>> rose: welcome to the program, with the united states government shutdown and what other ramifications. we talk to albert hunt, david leonhardt-- leon and chris matthews. >> when you ask a president, any president right or left to give away the one thing, before he even had a chance to really implement, and he wants to implement it, he wants to fix the thing over the next three years, to say oh, well take it away for at least a year and negotiate it again, for him to say yes to that would be extraordinary and i think would kill him in his own constituency. the liberals would say this guy is finished if he gives this away. >> rose: what the possibilities of a geneva conference on syria. we talk to lakhar brahimi

special enjoy to virria from the united nations and arab league. >> we have said there is-- the government is not going to win. they may be doing better today. they may be doing better next week. but they are not going to win this war. nor is the opposition going to defeat, you know, actually defeat the government and have them you know leave damascus or whatever. >> rose: a look at egypt today, part two of my conversation with nabil fahmy, the foreign minister. >> in two and a half years we have asked two presidents to leave. we are going through a societal transformation. egyptians are trying to define who they are, politically in the 21st century. that's the debate. how do we draw the image of egypt. is it my image? it can't only my image. is it an islamist image. it can't only that. so this is what we are

trying to do. it is an important, complicated but historic opportunity, which we have a responsible to pursue to the utmost. >> rose: shut down, syria and egypt next. funding for charlie rose was provided by the followin following: additional funding provided by these funders

captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> we're to the going to be -- extorted. the country is not going to be extorted. we're to the going to go with a gun to our heads. we're to the going to allow the republicans to say give us what we want or the economy is going to close. >> rose: we are just two days away from a possible government shutdown and any deal seems far away. the president's affordable care act is at the centre of the impasse. house republicans have demanded the government delay the implementation of obamacare in order to avoid a shutdown. democrats including the white house are refusing to negotiate. joining me from washington for a look at this developing story al better hunt of bloomberg view and nurx "new york times" washington bureau chief david leonhardt with me in new york.

chris mathews-- matthews and host of hardball. i go to you first. tell me where we are at this moment if anywhere, al better. has significant changed? >> not really. the house passed its bill which included obamacare delay provision, something on the tax, the senate is going to take it up. they're not going to-- they're going to pass what they call a clean cr which doesn't include any of those extraneous matters. the house will resist that and probably have a government shutdown whether it goes on for a couple days or goes on long other is the big question. and what kind of a face-saving compromise can you come up with for john boehner who does not have control of his caucus. charlie, quickly, the difference between this potential shutdown in 1995 and 1996 really is quite stark. in '95 and '96 gingrich and clinton thought they both had the stronger hand, they could take on the other and they knew it was going to be a high risk game. that somebody would win. but there were risks. this time many republicans are dying for a shutdown.

they really are going to celebrate a shutdown that makes a compromise much, much harder. >> david, do you agree with that? >> dido. it's a very strange situation. this seems to be the law that we can never stop fighting over it finally passed in 2009 after a year and a half of wrangling on the hill. we've been in a presidential election that was in part about the law well. had a supreme court case about the law. a major part of it is about to go into effect which is these exchanges are going open and people without insurance will start buying insurance plans on it and yet we still have congress fighting over whether it should be repealed or whether it should exist. and there are many people who continue to believe deeply it should be repeeled. it's really hard to see how the democrat goes along with that. what that does is it is as in the future if you don't like a law, even if it passed, survived a presidential election, the supreme court, you can threatone shut down the government in order to get rid of it. so it's really hard to see how the democrats agree to getting rid of this law. and at this point it's hard to see how republicans fold on their insis taens that it must be delayed.

i think we are likely looking at at least a short shutdown. >> rose: that is an interesting question, what do you think in terms of time. >> i think it's hard to find the short-term solution. i think you've got tond wither about the republicans. al is right, i think they're looking for a shut don and not really worried about having one, for some reason. but when you ask a president, any president, right or left to give away the one thing that put him in the history books, his major legislative accomplishment before he even had a chance to really implement it, and he wants to implement t he wants to fix the thing over the next three years to say oh, take it away for at least a year and we'll negotiate it again at the end of the year. for him to say yes to that would be extraordinary and i think would kill him in his own constituencies. the liberals and middle of the road guys would say this guy is finished if he gives it away. >> rose: and the republicans feel the same way on principles. so how does it play out and how much damage is it going to do to a, the country, and secondly, the economy. >> i can only see them if boehner and al is right,

boehner has to somehow broker this. hend the president have to get together and find something to give the cr, the continuing ref lugs an approval. something that gets the, protects obamacare but gives them something they really want or i think this isn't going to end. >> so what can give, al? >> well, he can give commitments to negotiate on future venues. but charlie, even worse than this government shutdown potentially is the debt ceiling which is coming up in two and a half weeks. and he cannot negotiate really on either one of those as far as obamacare is concerned. look, there's a deal they can put together separately to replace the question with some entitlement cut, some of which obama has already imposed. a little revenue and other things to do. but i think it's very hard to do it in the context of either the continuing resolution or certainly the debt ceiling.

