we have seen over the last couple months there have been four rounds of talks, one after the other has failed. there have been times were different committees have tried to get together to work out their differences on a smaller scale were both factions got together and try to hammer things out, each time is failed and that the situation we're in right now where it appears fatah will create a caretaker government which hamas is completely opposed to an end to a race is a specter of a round

of violence so we are concerned to see where things go, it is in no one's interest to see chaos continue in the region. now ask for within the administration understands what is happening and whether this is a figleaf i believe they fully understand there is no chance right now of a jump starting the peace process. there could be peace between israel and fatah, there could be, but that is assuming that fatah wants to enter into negotiation without having all of the palestinian people beneath them and i don't think that's going to happen anytime soon so we are still at a place where there is no interlocutor, the palestinians cannot agree on who there was sent to the negotiating table let alone whether they are truly interested in pieces. remember 60% of the palestinian support hamas, which is steadfast opposed to the peace process so we're in this place where i have trouble understanding the administration but if the goal is to provide political cover where they soon

the arab regime that is probably the main reason why we're seeing this push for an peace when i think everybody knows, the elephant in the room that is long as the palestinians are at war with one another there is no chance of an agreement, and settled agreement between them iraq let me pick up, and europe where they're pushing hard to try to get not israel and the palestinians back to the table beverly fatah and hamas to the table with the idea they should form a unity government. how that or? how do have a unity government, isn't there any realistic option of having a unity government, is it useful and with that government's it down at the table with israel and negotiate with half the government says there can be no peace? >> that is the point when you have hamas as part of a unity government and hamas rejects israel and actually read just the legitimacy of the plo which has renounced violence against israel, i don't know how you

move forward on this. people have suggested that hamas just yamelie takes parts in foreign relations but really it is about control over the west bank and fatah -- gaza but i believe there will be no compromise because both sides have their hands on a state that you have got hamas and fatah land and neither one wants to let go. so i think it is for that reason alone getting about ideology that i don't believe a compromise is imminent. >> the other thing proposed is a truce and that a hamas while it can have peace with israel could have a truce that could last up to 10 years based on theology and then those who are hopeful say that troops will allow ideas and attitudes to a lot of overtime and an investment in peace and you give something out of it, those who are less optimistic would say over the 10 years you will see an arms buildup for a round of fighting that will make everything else look like in a garden.

>> that is exactly the problem. since the hamas takeover in 2006 up until the operation we saw that hamas was amass a weaponry, high-powered disciple -- rifles and anti tank mines and all sorts of weaponry they started using against israel during the operation so the theory is when you know that hamas continues to speak of destruction of israel this is an intractable position. why would you want to allow this , moreover if you're interested in peace, why were to allow us? >> does in the obama administration want to see a fatah hamas unity government? >> the ideal would be there would like to see it in a case where both factions truly support peace, but we have to deal with a hand we're dealt with in reality and the reality is that both factions actually forgetting about hamas for the moment you've got fatah which

still calls for the destruction of israel so they're calling for a unity government of both that openly call for the destruction of israel and the thing for whatever reason both will continue down a path of peace so this is what i think we really are at a place where we're stuck. if he were to ask me where things should go right now i was i and i am the obama administration each one of you are in a corner and the palestinians i want you to figure out to space for you and exactly what your position is with regard to peace with israel and after that in a couple of months we can start to work on where to go from there. israel, you can figure out what it is you are willing to do in the name of peace, what kind of concessions willing to make based on previous agreements, and after both of the positions have been settled then bring the two of them together and calling for the two of them together now to me makes no sense given the realities on the ground which i think have not been addressed and not publicly. i think the administration understands and are working with the same body of knowledge i am

and all of us are, but for whatever reason they have yet to come out publicly and stays we know that the palestinians is the big stumbling block on the side. >> let's go to another question. >> there was an interesting piece of us syrian negotiations and their failure and it seems to be floated to the state department and other agencies now that serious a golden goose and all this may help the peace process. the u.s. granted that believe? if not, why is it so provocative and why do we keep going to this idea of negotiations with syria? >> this is something that dates back to the beginning of the clinton administration and i actually read in a book called innocents abroad where he talks about the idea of syria occurs as the icebreaker that will lead to all other peace.

