arab world is changing I think this should be the top priority to get a Palestinian-Israeli peace where both the Palestinians and the Israelis will have peace and that's very important and I think this matter was addressed by the delegation that went to Washington recently and they didn't for this tense time say there is an Arab peace initiative that if Israel will withdraw from all the occupied territories and the Palestinian state will be established fully on the ground not like now in a legal way what will happen is that all the Arab countries are willing to live in a normal life with Israel and I think this is very important for the people in Israel exactly for the people of Palestine that the whole area will live in peace for the first time in I don't know how many years or never maybe before and it's important to follow this through Mr. Mohd if I can turn to you of course all eyes will be on the UK soon with the G8 Summit coming up and of course Palestine and regional affairs especially Syria will also feature high on the agenda of the G8 so can you tell us what are your priorities for the UK in the upcoming G8 Summit when it comes to the region well the three themes we've set out for the G8 conference so first of all congratulations to our Jordanian hosts on Independence Day great celebrations and very glad to join in those congratulations our three themes were about trade tax and transparency and it's clear to me that as I think it is to most of us that the Arab Spring was not just about political freedom yes it did involve political freedom but a lot of it was about prosperity and jobs and the people feeling alienated from a regime and from the fruits of growth and being denied a share in prosperity and all of these three things are relevant to the outcome the results of the Arab Spring actually most governments around the world are facing a similar set of challenges big budget deficits a public sector that has grown at the expense of the private sector and a level of debt that's growing and unsustainable so we all face a similar challenge which is encouraging investment controlling the size and curbing the size of the public sector encouraging investment in the private sector that delivers jobs and prosperity for our citizens and all of these three issues tax ensuring international collaboration to attack tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance the promotion of trade a further effort to promote trade which again supports investment and jobs but particularly transparency alongside the G8 the United Kingdom Government is the co-chair of the Open Government Partnership which was launched in New York less than two years ago already 58 participating governments around the world as well as civil society organizations we're co-chairs with the Indonesian Government who will take over from us in October and the truth is that transparency is an idea whose time has come I can't remember who it was who said nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come and transparency is the friend of reformers all in politics all oppositions support transparency they think it's a really good idea that governments should be completely transparent and then when they take office themselves they're very enthusiastic about transparency and openness for the first 12 months while all they're exposing is what their predecessors have done their enthusiasm tends to elapse after that time but this increase in accountability the ability that transparency gives to fight corruption which we know is a tax prosperity, a tax growth is a very powerful feature in governments ability to deliver growth and prosperity and jobs but it's also key in helping to embed political change political reform because actually what's central to both freedom and growth is the rule of law is the sense that governments are just as much as citizens are and corporations are they're subject to the law and the accountability that comes with transparency is a key factor there and I believe Jordan is the only Arab country to have signed up to the initiative it is and we welcome that and we've worked very closely with our Jordanian colleagues on that to say 58 countries around the world have joined at very different stages both of economic and political development but the key factor that joins them is that reformers see transparency as being their aide and their friend but we'd like to see more Arab countries seeking to join and one of the things I'd love to talk to Mr. Al Arabi about is whether the Arab League could play a role in that well Senator McCain if I can turn to you transparency not only within Arab countries or between the countries of the region but also transparency in relations with the US and this has been one of the themes that I think a lot of people have been discussing the relationship between the region and the United States and I wanted to ask you in your long history with the region how you see these changes are actually impacting your interest the United States interest but also your policies towards the region well again congratulations to the Jordanian people on the anniversary of their independence and these are most trying times for the kingdom of Jordan and its people as a result of the Syrian conflict which we will discuss later on it was a little over two years ago in February of 2011 that then Secretary General the Arab League and I met in Cairo and we had a press conference afterwards and we were extolling all of the accomplishments of the Arab Spring and if you remember back at that time we were pretty optimistic and I remain optimistic but I think perhaps we had ignored some of the lessons of history and that is that revolutions are usually pretty messy and not a smooth transition and at that time I think many of us were not so worried about the rise of radical Islam as we were about the ability of these countries to restore their economies law and order trade other factors that especially for example in Egypt and how the economic difficulties were of prime importance and I'm sure we did not anticipate this situation in Syria I am confident that we did not appreciate the full extent of radical Islamic elements influence in literally all of these countries whether it be Libya whether it be Egypt whether it be any of the other countries in the region that have experienced the Arab Spring and I worry that these elements who were not the ones who made the revolution I'll never forget being with a group of young people in Cairo and the young man pulled out his blackberry and said I can get 200,000 people in the square in three hours there was a certain exuberance there that I think has been at least dampened by some events so the hard part of revolution is not making a revolution but it is implementing the goals of a revolution and the region and each individual country has made varying degrees of progress or varying degrees of retrograde in this pursuit of the ideals that frankly are articulated in our declaration of independence that all of us are endowed by a creator with certain inalienable rights and so as we watch the turmoil ranging from difficulties in Libya and the continued influence of these brigades and their ability to paralyze the government to Cairo where clearly economic difficulties are worse even than they were some time in the past and Syria which we will talk about and I think one of the lessons we should draw from that is that each country is different each country has different challenges each country has different traditions