and again it requires some people who really want to make a deal. john boehner i believe to be one of those. but i don't think he's in control of his caucus as i said earlier so it makes it very, very difficult. look, it's going to happen. how it happens is going to be very messy. >> the distinction that al is making between the economic damage from a shutdown and the economic damage from the debt ceiling is a really important distinction. the economic damage from a shutdown would not be enormous. the economic damage from the u.s. government no longer repaying its debts and creating all kinds of problems in the world market could be enormous and we're only a few weeks away from that. >> rose: in fact the last time that happened we had, because washington couldn't deal with the debt ceiling at that time, there was a reassessment of the credit rating for the country. >> right. and that was when we didn't violate the debt ceiling is so if we did that could be did -- i mean some of these warnings are overdone. but going over the debt ceiling would be from an economic standpoint potentially really terrible. >> rose: some say, al or

david, that the speaker has to risk his speakership here, either because his caucus will no longer elect him next time out if he does something that is so-- does such damage to them. on the other hand the speakership is at risk because if this thing turns out bad, he will no longer be in the majority in the house. >> for john boehner to risk his speakership seems on every issue, this, immigration. i have a suspicion this is not based on good reporting, that this guy does to the want to be speaker at the end of this term. it really is a miserable job right now. and really stark contrast to chris's old boss tip o'neill where it was really fun to run the house. challenging but fun this guy doesn't have any fun. there is no enjoyment. he doesn't control his own destiny. so i think at some point, in either the debt ceiling or in this, you are right, he is going to have to do away with the so-called-- rule, pass the bill with a lot of democrats and a minority of republicans. and that's just going to

make his position all the more precarious. >> rose: there is also this factor. go ahead, david, you want to say something. >> i was going to say the dynamics for the speaker are terrible. because, because if you think about the republican caucus, what he's got is a majority of republicans who really don't want to compromise on almost anything with the democrats. but then he's got a majority in the house which is to say the democratic caucus and a minority of republicans who when you put them together they make up a majority of house who often do want to compromise so there is a majority in the house for avoiding this crisis. there is a majority in the house for immigration reform. there was a majority in the house for bills like hurricane sandy relief that passed. but boehner can't keep the speakership if he copes going to that majority because he needs a majority of republicans to keep him speaker. and it's just a terrible situation. >> rose: political question, chris s it automatic, we all look at what happened between clinton and gingrich. and we say if you are seen to have caused a government shutdown it will do serious

political damage to you. but i have heard people say it's not that way this time. >> not to your cd, your congressional district. the way the voters, it is not all jerry manneddering but some of it is. 230 some congressional seats, a strong ma ert did -- majority are members of congress, republicans representing people who voted against obama last time. they go home and said i did what you did. i voted against this guy. but for the country as a whole, boehner has to sort of like speaker o'neill represent the country as a whole. and the country as a whole cannot cashier its presidency which is what this might do, this whole idea of throwing out the guy's major chievement. but one of these members i think said i'm only loyal to my districtment i don't have to think about the country implicitly. and i think that's the problem. the democrats get all their votes in the big cities and 85% in philadelphia, 58% in the bay area, san francisco. and they waste vote, if you will. but they win the electoral college votes but can't control the congress with those big victories in the cities because then they lose 55, 45 in the suburban areas and that is their problem.