i personally don't believe that syria is in a position where it can make this peace with israel given the track is embedded iran and can get out given the fact that hezbollah could very easily draw syria back into conflict with israel even if syria tried to pull away. why does continues to be attractive to policy makers is beyond me, syria is a smaller world ratio but a world regime nonetheless. >> we have a question up front if we men, signal made. >> my question is about to fayed, a lot see him as the great hubbub potential of moderate palestinian leadership. what is his future and will he gained credibility of them in and where your future? >> he is an interesting case and ran in the 06 election but to get a lot of support and maybe have a couple states under a party called the third way.

his legitimacy really stems from the international recognition he has of a former world bank and imf official. he is a quintessential moderates and he does not want to be seen as a fatah member or hamas member and takes pride in the fact that both factions don't entirely trust them and that this makes him an excellent go-between for the two factions. my problem with him is even though he has cut illegitimacy and international committee and a track donor funds and help to build the palestinian territories, he does not control any malicious, any weapons and that actually in mind is a very good thing but in the minds of the palestinians to respect our on the streets, this is a real weakness for a camera. and that makes me wonder how much power he will be able to accumulate 80 for instance opposite end of this caretaker government there are talking about right now, would he be able to gain more power that way, i would say probably not. he will probably serve an

excellent role as a this caretaker prime minister for a boss but that is. >> two what extent is charisma vital in this? what ever you say about arafat he was for many people a charismatic figure. i don't think that abbas is a charismatic figure in that way and, on the other hand, announcer that michelle and who heads up hamas from syria is a charismatic figure, is there a need for a charismatic figure to be a leader as opposed two simply fashions and ideas and coalitions? >> one of the things are argue in the book is yasser arafat for all of his failings have captured the imagination of the palestinian people here and here was this character who wore fatigues and had his black-and-white checkered a pythia in the shape of palestine and the today oldest -- and i am working around-the-clock to liberate palestine. this appeal to the palestinian

people so much to the point that when he died in 2004i actually really believed that is when things began to unravel and anarchy took over the west bank and gaza because it was as if you tell this to territories together. i would argue that with him gone these two territories are separated by more than 20 miles of the desert, they are ministates of this point that may be a shame the devil to put back together. in order to bring them back together and we will need to see that a charismatic figure who comes up with a vision of the palestine is going to look like and that is one of the things i talk about in the last chapter and that is we need to see on the palestinian side for any of this to move toward we need to see that next martin luther king or ghandi or even nelson mandela -- somebody who has a board looking a vision provide possibly future state of palestine is ever to apply because at this point we are looking at two factions that are at war with another that are

based on the destruction of something rather than the creation of something. i don't think that hamas are fatah have put together a platform that talks about what future palestinian state would look like and i think that is one of the main reasons we see them and the position they are today. >> a question of their. >> just to step back for a second when you're discussing in the united states policy visavie fatah and propping them up, and as you know both under the previous administration and the current one, one of the episodes of success with policymakers pointing to is the mission a by lt. dave then improvise security training and coordination to the palestinian forces under president abbas and prime minister fayed. considering we are actively training 15 soon to be properly in professional paramilitary

outfit, since that is a sign that has minority support among palestinian people and on the ground hamas mesa big deal out of an army etc. etc., and one way is to the u.s. showing of this position as being either seen as an honest broker or otherwise seen as somehow facilitating peace and a corollary two that sense right now american legislators and policy makers are tearing themselves up over in his interrogation techniques that are used in the past and here we are supporting a recession that actually uses real torture, not enhanced interrogation, real torture -- in what way is this producing a result that is further u.s. interest in the region? >> these are all -- this is all great stuff and i probably talked about another 20 minutes, but to try to summon up, i think that the support of the west bank government is a