but I would also make an argument that Egypt is of particular importance because of its historic role in the world and its central position as far as the cultural and historic center of the Arab world and that's why I worry about that country as much as any other but I guess in summary a revolution came we applauded it we were appreciative of the technology that facilitated it and now the hard part comes and we have a lot of work to do love work indeed you mentioned Egypt because of course Mr. Musa is here with us and I wanted to ask him about Egypt but in a more broad context the idea that now domestic audiences the people have spoken in several of the Arab countries and in different voices and the idea that now we would hope that policies are actually reflecting their aspirations do you think that's happened whether it's in Egypt or other countries that witnessed revolutions well thank you very much and let me join my colleagues in congratulating Jordan on the occasion of the day of independence the question pertaining to the changes in the Arab world and in the Middle East is so basic not only from a domestic point of view but also a regional point of view people after the revolutions in Tunisia in Egypt and in the rest of the 5 or 6 countries with which the revolution started was clear that it is not only prosperity that they were after but dignity the previous regimes autocrats اشتريت the Arab people from many of their feelings of dignity that we form a people that has a cause and a role and a history but the prevailing feeling and I believe this is an important point felt that we are living in the 21st century while we in fact live a century back and we reject this notion and we have to contribute according to the rules of the game as we see them in this century and this is one of the major battles conflicts between different political currents in the Arab world in Egypt as well as in the other countries we want to be part of the 21st century and we want to compete in order to get a place in the first true as other countries have done countries from the third world this feeling of lack of dignity of people being deceived by their autocratic regimes and also the chances for them to live decently formed the basis for this revolution and many of us have seen it coming it was very clear that things are not going to stay where they are and that it is coming soon very imminent and I still wonder up to this moment how come that those regimes haven't seen it coming they were either overconfident or the reports that they have used to read were always assuring them that everybody's loving them and everything is fine do you think there are Arab regimes blind to that possibility now do you think there are Arab regimes blind to that possibility now but I don't think so but I'll come to this point because there is also this appointment with the performance of some of the regimes that are ruling Arab countries now but for different reasons and perhaps this is the moment to speak about this point the expectations were high because it is the second republic it is the 21st century it is a revolution the young people the high technology and then the people found that there is no change poverty continues to be the poverty services continue to be as bad as they have been the prospects for the future for the 21st century for the human rights, for democracy so there is a prevailing feeling of this appointment of frustration today that is to describe that domestic situation is it the final station of course not this is a revolution this is a new era and as you said Senator McCain it is always like that messy in the beginning it might get better later on but to get better you have to follow certain rules of the game of how to get better it is not only by praying that things will will improve it is by work and by working with others and by seeing how the Middle East how the world is moving through education through science through cooperation through correct and modern practices and ways of governing I believe that this era will come and go but change will be the name of the game and I don't believe at all that there will be a U-turn in any of the countries that have witnessed the revolutions in fact this will spread step by step and there is a generational transition now within a few years it is a new generation that is going to to assume power all the old generation will just move away from the scene and you will find within a few years that it is a new generation that is rolling the whole of the Middle East and the whole of the Arab world now with this optimistic view not because of what is going on today but because of what is going on today impossible to stay there is no performance we see no results no good things happening we see no second republic or republics for that matter in many Arab countries now I move to the regional scene as Dr. Al-Arabi was saying the Palestinian question is essential we cannot move from an era to another from an old Middle East to a different Middle East not to mention new Middle East but different Middle East with the Palestinian question it is with the same practices the same rules of the game the same wrong approach which is manage the conflict don't solve the problem this is unacceptable and now everybody is opening his eyes and ears and ready to get in including the young people including the youth it is not a matter for governments to decide it is for the people now the movement of democracy will not only play in domestic considerations alone but in the regional scene perhaps we will address the issue of Syria later on but as Dr. Al-Arabi has given priority to the issue of Palestine I wish to answer your question about the consideration of the Arab world the Arab countries as to the possibility of doing some you mentioned the word concessions on our part I don't think the Arab should give any further concessions any further concessions after the campaign of deception about concede something will move and then you concede nothing moves concede again concede third time fourth time fifth time this is the lesson of history that should not be done again but we have a position which is the Arab initiative the Arab initiative of Beirut is very clear about where do we stand our readiness to move a step for a step and that we are ready for normalization not only normalization but even recognition of Israel collectively if Israel also abide by the rules of the game and allow a Palestinian state to emerge by the way it's not Israel that allows but the international certain international support that allows Israel to have this privilege I believe that what secretary Jean Kerry has proposed is a good thing to address it address the problem and bring back the United States into the scene I hope that this will be in terms of solving the problem rather than managing the crisis well this leads us well this leads us to Santer Menendez I wanted to ask you Mr. Musa was speaking about the 21st century and what it means for the Arab world is the start of the 21st century going to see the start of a less engaged US in the region even though of course we've seen with secretary Kerry and his involvement with the important issue of Palestine and the rights of the Palestinians and of course peace in the region but I wanted to ask you about this issue of this engagement and whether actually we see that it's peace that will bring the US a pivotal role in this period well let me first also join my colleague Senator McCain in congratulating Jordan on