>> rose: when you look at the kinds of things, al, you mentioned one and people have different ideas as to what might lead to some kind of change. what happens after the government shutdown, what will then take place. will they continue to talk or back away from it or what? >>. >> they have to continue to talk. there are consequences, charlie for the members of congress to be sure but particularly for the president. the president is supposed to take a trip next saturday to asia, to meet with putin, meet with the the chinese leader. i don't think can go on that trip if there is a government shutdown. and if he's not doing that there is no way in the world congress can go home and take a district work period or vacation. they are going to have to at least go through the motions. but going through those motions, you know, normally you would say, all right, a couple day, they'll feel the heat, know they have to do something but this may be one of those things that after you have taken that heat or 2, 3, 4 days you have a group that i sass let's keep going. >> rose: yeah. the place we seem to be now

is winning the blame game. that's really more important than coming up with a-- some brilliant creative way out of this. david, do you agree? >> yeah, i think part of the problem is it's not clear what the creative brilliant way out of this is. because to some extent what you have among a lot of house republicans is a desire not to get out of this. and if what they want to do is force a confrontation over obamacare f what they want to do is shut down the government, for idea logical reasons to shrink it even temporarily you kind of can't have a brilliant way out of it because basically what they want is not to get out of it. and i think that is the specter that al and chris are raising here which is we'll probably get out of this in a matter of days or weeks. because we have before. but you can certainly construct a scenario where this goes on for some time with the politicaldigmics. >> rose: what is different than before. >> the desteyr for the

government to move forward and find some stability which was true under reagan and o'neill, under bill clinton and gingrich, ultimately put the fight behind you and continue on with some resolution. but you can imagine a resolution in either of these directions right now? where the tea party caucus basically which runs the republican majority gives up on obamacare, just gives up or can you imagine even greater stretch, the president of the united states saying you got me, i'm saying good-bye to my baby. i created this, i'm saying good-bye for a year or whatever, and half a year i think any piece of time he gives up on it will be the less time you will have to implement it the way he wants to do it. >> the amazing thing about this is that-- the amazing thing about this is there is actually a substantive solution here. al was hinting at it before, which is that, i mean if what republicans want is to restrain government in the long-term, they could come to a deal with obama and cocome to a deal with them where they put in place to restrain the growth of pled care spending and obamacare

spending all these things. the technical solution isn't that hard. it's the political one that is so hard. >> just to jump? i agree with dave. i think on the blame game question, there also is a certain parody of destruction here in the sense that i think republicans feel and i suspect correctly that this is not going to hurt them in 2014. that that base will get energized and off-year election, they will do just fine. they have that certain advantage anyway as chris eluded to a moment ago. long-term i think it hurts the republican brand more which already is held in low regard and i think as a national party republicans will be more hurt by this than anyone. but short term it's to the going to hurt them. >> what is its one aspect of bama care that so offends the tea party. i thought it was the individual mandate but what is it? >> i think there is the most important expansion of the social safety net in almost 50 years. and i think historically. >> just that idea. >> if that idea, if you go

back and look at there are these great old quotes from reagan about how medicare will end american life as we know it in the 1950s when he was a conservative activist. and i think that is of that ilk where this is an expansion of government, it takes the united states away from being the only rich country in the world with large numbers of uninsured people and it mainly does it by taxing rich people to pay for health insurance for poor and sick people. and if you are a conservative there is something, for many conservatives there is something distasteful about that. >> if the mid-term election was tomorrow would the democrats or the republicans be in the majority in the house? >> republicans. >> six year advantage is always there. reagan in the end knew how to compromise after he made his point tlment is no tea party leader. that is a tough question, i done know the name of-- mccarthy, can tor, i don't think they are the leaders. they are in the leadership. who could stand up and say dammit follow me and they will follow him. >> rose: ted cruz. >> in a negative way, in a

negative way. i'm not sure he could throw it the other way. reagan could do that. >> rose: al, who is it, i asked that question earlier? >> well, first i think cruz is a huge winner in this thing as far as republican party politics. he is the face, he is the voice of the republican party today. so and he certainly would not be inclined to say hey, let's be reasonable. let's reason together. and quote isaiah, that not the ted cruz way. >> parties tend to change when they feel really weak, when they feel defeated. bill clinton was able to say to the democrats you moved too far left only because democrats were so sick of having lost so many presidential elections. >> five of six by the time he came along. republicans don't feel weak right now. so that kind of message of hey we need to change which jeb bush has been testing out ever so gradually, just doesn't have a huge audience in the party right now because the party still feels pretty good. >> rose: this is interesting. >> the party-- i think that will only occur if they suffer a devastating defeat. i mean right now these tea party types really think that they are riding a wave. whether they are or not, we can debate. but they believe that.