continuation of a policy that has served the u.s. poorly in the past. in when you look back and our support to for egypt for instance and i there is a corrupt government that is autocratic and doesn't have a lot of respect on the street and this is essentially what we're doing in the west bank. what we're doing here is to prevent something rather than prop up something else. that would be the way i look at the with the bush administration approaches after the june 2 of 07 and 1 could even argue that the propping up of these forces, we're not giving them too much strength by giving them enough to counter the activities of hamas so what you could argue and i done of this is exactly the strategy involved with this could be something akin to and iran iraq or on a small skillet the palestinians. in other words, that one side you really don't want eupepsia propped up enough so that is strong enough to keep all of the west bank and not too

strong because it is not the old senate government that you're looking for. i don't hafed is the goal but it appears that would be logical strategy if that is why the cia or the white house approached it. >> let me ask, people are living better i assume on the west bank and in gaza, higher standard of living -- is that having an impact on the thinking of palestinians on both sides? >> well, the poverty level in the west bank is somewhere around 20 or 25% and you compare that to the gao's strip where it is probably more than 50%, some has to do with a much larger refugee population in the gaza and west bank but are also has to of the fact that when both of these territories control of jordan and egypt, jordan and best and enhance a lot more in the west bank economy to the point there was more industry than there was in gaza, but gaza, hamas essentially has

destroyed a lot of what ever was available in industrial zones men available to it, the greenhouse is that the israelis left after their evacuation into 1,005 in all this could have been put to warrant a better quality of life where the average gaza resident poet have seen spewing essentially destroyed it and this raises the question of whether hamas is less popular because of the way they have governed off the gaza strip and i was a there probably are but the extent to which they are unpopular is just almost impossible to tell given the problems we talked about earlier with regard to media and the way freedoms have been curtailed drastically, a piece of that i wrote the tell the telethon is asian of the gaza strip, not the fact that they have been swelled but there are sharia courts, there are these groups that drive around and beat people up and i am not just properly, the sort of savvy style of vigilante

groups so we continue to see problems throughout the gaza strip based on lack of freedom so at this point is too soon to tell. >> since you raised jordan i need to introduce that for a second. people i think no fairly well that jordan is a modern arabic ledger and at peace with israel and what they may not know is what we call the country of jordan is in the eastern part of what historically was palestine, a chance starting in palestine, and that most of its population is palestinian without any difference from the folks on the west bank. happens to have a king who was exiled by the saudi family from arabia man in saudi arabia, he was exiled so now he is in power in jordan, a chance jordanian palestine, and there are those who say that west bank as an independent entity cannot possibly be liable unless it is

integrated at least economically with what is now jordan. talk about jordan's role a little. >> jordan is in the top spot -- there is no doubt this is a historical link from a controlled the west bank from 1940 to 1967 and continues to be good relations between the power structure is of the west bank and jordan. the problem stems from jordan's on palestinian population. jordan is more than 60 and 65 or 70 percent palestinian and so there is a lot of concern over the demographics. people talk about the demographic threat to israel, it is far worse in jordan at this point and the hashemite kingdom is concerned about this and has taken steps to make sure that the west bank never becomes jordan, they don't want to include the west bank palestinians into jordan because it would essentially completely dilutes what ever national identity that exists in jordan today. in 1987 after the outbreak of

the first intifada king hussein actually renounced all claims to the west bank because of the theory of spill over into the east bank of palestinian violence so you have a drinking of jordan that wants to make sure that those divisions remain although i think there is a good argument that can be made that says jordan should take control and stewardship and economic control what ever the case may be but it is the palestinian narrative that is they don't wish to happen and on top of that occurs the jordanians have no interest. >> let's go and the back there. >> i would like to return the conversation to the question of palestinian leadership and you say they're missing a charismatic leader and the obvious question is who in the public's fear could perhaps take on that position or step up to the challenge of? one name from 2003 to 2005 that came up was bughati and the argument you're seeing a lot of people who originally against

the idea of moving toward a position of letting him out of israeli prison where he is now and getting involved in palestinian politics on the grounds that the time for him to affect any changes is running out because the mainstream generation coming up don't remember him, he has been in jail with their entire lifetime, so what are your thoughts on the bughati idea and is there anybody else you see that could take up the challenge in helping the palestinians for the? >> with regard to bughati, i think we have seen this movement before and now how events. you think about yasir arafat and how he dedicated his life to the liberation of palestine two any means necessary, had blood on his hands and then decided i can be the leader of the palestinian people and i will therefore renounce violence and of a sudden you have got a government under his control. this is the fear that we would have with bughati, a man with blood on his hands to dozens