its Independence Day and expressing the admiration that the United States has for Jordan particularly in the way in which it has opened its doors to a great humanitarian crisis and accepted an unprecedented number of Syrian refugees and we are both admirers of Jordan and we seek to help Jordan in that respect you know with reference to your question as the chairman of the center for relations committee I think that I look at your question in even more broader way we have a world in which we have challenges and opportunities a world in which we can have a paradigm shift in our thinking from the interconnectivity of people and nations for sustainable development and economic growth among many populations in the world as well as global governance issues and the promotion of democracy and alliances to try to achieve that and in that respect I see not a lesser US engagement in the region but a greater one I think that the presence of my distinguished colleague here who has been obviously in the region for some time Senator McCain as a ranking member of the armed services committee and myself as chairman of the center for relations committee is an expression of the importance of the region I think that secretary Kerry in the midst of global challenges in the world the time that he has spent the effort that he has spent in seeking to the Arab-Israeli conflict and the goal of achieving a two-state solutions living in peace and security with each other is incredibly important I think the fact that the United States recognizes its national interest and its national security interest in the region is pretty evident by the action that the United Foreign Relations Committee took just this past week as it relates to Syria in a strong bipartisan vote of 15-3 of the committee passed out legislation to try to change the tipping point inside of Syria so that the calculations of Assad as well as other global leaders may change and we can stop the bloodshed and seek a more inclusive society of the future and to prepare for that opportunity as well as increase our humanitarian assistance it's an expression of the U.S. engagements when I believe that we need to be more focused of both in a bilateral context as well in multilateral context such as through the IMF and the World Bank on the question of economic development if you have a population that is very young and very poor and hopeless in many respects then you have the seeds of the type of change that you do not want to see you have the seeds of those who in fact can be proselytized for the purposes of extremism and so either we recognize that even in the context of national security economic development the opportunity to raise the standards of living for people in this region as well as a policy more globally is incredibly important because as individuals rise in their economic standing they make greater demands on their government for transparency as well as for freedoms and democracy create greater stability within their own country and of course create growth in a global trade context and so I think that the United States and certainly it is my expectation that our committee as part of the foreign policy process of the United States will drive to be very engaged in the region and will also I hope drive to look at economic development and opportunity as a core principle and necessity in order to create greater stability for the region greater prosperity for the region and greater democracy for the region it is up to the people of the countries in which the Arab spring took place to realize the fulfillment of their revolution but it is I believe a role that we can play in working within the region and listening to leaders within the region and where we can and agree to incorporate their views as to how we create the opportunities and the development that can I think create more sustainable long term peace and prosperity and I personally after spending 20 years in the Congress between the House and the Senate I think that too often we are focused on the symptoms rather than the causes and if we focus on the causes it will be in the national interest and security of the United States and our partners at the end of the day to achieve the type of world in which we all aspire and so I think you will see not lesser U.S. engagement but greater U.S. engagement I think you'll find yes of course at the beginning you did mention concessions and I told you it's not by Israel and Mr. Musa elaborated further on it I just want to point out something perhaps I'm not sure about that but anyhow I would like to make it because territorial concessions have been made Palestine was till 1947 100% Palestinians then the partition resolution gave gave the majority gave the majority 44% which the United Nations itself was about to change it didn't happen because the mediator who was working on it was assassinated in Palestine without getting into that but then the Palestinians now and after the latest agreement with Israel they accept 22% so they have already made the concessions if someone should make any concessions it's not the Palestinians anymore it's not the point this is the point I wanted to ask Senator Menendez because as you said it's rather than treating symptoms we need to go to the cause and I think you'll find vast majority of Arabs will say to you the cause remains of many of the problems in the region the lack of peace and the lack of the rights of the Palestinian people so in your of course very important distinguished position at the senate do you think there is that support in the US that so to speak political will to actually go the whole way this time and press as much as possible of course in the US they say both sides us in the Arab world we would say the Israelis to actually go the final mile and actually try to come to an agreement on the solution that I think just about all of us know what it looks like but it just takes the courage to go ahead well I do not think that President Obama would have given the green light to Secretary Kerry to spend as much time as he has spent as much effort and a fair amount of capital to try to do anything less than achieve the goal and in the midst of Iran whose marks to nuclear weapons is a national security threat to the United States and the western world in the midst of the incredible humanitarian tragedy that is Syria with 80,000 lives lost and one and a half million people displaced outside and nearly 5 million displaced inside and in the midst of a whole host of other challenges in the Arab world I think that the focus of time and effort of Secretary Kerry is an expression of the administration's view to try to seek the goal now I understand from the Arab world that it is all about Israel my view is that you have to create a set of conditions in which it is win-win for both sides that one wins and the other one loses is a failed proposition at the end of the day having a win-win situation which I think can be devised so I think the will is clearly there as expressed by the commitment of time, effort and capital that is political capital that has taken place so I think at this juncture it's important to while focusing on the possibilities of peace in the region there's also the many terrible you know you get lost for words describe what's going on in Syria it's a war, it's civil strife it's a humanitarian crisis on the highest level and I wanted to ask Mr. AlArabi to comment on the Syrian issue and whether in fact on the Syrian issue and to ask you whether in fact there