and only with a real debacle will there be any kind of-- i think you need that number one and secondly you need someone who probably is going to give them their so-called sister soldier moment when clinton took on that black rap singer, and i am waiting for some republican to do that. pretty hard to do. >> rose: what would they say, that republican? >> they would say, they would talk about a lack of tolerance. they would talk about a narrow agenda. they would say some of the same things that john mccain and bob corker are saying but john mccain and bob corker just don't have any credibility with that group rrdz i have to leave if there i have a book to recommend to both of you. it is called tip and the gipper. when politics work. written by distinguished washington journalist by the name of chris matthews, author of the best selling jack kennedy elusive hero. we'll be right back. stay with us. >> we look forward to the work on chemical weapons in syria. it is extremely important in itself and for itself and it

is also extremely important for us who are working with you on trying to bring togethered geneva 2 conference success these. >> lakhar brahimi is here. he was pointed in august 2012 after kofi annan resigned in frustration over the deadlock on syria and the security council. his efforts have focused on convening an international peace conference known as geneva 2. it its objective is to broker a political settlement between the assad regime and the syrian opposition. he has recently held a series of talks with u.s. secretary of state john kerry and russian foreign minister lavrov. those meetings have resulted in a plan to put syria's chemical weapons under international control. i am pleased to have our friend lakhar brahimi back at this table. welcome. >> thank you very much. good to be here. >> rose: so before he we talk about how we got here, just tell me where we are. >> i wish i knew.

>> rose: if you don't, who does? sergei lavrov maybe. >> yeah, you know, we also had a meeting on friday night with the five ministers of the permanent matter of secretary you are council. >> rose: and you had about -- >> and they all agree that let's try and see if we can get this conference going by the middle of november. and they have asked me to assert that this is going to possible. so i am going to talk to, you know, as many people as i can in the region and elsewhere and then report to the secretary-general by the end of october or so to tell him yes, it is worth trying assembling this conference in the middle of november or not. >> and everybody would come. >> i suppose so, yes, sure. >> rose: let's go through who would come, one, russia or the united states.

at sad regime would, they would send the foreign minister or they would -- >> the foreign minister. i think they have decided they would sen the foreign minister. >> who would represent the opposition. >> that is a little bit complicated. >> yes. >> they don't even recognize each other and they have abandoned each other. >> there are many, many groups. the group that is recognized by the west and the countries in the region observation september iran and iraq are the so-called coalition. and they will definitely come but i think they know that they must try and bring other people with them so that they are more representative of the rich variety of the opposition. >> will iran come? >> yeah, it's more and more possible. as you know there was a great deal of opposition to them.

but this week in particular has been a great week for iran in the united nations. and there is less and less opposition to them. as you know the secretary-general of the united nation has always been in favor of their participation. >> rose: and will france be there, will britain be there. >> oh, yeah, sure. >> rose: everyone on the security council will be there. >> the pfive will be there. >> rose: plus germany? >> that, you know, we don't know who else from outside the region. >> rose: right. >> but the idea now is that the countries of the region around syria plus egypt saudi arabia,. >> rose: turkey. >> definitely, sure. >> rose: jordan. >> yeah, jordan, lebanon. >> rose: they are as you say skin in the game meaning that they have a million plus refugees. >> oh yeah, sure, yeah, at least one million in jordan. more than one million i think in lebanon.

half a million. >> rose: two and a half million refugees. >> oh yeah, easily. >> rose: 100,000 people killed. >> easily. and maybe four million. >> so you are talking about one-third of the population that is directly hit by this conflict. plus you know millions, more than half of the population is affected one way or the other. >> okay, as a condition to this, coming to this conference, suppose that people say from the opposition whatever the groups that are represented say, under no circumstances will we allow any kind of settlement that involves bashar assad. >> oh, they are saying that. >> rose: they are. >> yeah, sure. you know-- . >> rose: so why should he come to a conference, a conference that people are saying you know, you can't stay. >> yeah. you know, but he has said yes. and the opposition has said

yes. and what kerry an lavrov have achieved, if you like, in their meeting on the 7th of may is that they say, you know, everybody comes without any preconditions. and we have the declaration of the first geneva conference, of the 30out of june 2012, which is a very detailed plan of how you come out of this horrible crisis. and the idea is that this conference is about getting this plan of the 30th of june 2012 implemented. now the p-5 who are-- kofi annan on the 30th of june have to the been able to agree on taking this to the security council. they have now on the occasion of this resolution on the chemical-- chemical

weapons there is a paragraph that says the geneva conference must take place as soon as possible to implement the declaration of the 30out of june. so now this is a security council decision that this plan is the basis for negotiation. >> rose: when you look at the chemical weapons issue here, have the syrian regime, has the syrian regime in a sense been forthcoming. or are they lacking in skrution details that was expected to be in the hands of the u.n. by now? >> so far you know let me say that i don't know very much about it. it's not my -- >> but so far i think that she have done their share of what is required of them. they were asked to surrender

to-- to this organization in the hague, a list of their weapons and also their establishment where they-- where you produce these horrible things. and the people in the hague are happy with what they got. and as far as i know the americans and the russians think that they have given a comprehensive list of what they had. the inspectors and the experts that are going to deal with this problem get hold of these-- i mean this material, whatever it is, they have already, they are already in beirut on their way to damascus. so you know, it is moving forward. and they, the syrian government is repeating all the time, you know, this is what we have taken. >> rose: some have said, the

argument made by john mccain for example, u.s. senator has always been support the rebels so that they can create some kind of level playing field. >> this argument abou about-- bringing the two parties together so that you have a stalemate and that will make it easier for them. >> right, right. >> you have a stalemate already. what we have been saying, all along, secretary-general of the united nations, myself, every time i have spoken to the security council or to you here, we have said there is no military solution. the government is not going to win. they may be doing better today. she may be doing better next week but they are not going to win this war. nor is the opposition going to defeat, you know,

actually defeat the government and have them you know leave damascus or whatever. no. you already have a stalemate. some people call it civil war. myself included. other people say it's not civil war. whatever it is, it's a horrible war. and to stop it you have got to put together a political process. >> rose: what's the risk of becoming-- getting beyond the borders. because you've got so many people that have some participation here. >> sure. saudies have participation here. turkey has participation in here. hezbollah has participation here. iran has participation here. united states has beginnings of participation here. >> you know, it is already-- it is a horrible syrian crisis. it's already a regional crisis.

you know t has all sorts of ingredients. the sectarian as pefkt the problem is becoming more and more visible. and the proxy aspect is becoming also, and you know, from there, you know, i have always been saying since-- you cannot bottle a war like this inside one country. >> yeah. >> it will overflow. if you don't deal with it, it will overflow. >> primarily because it's sectarian or because everybody has already invested in it? >> for all sorts of reasons. sectarian-- is horrible for us in the region. but you know, whether it's sectarian or anything else it will, you know, because people have influence in-- exercise influence in the civil war. but there is also a kind of

boomer range effect. you exercise-- that you know there is influence that comes to you. refugees. jordan and lebanon are crumbling under the weight of the amount of resources it takes to take care of them. >> yeah, and also you have people you know, that refugees will create other problems. not only resources. security problems. >> rose: right. >> for the countries where they are. you've seen that one hell kropter, syrian helicopter had been brought down in turkey. one turkish plane a few months ago was brought down along the border. you know, 2, 3, what it will produce. >> how is he been able to

survive, bash orr al-assad. >> you know, his father built a very pretty sordid regime. he had participated in so many coup deat that times. he knew the technique. and it is resilient regime. extremely. >> support certainly from the alawites who worry about their own survival. >> i think he has support outside of that as well. he has also support from russian, iran, iraq now as well. yeah, so you know, he thinks can win. if he thinks can win this war, i think he is wrong. this war has got to finish through a compromise. >> rose: and you believe he thinks he can win. >> oh yes, yes. he believes he can win. just like the opposition. they think they can win too. this is the sad situation that we have. they both have started to

speak also about a political solution. so this is the progress that we have made in 1 year. and the fact that the russians and the americans have been talking to one another i think has helped a great deal. i hope they will continue to be talking to one another and coming closer together on this one. >> rose: what about war crimes and those kinds of issues. >> sure. >> rose: how are they handled? >> for the moment they are not. but i think that you know in today's world international justice is becoming reality. the united nations will not even witness an agreement that to end any conflict where there is a blanket amnesty. >> right, right. >> we think that you know no

blanket amnesty is acceptable. >> when do you, you know, of course people are saying you've got to start this international justice. i done think that is possible. but i'm sure that situation will come. >> you know this region well. i mean we look at a situation where you know there are so many proxies. >> yeah, sure. >> you know. and over the last several years how many people come in who are now part of this whole islamist coalition. >> the government says that there are people from 83 countries. we haven't-- . >> rose: on the ground. >> yes, on the ground. but you know probably countries that are presented by one guy, two guys. >> right, right. >> you know, this is one of the phenomenon of this age where you have this islamist have a gun will travel. >> right.