is already intervention in Syria from different sides you know before I used to say should there be intervention well I think now just about everybody agrees there's different types of intervention that's happening in Syria do we believe that or do you believe that the Arab League continues to have the capacity to lead on this is this something that the Security Council eventually will have to go to and is Geneva too a possibility to succeed thank you at the beginning of this crisis which really is a full stage catastrophe by any means it was clear that there was an intervention by the Arab League which we did at the beginning to try to convince the president as I went to see him myself 3 times that what is needed now is that there was no war there were people in the street claiming for liberty claiming for freedom exactly as in Egypt or Tunisia or any of these countries but they were met with brute force by the authorities they should stop prisoner should be released and genuine meaningful political reform should take place under him no one spoke about anything else at that time he refused for a minister when the same plea he didn't cooperate then there was a resolution to stop the fighting and strange enough it was accepted by the Syrian government but they did not abide with it at that time we sent observers and for the first time we do that we sent observers however fighting was going on observer were few they have to go to sleep and eat and when they are not in their place people were killed at 22nd of January 2012 the Arab League as the shorter prescribe charter of the United Nations prescribes the League is a regional organization under the United Nations it's chapter 8 of the charter it refer the matter to the Security Council because when it comes to war and peace it's the Security Council and the Security Council really has failed to do anything now now we have a full-fledged civil war to me it has some four dimensions the first is the fighting and the bloodshed is going on for a very long time reports say 80,000 have died maybe even more I don't know something which no conscience can accept then you have the question of the humanitarian catastrophe in the whole country then third you have also the question of this spillover to the countries in the region which is creating chaos and turmoil in many countries in the region which cannot go on forever what His Majesty King Abdullah have said about Jordan having 10% of its population actually when I had the audience when him later on he even told me now it's more than 10% of whoever is in Jordan and they have scarce resources they cannot go on like that and then there's a very important and problem that the whole world should focus on from now what will happen the day after the day after when fighting when ever it's going to stop this country how it's going to be rebuilt what kind of reconstruction is needed what kind of resources will have to cover for that so it's really a very very complicated and serious problem and I do hope that the Security Council will stand up and hold the charter and try to carry out its responsibilities by first of all stopping the fighting if we notice from 1945 till now in every part of the world when fighting takes place for a long time and so many people die the Security Council will intervene stop the fighting and then the political solution will come you cannot expect that the fighting will go on forever and you will not do something about the people who are dying so I think this is a very important matter it has to be addressed Senator McKenna if I can ask you you've been one of those voices that have said for political solution to be possible then the opposition has to be supported with further arms further assistance from the international community including the US in order to shift the military balance in Syria and let the regime come to negotiating table in a position where it knows that there will be force on the other hand of course there are others that say putting more arms into a situation like Syria can only lead to more death how do you respond to that I won't repeat the statistics of what has happened in little over the last two years the million and a half refugees the 80,000 massacred the torture of the murder of the rapes the gang rapes the refugees and I say with respect to say stop the fighting is a great phrase but the fact is that until the battlefield equation is tilted against Bashar Assad there will be no incentive for him or his patrons the Iranians and the Russians and Hezbollah to stop the conflict to stop the fighting and the massacre that's going on right now is an offense to the world in general in particular I would like to say under the leadership of Senator Menendez we did pass legislation which I am confident will pass the congress that calls for the provision of weapons to the right people who are fighting for freedom and I appreciate very much the leadership that he has given to our committee in the United States Senate in the words of Mr. Bismarck if we keep going to that same over and over let's get the Russians to change one grows a little weary and one grows a little cynical the words of Mr. Bismarck I'm afraid the issue will be decided by blood and iron because that's the only thing that Bashar Assad understands and that's the only thing that the Iranians understand that's the only thing that Hezbollah understands and it's a shameful chapter it's a shameful chapter in the history of this world that we have stood by and watch this slaughter go on without acting it's an unfair fight my friends it's not a fair fight we know that Syrians are being trained in Iran and sent back we know that Hezbollah has admitted to be in the fight we know the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has stated openly that they have boots on the ground and so it's a shameful chapter and for us to sit by and watch this happen is not only an offense to everything we stand for and believe in we are now seeing the spread of this conflict of surrounding countries which could engulf the whole region so there's more than a humanitarian to this our General Mattis our Head of our Central Command before the Congress of the United States the fall of Bashar Assad would be the greatest blow to Iran in 25 years they lose their connection with Hezbollah they lose the cohesion that has allowed them to make such mischief throughout the Arab world and the world so let me just finally say and I'm sorry for the long time but we have a chance to act and now we're going to wait until Geneva 2 and I am convinced that that the Russians or anything good is going to happen unless the Russians are convinced that Bashar Assad is going to lose and that is not the situation on the battlefield today سانتركين I wanted to ask you but you said in order to provide arms those that are on the ground that you can you can be sure of but can you sure we can the same way we were able to in Libya when we gave them a safe haven in Benghazi they need a safe haven they need to neutralize the air assets of Bashar Assad in this climate in this terrain air is a decisive asset and we need to move the patriot missiles down closer to this safe zone we need to give them the weapons and ammunition which they're always short of and an ability to organize and to govern and then take over every day that goes by we know more and more jihadists flow into the region and more complicated the post Assad period will be and finally one more issue that we also not plan for and that sees