>> system. >> from waz irstan and pakistan and afghanistan so yemin-- yemen to north africa, my own country, and now-- and now syria. syria is certainly-- there's no doubt that there are elements who you can call only terrorists. >> rose: and then you've got elections in 2014. >> yes. presidential elections sometime i think in may or june are supposed to take place there. you know, in the geneva process elections are very important. but i mean the elections, geneva speaks about are not quite the same as the elections that the syrian government is thinking of now. >> yeah.

the united states. did it make a mistake in your judgement by not supporting early -- >> you know, from where i sit, my criticism of the international community as a whole, the united states included, i suppose, is that they haven't really put enough political will to find the political solution. rather than help one side or the other. >> and why is that. >> because you know, i think because they thought that, you know, this regime is going to fall just like the regime in egypt and yemen that it would be easy. it doesn't even need many weapons or something like that. so that was a miscalculation by everybody. i think nobody expected this regime to be, to last this long. but i think you know, the secretary-general of the united nations to his credit

has been saying right from the beginning we need a political solution here. and we didn't have enough-- the russians were supposed to get the government in place, the americans the opposition and it took a long time for them to get together. we tried to help that process and it really gelled properly only on the 7th of may of this year. >> rose: is the united nation its reputation at stake here? >> i don't think so. it is peace in the region. it is you know, if we really believe what we say about caring for people, it's great to have it worked up by the-- chemical weapons that have killed according to the highest estimate $1,400. how about getting people

worked up about 100,000 people. >> exactly. >> and 7 million people you know, lost everything. how about being worked up by that. and saying we need a solution to this problem. so you know, in is what the united nations is-- israeli, you know, trying to convince people of. >> what's the optimal solution. is it, and what happens to bash orr al-assad in the optimal solution? >> i don't want to get ahead of myself. >> right. >> but what i am telling people including my friends in damascus is that after this two years of war, they don't call it civil war. but i think they accept that it is a war.

100,000 people were killed. their country ravaged, destroyed, cities destroyed. their arts destroyed. the past destroyed. we're not going to go back to the system that was created. we're going to create a new republic. that's what syria wants and that is what syria will get, i hope. how that is going to be worked out, you know, as i told you now, will following the american russian decision everybody will come if it takes place without any preconditions that means nobody is going to ask that bashar be hanged before we go to geneva. but then there are very hard questions that will need to be answered. and what i am telling everybody is syrians should

get together and build their own republic. >> rose: thank you for coming. pleasure to see you. >> thank you for having me. >> rose: lakhar brahimi, u.n. envoy to syria, trying to create some momentum for a conference that will take place at some time perhaps in november. back in a moment. stays with us. >> rose: nabil pammy is here the foreign minister for egypt government, former ambassador to the united states. i've known him for many years. he gipts's government is now revising the constitution adopted under the ousted former president mohammed morsi, the first stage of a proposed road map towards national reconciliation. i am pleased to welcome him to this. welcome back. good to see you. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: i want to talk about egypt and move, but egypt. >> what is happening on the ground here.

what is-- what is the constitution, where is the constitutional changes. how long will the interim government be in power. what is this whole thing about, you know, it seems like an assault on the muslim brotherhood about. >> sure. first of all, a short step back. people are looking at this as if it was a change of government or change of precedence. even a change of parties from brotherhood to a secular party, from morsi to the present president. it's more than that. in two and a half year wes have asked two presidents to leave. we are going through a societal transformation. egyptians are trying to define who they are, politically in the 21st century. that's the debate. how do we drought image of egypt s it my image? it can't be only my image. is it an islamist image. it can't be only that.

this is what we are trying to do. it is an important complicated but historic opportunity. which we have a responsibility to pursue to the utmost. >> one of those was democratic elected morsi. >> yeah, sure. but it's not about how are you elected. it's what you do with the mandate. he was elected democratically. he governed exclusively. president obama. >> rose: constitutionally. >> no, exclusively. >> rose: i was asking. >> he actually -- have a constitution. and then he developed one only among islamists. >> rose: rights. >> well, that left me out. i'm a practice muslim. they left me out. i cond find my identity in that. even president obama who was a foreigner, an american, a foreigner, in his speech, he mentioned that the egyptian people asked the president to leave who was elected democratically because they felt that he was not

governing inclusively. >> rose: here's what said. >> over the last few years particularly in he gipts we have sown just how hard this transition will be. mohammed morsi democratically elected but proving unwilling or unable to govern in a way that was fully inclusive. >> exactly. >> rose: the interim government that replaced him responded to the desire of millions of egyptians who believed the revolution had taken a wrong turn but it too had made decisions inconsistent with inclusive democracy. through an emergency law and restrictions on the press, civil society and opposition party. >> sure. >> rose: that is a criticism of the interim government. >> i don't-- i didn't deny that there was criticism. i can respond to that the more important part is why do you remove a president. why don't you wait for four more years. well, you can't wait because we didn't have a constitution. >> rose: right. >> therefore he was governing anyway he wanted. and secondly, he did not, he want governing for all of us. i mean you can be a democrat or a republican and pursue your programs and your policies. but you still are the american president. you can't deny that, take it away from you or from anyone

else. anyway,-- . >> rose: his whole government was all about islamist. >> yeah. >> he wanted to put the image of egypt as an islamist country. it's not. it includes islamists. and i can't-- . >> rose: didn't want to do things like change to sarria law, did he? >> in the first year? >> rose: yeah. >> not in the first year but believe me it is much more complicated than that. >> rose: i understand but is it -- >> but yes, the constitution drafted by islamist committee had 26 references to religion in it. the one before it didn't have more than two. so everything became based on religion. >> rose: did in happen because the army, army decided that he had to go because of all the things you're saying or did it happen because people who had kicked out mohammed from tahrir square, i mean mubarak from tahrir square all of a sudden and were willing to give the benefit

of the doubt morsi decided that that was not turning out the way they wanted to. and they said 's going to be back in the streets. and when the army saw them in the streets they said we have to do something. >> look, the army intervention in 2011 when the people were demonstrating against mubarak and 2013 when they were doing it against morsi, was of course an exceptional circumstances. but in both cases it responded to the people. they did not take it. in the second case. >> without the people they would not have -- >> they couldn't have. and frankly, the liberal intellectuals and the youth were the ones asking the army to intervene. >> rose: but has it been necessary to go out and arrest all the muslim brotherhood leadership and put them in jail. we don't know where morsi is is that the way an interim government ought to behave. >> no, you have to be a bit more on point here. they, those arrested have been accused of criminal

agos. in other words, either violence or insightment to violencez. >> rose: including the president. >> sure. the president has been accused of incidents regarding people killed around the palace while he was in the palace. and then some issues. and possibly some other things that i'm not yet aware of because they're still being investigated. but more pornly o i can't and i don't have the north nor will i determine who is right and who is wrong who is innocent and who is guilty. our courts do that when the president mubarak was remove odd many of his staff were accused of corruption. and the majority were found guilty. they all went to appeal. and the overwhelm magazine jority of those were found innocent. so the court will decide depending on is the evidence there and is the procedure being respected that is going to happen exactly the same with this group. >> rose: so what is the court or what is the interim government saying about the

muslim brotherhood as an organization? >> two things. first of all the people are very angry with the brotherhood and they want the majority want it an ri gated or they want excluded from the system. the government has not taken the position. the government has said what we saw two days ago was a court decision in response to a complaint from the leftist party. that court decision which you describe correctly is the first degree. the next morning the muslim brotherhood made an appeal and there are three levels of appeal before this becomes final. so the government said we will respect the law but we're going to wait until the appeal process ends. >> rose: obviously people worry about that when will they see a democratic election? >> when will that happen or will there be delay and delay and other people worry that in the end it's the

army that is in control as it has so frequently been in egypt and the leadership in the past has come from the military. >> i understand why they drp --. >> mubarak, nassir. >> i understand. because they worry given our past, given our record, that's why they question this. that being said, we have never had these popular revolutions before. 2011 and 2013. but to add, to complete the answer, we have this nine month road map which started in july. the commission developed in the constitution is now working, it has 50 more days to finish its work. and there are 30 days for a public debate on the constitution and then a referendum so by the end of the year we will have had a referendum on the constitution. and then within 6 to 8 weeks an election for parliament. and within two or three more months an election for president. so we have to finish by the

end of spring early summer. >> rose: here's an interesting idea that i heard when i was in tahrir square at the time mubarak was overthrown. that the people in the street really weren't interested in governing themselves. they were there because they wanted dignity. they wanted liberty. and they wanted an opportunity to influence its affairs of their country, all legitimate aspiration. that's what they wanted. not to be in power. not to be-- is that true and is it still true? >> i think it's true and i think the proof of that is that two and a half years later it again was a grassroots movement what they call rebels, young kids. now young kids who are 30 or younger aren't striving to be in government. they just want to have a future. >> and now because of the internet they can see what the future is for other young kids and they say why

can't i have a life like that. >> when i met these young kids in 2011 and i have always been a government employee in the tof enservice before i left government in 2008. but i met these kids as part of the youth movement and i said who in the world taught you guys because we didn't teach you this stuff. and the answer was we used the foundation of the public school system and then the internet. you know. one wonders why are we having these revolutions now in the arab world when we didn't have them before. three reasons. i admit this openly. a governance deficiency or governance deficit. secondly a youth-- and thirdly the information revolution. we have 56% of our population is 25 or younger. >> 56%. >> 56% that's more than half. >> throughout the region. >> and a quarter of them at least live in egypt. and if i take it to above 30 it goes to 70%.