caches of chemical weapons which are falling in the hands of the wrong people can have catastrophic consequences we should be planning now with our allies in the region and in NATO and around the world to be prepared to secure these caches of chemical weapons before they go into the wrong hands and maybe the next bomb that goes off in New York may not just be nails and hardware Mr. Mohd I want to ask you in Europe how much of an appetite is there for that sort of role in terms of providing arms of course the UK and France have been open but I just finally mentioned no American boots on the ground yes you've been quite clear in your statements previously not to have boots on the ground and perhaps that is the legacy of Iraq it's been 10 years since the Iraq war and perhaps that's one of the legacies of the Iraq war not to have boots on the ground however that doesn't stop the complications and I wanted to ask you know there's the meeting to discuss the amending of the arms embargo on Syria at the moment and France and the UK have been quite clear in their position do you think the rest of Europe could come on to the side of the UK and France who have been leading on this effort and actually accept an amendment well we hope so but it is a very mixed picture Britain and France are forward leaning in this we share a lot of the concerns that Senator McCain has set out I mean every day that goes by more people are being killed and maimed every day that goes by with the regime still in place thinking that they have a chance of winning means that there's less chance of it coming to a swift end and Syria that country full of such promise will be able to rebuild so we want this to be able to be brought to an end as soon as possible and of course the history of these matters tends to be the longer you leave it the worse it is and the longer it then takes to resolve and we want this to be brought to an end before there's nothing left but a heap of rubble Mr. Moussa you're of course one of the most renowned diplomats of the Arab world do you think a diplomatic solution is in sight or we'll see much more bloodshed before we can come to that let me first say that I am really flabbergasted by what I heard and read even before that now the US Britain and the West are getting ready to provide arms weapons to the those on the streets the rest of the story is that Russia is going to provide the regime with weapons and they are already yes but more weapons and the comments are abound on that so this is this would lead to an escalation in the military action in Syria more destruction more casualties and more refugees and more displaced persons this is one scenario now I'm just describing I haven't yet commented on that then the other scenario is that the US and Russia are getting together to call for a conference cooperating calling on parties to negotiate the government and the what the revolutionary is the resistance call them as you like so this is another scenario so it is a very dangerous situation that Syria is going one way by way of military confrontation and the other way by sitting and trying to reach an understanding how can we reconcile both things I believe the solution is what Doctor AlArabi has just said the Secretary General of the Arab League that the Security Council has to address the situation and call for immediate ceasefire and then starts the negotiations that is all this is number one number two the understanding as we see promoted between the US and Russia is calling for diplomatic solution meaning that the regime and the opponents would sit together and negotiate meaning that what we heard about removal of President Assad and that he has to immediately leave his office has been abandoned to a different set of rules that no he can stay he will negotiate he will send a delegation presided over by the Prime Minister and a powerful delegation to the point that we read yesterday or before yesterday that the government in Damascus is really thinking of going or not going it is up to their assessment to see whether it is useful to go to Geneva or not to go the Syrian issue in my humble opinion as just a private citizen following the news and the developments it's a good luxury to have it was wrongly addressed from the beginning it was not only a case of so called Arab Spring from the very first minute yes indeed it has this side but the rest is different we should have addressed that under the title Syria slash Iran Iran is very much involved there and perhaps to add to what the senator was saying and I was commenting on that that a mere deal between Russia and US will not suffice suffice to solve the problem Iran is part of this problem it has to be addressed and the Arab world has to be present the Arab world is the owner of the senior scene the Syrian scene the Arab world has to be there Iran in my opinion I believe Nabil Arabi agrees with this point of view is that Iran should be invited to the Geneva conference it can be part of the solution rather than just part of the problem in short a lot of confusion so many scenarios in different directions and the people of Syria and the surrounding countries including this country Jordan are going to suffer a lot whatever the result could I just say in response to my friend we will be at other conferences at other times in the coming years we'll see who is right I'm all for a conference I'm all for peace talks nothing that's better but as long as Bashar Assad believes that he can win and he's winning right now there is no motivation to stop the fighting if I may I appreciate the desire to see the Security Council and the United States has led with its allies in trying to seek a vote of the Security Council but has been rebuffed by other members of the Council and so unless the dynamics change in which the other nations on the Security Council and their abilities not to allow the Security Council to move forward changes the dynamic of seeking a Security Council resolution won't be realized which then leaves the question to arm or not to arm that question is past us there are tremendous views of arms already as been established inside of Syria the question is where the vetted moderate forces can have the ability to change the tipping point to change Assad's calculation as well as its patrons that reality doesn't exist today some of the most extreme elements inside of Syria the ones who are best armed and best trained and that creates a real challenge so I would wish that the Security Council would move in concert with what the United States and its European allies have promoted but that has not been the case and unless that calculation of Russia and others change then we will not see a Security Council resolution and the presence that is called would continue I think that that is not acceptable and I would I would also say that you know I find it hard to believe that a country like Iran is going to provide a serious effort to be helpful in this conflict it's not being helpful when it has overflights and sending resources to Assad it's not being helpful when it is training an enormous number of Revolutionary Guard retraining them to come to Syria it is not being helpful when it moves Hezbollah in significant numbers and resources in Syria that there is no great option here the question is how do you change the dynamics as they exist today and while I am also hopeful for the conference that will be held I find it difficult to believe that Assad would either through his representatives or others seek to go there