>> right. >> so these kids want a future. they're different from me. they're looking at the future. and they done -- >> they want the president. >> they don't compare themselves to the kid next door. they look at the swed, the italian, the magazine arb-- malaysian and if i don't give them information they go and get it had we had good governance they would not have objected so verimently. but to be very candid we did not have good governance. doesn't mean everything was wrong but we did not have sufficiently good governance. and had it been a mature audience it wouldn't have worked. this was a young population and then they access to information. >> is general sysya national hero. >> i think so now, yes. i mean people-- look. two years ago, two and a half years ago you wanted to be a democratic system. in other words, civilian government, that's what you

are trying to get. you're not trying to get a military government or an authoritarian government. you're looking for a civilian government. two and a half years later your choice is do i pursue a religious government or look for somebody else to help me get rid of it and that's why the people called-- in that respect, general asisi is a hero to the laymen in egypt because he gave them a second opportunity. >> rose: okay. president mubarak, hosni mubarak, where is he? what is going to happen to him? >> he is presently in the hospital. >> rose: under house arrest. >> well, yes and no. >> in custody of some kind. he has been release. >> they found guilty of, on appeal. he won the appeal. he's being retried.

>> what worries you the most as you look forward after all the aspirations of the arab spring. >> well, let me just make-- first thing there worries me is sectarianism, because that shifts the problems that we couldn't solve anyway into a different gear. >> and it's present in every country. >> well, every country but egypt. >> why not in egypt. you had the muslim brotherhood. >> but it's not sectarianism. >> this is not-- so but yes. every country to complete the answer, every country in the region faces governance issues. faces youted bulge and is challenged by the information-- so there will be change in every single

country in the region. some have progressed better than others an therefore the change will be normal. and others will not. the youth issue is a huge challenge. these kids want a future. >> right. >> so you have to give them space. you have to give them hope. and you have to give them economic capabilities. you can't sell them hot air. so that's really where i am on this. we have to do all of that at the same time. >> an dow need help from outside to do that, you need economic help from the west. >> there's no question. >> in terms of bumps, being able to offer investments in the economic future of the region. >> there's no question we need it. i would argue we need it most, focus and directed at youth. one of the major problems we have. i can attract investment. and i can get investment for the big egyptian companies

but the problem, i can get loans domestically. its problem in egypt is we're used to giving you loans in exchange for a mortgage. well, a young kid with a good idea can't mortgage that. so we don't really encourage entrepreneurs, youth entrepreneurs. in the west on the open market and the market economic, you're used to that you finance incubators. that's something we need to focus on. >> finally there is this. where is the relationship between the united states and egypt? >> it's unsettled. still very important to both sides it will survive this. because we need each other. but it's unsettled for one special reason we're $7,000 years old but we don't do revolutions frequently. what has happened over the last two and a half years is

the people decided they're taking charge. you were always used to dealing with me, government officials. you weren't used tohat there are public pressures in egypt, short term politics. you're used to we'll talk to the foreign minister, the president. he's going to be around for a while so he can survive this. that is the first point. you now have to react to the public street, and they're watching you. >> and this is different for you. and new for you. i have the same problem. an egyptian i am not a public foreign minister. that's besides the point. >> i have the same problem. every time i speak i get a reaction from the public. >> thank you for coming. >> thank you. >> a pleasure to see you. >> hauls happy to be here. thank you for joining us. see you next time.

captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> funding for charlie rose has been provided by the coca-cola company supporting this program since 2002. and american express. additional funding provided by these funders. >> and by bloomberg a provide other of multimedia news and information services worldwide.

09/30/13 09/30/13 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] >> from new orleans public televison, this is democracy now! louisiana, the world's prison capital -- with more people behind bars per capita than any other state, and an incarceration rate 13 times that of china. >> being arrested for something know, is a, you horrible feeling and that is a feeling,