for the purposes of removing himself from power so you know that I am not overly optimistic about the conference as a result if you allow me because what I have said really has been said now by the senator I have been said now by the senator because the point I wanted to make is that studying the fighting is going on in various parts of the world since the second world war there is no one single pattern to end the war Vietnam and here senator of course McKinn knows everything about it and suffered a lot in that war negotiations started in Paris while fighting was going on in other parts let's say in the Middle East where we live always negotiation to reach a settlement whether it was reached or not followed a ceasefire this is a very complicated matter because it is also a question of the war and there are outside powers it's a war by proxy between certain parts and that makes it much more difficult so one has to be innovative one has to be imaginative but the main thing is to start I don't have high hopes to be very honest on the conference that it will succeed but it's the only opening before us now it convenes and we should not really make who should participate as an obstacle to convening the meeting it's very important to convene the meeting we don't want it to become again talks about how this will be this will be really disastrous for the whole area what has to be done is quickly to get a meeting and see if something could come out of it I think the opposition it's very disorganized very disorganized I agree I've been seeing them since September 2011 however they have one message they want a new regime and this is very important regardless of their own views what is important now is to see because the meeting is going to be if it meets it's going to be governed by a certain work or parameters which is Geneva 1 the final communique of 30 June 2011 made it very clear what has been agreed upon is A to start a new transitional period and B to form a national unity government by mutual consent to have full executive powers so there is the parameters there once the meeting is convened you can walk it through with the right pressure of course we can discuss Syria to know and all the other issues of the region but I want to give a chance to the floor to ask questions but I promise Mr. Moussa that he would get in his final remark please a brief remark and then if you can prepare your question I have just a brief comment on what Senator referred to saying about the Security Council now Russia and the US or Russia and the West were at cross purposes at odds so far as the situation in Syria was concerned now there is an understanding between Russia and America so the prospects are better in the Security Council than it has been at that time now if we want to achieve what Dr. Larby was saying now about ceasefire about the confrontation and so on it is for the Security Council to decide that not for the conference in Geneva Geneva is a conference and if you recall what happened with Geneva 1 ok that was very good and good documents came out of it but so what where are we? Geneva 2 will have the same effect if we want to establish a transitional period it is for the Security Council to establish that not for a conference and speeches in Geneva it is time for the Security Council especially that the US and Russia started to follow one path to a great extent at least as we see it now this is time for Security Council thank you can I remind my friend that we would never have gone to Bosnia if we had relied on the UN Security Council we would never go on to Kosovo if we'd relied on the UN Security Council we stopped genocide there genocide is taking place in Syria on a much larger scale today and was the case there ok so I will I am losing control of my panel just one word one final word please that situation in Bosnia and Kosovo and now there is agreement between US and Russia there is a difference the Russians objected strenuously to Kosovo and we will have to wait we did not require the United Nations the point that my friend Mr. Musa just made was that we have to go through the Security Council we did not in Bosnia or Kosovo that's a fundamental point ok so with that point I'm sure we'll have many more questions on Syria so we'll keep the conversation going the gentleman in the third row here if you could kindly identify yourself and if your question is for a particular member of the panel please also let us know yeah my name is Barash Iban I'm from Yemen from the global shapers Sana'a hub my question is for Mr. McCain and maybe Senator Menendez can also respond to that the United States I mean I personally think that it's very courageous that it make the decision to maybe arm the freedom fighters in Syria but the United States had an experience before with arming fighters that happened in Afghanistan almost 20 years ago or even more aren't you afraid that the same experience like you might face again in Syria absolutely not the American people would never and the American congress would never subject allow American boots to be on the ground although I have to emphasize there's this issue of the chemical weapons caches in Syria that's going to have to be addressed on an international basis not the United States alone Americans as we all know are war weary and they would not allow such thing but second of all I don't think American boots on the ground would do anything but have a negative effect and the whole situation I just want these people to be able to defend themselves in a fair fight and that would mean negating Bashar Assad's air assets because that is a huge and decisive factor as we found out in Libya in any conflict in this terrain in this climate Bob well I would just simply say I think that we after 2 years are dealing with the opposition and working with our allies have a pretty fair idea about who we could be supporting and who would share our values and who would be if they were in power all in a more inclusive Syrian society so the legislation that was passed out of our committee and I believe that the senate would ultimately approve has vetting entities to ensure that as best as possible there's always some degree of risk it is not hermetic by any stretch of the imagination that we have come to a point after 2 years of dealing with the opposition and working with our partners including here in the region who is someone who are the entities worthy of supporting and not having the concern that you raised okay there's a question from middle there please hi my name is واسيم مقحال I'm from Lebanon who is actually also today celebrating an important anniversary the liberation of south of Lebanon from Israel my question my question is directed to senators mccain and melendez senators there has been a deep rooted mistrust between the arab street and the arab population and the united states where it comes to its foreign policy 3 very quick examples of this mistrust the arab street for decades sees the u.s. as a staunch supporter of israel and every measure that the Israeli government takes as a matter of fact the knesset is more questionable of its governments and questions topics like the settlement building whereas these topics are taboos and considered political suicide on capital hill in addition the arab spring which you today are supporting has been an outcry of the arab people against dictators who you and the american government have supported for decades and I won't even start so we can get to the question which are all pertinent questions and I'm sure many arab have this on their mind but just so that we can give a chance to others the question is how do you ever envisage gaining the trust of the arab street and the arab population and when will the u.s. foreign policy actually reflect the unalien and self-evident truths that are reflected in the declaration of the independence well first of all sir I'm proud of the united states of america I'm proud of what we've done on behalf of democracy and freedom throughout the world throughout our history you can name almost every major conflict of the 19th and at least certainly the 20th century where the united states led was dedicated and sacrificed american blood and treasure in all four corners of the world usually in defense of someone else's freedom so I take offense at your characterization of the united states of america sir but I will respond to your question as far as the arab-israeli issue is concerned I have palestinian-israeli situation we know it has to be addressed and american presidents both republican and democrat have made very strong good faith efforts I happen to be a great admirer of president bill clinton and at camp david with that close to an agreement and it was yasser arifat that decided that the answer was no and we all know we all know what the outlines of an arab a palestinian-israeli peace process is it's the camp david accords that they that they almost reached again we spoke out on behalf of human rights like no other nation in the world including arab nations are not speaking out for human rights as much as the united states of america is we have conditioned aid we have conditioned assistance we have come to the aid of people that are beleaguered throughout the world and I'm proud of our record and I'm proud of both democrat and republican administrations and it's not an accident that the 20th century was named the american century and I believe the 21st century can as well thank you for your comments well let me I respect your premise I respect your right to ask it but I reject your premise tell me who has spent more lives in national treasure in the freedom of people in iraq or afghanistan where has the standard of women in a country like afghanistan risen so dramatically what other country in the world did as much we have allies that have done what other country has been as continuing in its effort financially to the palestinian authority to help it meet its governance challenges and so you know this is a reality of clearly misperception because if you ask the mothers and fathers of those who have lost their lives in the pursuit of individuals freedoms they do not think that in fact that the shedding of the blood of their sons and daughters was not for in vain and certainly in the cause of freedom for many of these individuals who now enjoy a greater freedom than they had so that's really not a view and if you heard my comments we talk about the focus of creating new economic development opportunities for a population not only in this part of the world but elsewhere who is poor, very young and many times feel very hopeless and the united states has actively engaged through USAID as well as to international organizations in trying to raise the standards of livings for those individuals so I think it is wrong to believe so and finally there are many who said our interests if we were just to pursue our interests was not to stand with the people but to stand with those who had been authoritarian in governing them and the reality is that is not the position the united states took so I think all those are demonstrable elements that are of the highest order of a different view I know there are many questions from the floor which I will come back to but we also have many people sending in questions through twitter and I want to pick up on this point that you spoke about development and economics because we actually have a question from Nader Abdul Qadir who says how can foreign policy serve collaboration between the MENA region and other countries in the field of research and technological development and that brings me to the Doveville partnership and other efforts that have been made in order to bolster some of the countries of the region not necessarily just with finance but rather with projects that would help take us to a better place so perhaps Mr. Maud you could speak about that particular issue and especially with the Doveville partnership well the Doveville partnership is very important it's a lot of investment has gone into it it needs to be built on and built on rapidly and there is no doubt that if across the Middle East and North Africa region we see conditions arising where which are encouraging for investment that will support all the other things we're talking about here it supports conflict resolution more prosperous people want to resolve conflict more they got more skin in the game more the stakes become higher so that's very important that we do that but there's something else as well which is that engagement detailed substantive engagement on issues like technology transfer like collaboration on all of these on all of these areas actually gets dialogue on to things where it's easier to reach it's easier to reach agreement so I've always been a huge supporter of the idea that trade is the best antidote to conflict by and large peoples that trade together don't fight each other and because you have more and more vested interest in each other's prosperity and each other's stability so that's why in the context of the G8 we have said that trade is one of the three big themes and if we understand that that can be promoted then it does contribute not immediately not overnight and it doesn't stop there being all the issues that have been talked about particularly in the Palestine Israeli conflict where there need to be substantive concessions on both sides and for neither side are those easy concessions but they're really important but actually building the collaboration building the engagement on things which are not to do with that conflict can be a really important precursor to success and perhaps that's one of the lessons of Europe that the region can look to and maybe a hundred years ago if you had said there'd be no wars in Europe that you would have such close partnerships between France and Germany you'd say it would be impossible and then so we've seen it I'll take more questions from the floor and voices women ask questions please do you want to go ahead no no no please please hi my name is Munir Altallah I'm with Your Middle East and my question is for Dr. AlArabi my question is can America be trusted as a moderator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict given its history with the issue and how many more chances should we give America to facilitate this conflict before looking for new moderators or is anyone who tries to take that away from America going to be you know sort of crushed I think crushed might be a bit strong to go straight forward to answer your question can America be the moderator yes it can it can I was present myself with President Sadat at Camp David in September 1978 where the United States made enormous efforts with pressure on both sides to produce the peace treaty so that I have seen that myself the United States was a party a very active party in writing down resolution 2 for 2 which called for withdrawal from the Arab countries occupied or from the territories occupied in 1967 and that peace and security would be on a reciprocal base for both sides so it can't do that the United States has a unique power of persuasion let's say in trying to move the Israeli government the present one which is very difficult to attain peace for the Palestinians now you say can we find out someone else another moderator I'll be very happy if you can point out someone who can do who can play this role in our modern world a question here hello my name is I am part of the global shaper is Cairo hub well I have two questions my first question is for all the panelists it's regarding the Israeli and the Palestinian conflict and a growing sense of fear and suspicious over the latest changes made on the peace initiative in a way that included the land swaps so people have a growing sense that this might actually lead to more loss of lands or maybe the loss of the 67 borders and my second question is for Mr. Mandas and Mr. McCain what do they think of the latest shift you as drones killing policy in Yemen and Afghanistan in many other states was it for the sake of the hundreds innocent Afghanistan and Yemeni people who were killed or was that decision has been taking for other reasons thank you okay land swaps it's a myth that grew out of proportion you are speaking here and I was part of the delegation that went to Washington you are speaking here about two states we never had two states there two states and they have to define the borders define the borders you have to do two things delimitate the border which never existed and then demarcate the borders and when you do that and I have spent 5 years with the borders of Egypt working on that as legal advisor of the Egyptian foreign ministry to go around areas and to do this and that this is number one number two the Palestinians themselves in their agreements in the past particularly under prime minister they found out by agreement that there would be perhaps changes of the border between them but the delegation in Washington did that made the three conditions that the Palestinians want there has to be equal in space so there is no loss of land 22% will not be 21.5% secondly they have to be with the same value value of the terrain itself and thirdly by mutual consent so where is the concession I don't know but on the other side of me for their many years of dedication to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process all of us are very grateful did you want to say anything yes indeed because the issue of SWAP was there on the table for so many years but it dealt with the border line and SWAPs should be astride the borders on both sides not only on the Palestinian side and equal in value and space so in fact when I read all the documents coming out of this meeting I found that the Arab delegation remained within the parameters as indicated by the Arab initiative which is there and it will not be amended under no circumstances it could be amended it is fair it is balanced and nothing else could be done concerning it but the Israeli side created a myth that yes indeed there is now SWAP of land they were thinking of the settlement and they talked about 10% or something of that kind more or less and that shows that it is an impossible proposition it has to be on the borders within a very limited surface and equal as we have agreed so the concession the idea of SWAP was there but the amount was limited and I believe there was some kind of understanding some kind between President Abbas and former Prime Minister Olmut on that just to start and then it went down the drain can I mention other part of the question yes sure as it relates to your second part of your question I would say to you what do you think of the 3000 lives that were lost on September 11 including 700 from my state of New Jersey what do you think of the bombings that took place at American bases and American facilities and took lives look the reality is that personally speaking I would not second guess the the government of the United States to pursue the national security of its people like I would not doubt any other nations right to pursue the national security of its people but I think it has been we live in a new time these are stateless actors these are not the times and we have individuals for which their glorification is in dying not living and that is a challenging set of circumstances which goes to my original question it's trying to change the dynamics of the root causes versus just simply the symptoms but I always ask people who ask me this question what about the 3000 lives that were lost on September 11 that is the nature of the responses we have had since and it is a continuing challenge to the national security of the United States of actors who in their extremism continue to seek the death of Americans both at home and abroad and that is the challenge we face and within that challenge we probably go to enormous pains to try to ensure that we go after only those of us only those who are trying to in essence kill Americans but as in any set of circumstances this is not the simplest set of circumstances under which we are pursuing those who in essence want to kill our citizens and so I will not apologize for the United States protecting its citizens which I fully would expect I just like to I just like to remind you that after the attacks on Washington and New York the United States of America did not declare war on Afghanistan they demanded that those responsible who were based in Afghanistan that be turned over to the United States the Taliban refused to do that this is what triggered our invasion of Afghanistan and I am sure that you and other professional women especially would not like to see a return to the reign of the Taliban and the abuse of women's rights which was their doctrine and that's one of the reasons why I believe that we should try to preserve a free and democratic society in Afghanistan with all the problems and challenges that we face I believe it's possible with a sufficient force left behind that we can leave Afghanistan and have our assistance with them in a number of ways militarily that we may see a long hard path but democracy and freedom and rights for all including women in Afghanistan well there are so many hands up and I do apologize to you because we are coming to the end of the session and I would not dream of keeping you all behind so just to wrap up I mean there are so many topics of course that we do not have a chance to touch upon we have Iranian elections coming up mid-June we have Iraq on the border of Jordan we don't know what will happen there with all the difficulties of course Lebanon and so forth and Yemen and then we didn't even touch upon Libya and Tunisia that have witnessed historical changes and perhaps it's indicative of just how in one sense rich this region is for all the topics that are pressing for the world it's no longer just about us but I think that the one defining factor is that there is a lack of trust and whether there is a lack of trust between countries or whether there is a lack of trust between peoples and their governments or a lack of trust towards the United States or some of its allies this is I think one of the themes that has really come through and I guess it's venues like this that allow us to have discussions and even if we defer be able to air those differences and discuss them to go forward with that I would like to thank our panel for their time and I'd like to thank you for your questions and I apologize for not being able to take more questions but we had such a lively debate so thank you