renounce violence, saw his role in the violence associated with the intifada in the early part of the decade is being completely it legitimate to invite him to the palestinians again for the israelis to be open to this, i know there, of course, has been israel within the united states indefinitely with in the territories that this is the only chance. i am still waiting to see a real choice emerged. i don't believe he is that, not to say it won't happen. leaders in the arab world and specifically in the palestinian territories gained their bonafide because of the fact they thought, this is what makes them a leader so that is the argument that can be made where the but i can think of 12 others against. >> we have one more question here. >> going beyond the subject of the book "hamas v. fatah" and some of the other articles you have written, could you comment

on one rahm emanuel supposedly said that the path to any arrangement with iran license through palestinian israeli peace. again, does that make any sense into him? what is the context of their? and number two, a thing we recently heard king abdullah suggest if there was an peace within 18 months there would be this huge middle east war involving everybody. could you comment on that as well gripes'. >> with regard to your question of linkage which is what we're calling now the l word, we continue to hear that unless the israeli rededicate their efforts toward peace, then the united states can help the or to the iranian drive for nuclear weapons. this is to me, i don't understand the logic of it. i understand how the figleaf of

peace could help with the sudanese as you mentioned before, that this unique arab states and they saudi egyptians to get behind israel or in the evidence that israel seized a decision in test tube, iran, but i don't see this as, how you cannot leave one with the other. in my opinion both should be pursued independent and is in everybody's interest to see peace break out in the middle east but we have these problems of trying to figure out to space for the palestinians but at the same time you got iran which is pushing toward nuclear weapons, edging closer every day. it will only be up to the u.s.. we have seen in every international iter and clinton talked about this well back down from the iranian challenge and will be left up to the u.s. and israel as it always is in the middle east and by this administration to say that it can't do anything until peace talks which are hinged on a lot of factors out of israel's

control to me is not a very logical position. on hope that answers your question. >> and king abdullah? >> you know, what i can say about that is the leaders across the region and pundits here at the u.s. and israelis as well are always talking about the next war to come and how can be worse than the last and that disaster awaits. this is a part of the world where such predictions are commonplace. i would place a lot of stock in it, we like to see i think that if there is a confrontation between iran, yes, we have a lot of trouble on our hands but that is not 18 months, that could be six months to 10 months from now. so i think it's a little bit of an exaggeration but there are real dangers ahead and i think those stem from primarily iran. >> let's follow up with a iran for a moment. i guess put it this way, start with this anyway -- in iran were to get nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, has that

changed the equation for israel, hamas, fatah and the region? >> well, it puts israel in an automatic we position here is strengthens the hand of hamas, and knows it. >> basic impunity nosing that its big brother is standing behind them. the same ago for hezbollah and for syria, sudan want to get into the act which is also people overlook the iraq and sudan is also a proxy of iran. you've got these ponds that are surrounding israel and israel played a masterful game of chess to my chest was invented in persia and we can now see that even if iran doesn't get these weapons and has placed upon separately route is real, and it gets the nukes and all these factors into would they please and women even necessarily need to be a nuclear attack with israel, it could be just a toy of the missiles. the low to the 30,000 plus in their position and other

5,210,000 possibly chemical weapons in syrian hands and the homemade weapons that hamas buyers into southern israel which increasingly can now reach tell of the according to some reports not to mention whenever sudan was, and other wares having all this in place to put israel in a great amount of danger and also threaten the viability of a speech to the fashion in the west bank arab robins reasons the strength of wayne. so there are a lot of petitions about the way this is going to work out but at the end of the day it comes down to iran my getting nuclear weapons and not shipped in the balance of power that right now keeps the region, i'm not going to stay stable but more stable than it could be. >> that is a the other side of the question which to barack obama has said it would be intolerable for the iranians and this regime, this regime to get a clear weapons. president bush said the same thing, the israelis are saying it and some people the israelis really mean it. >> and i continue to hear about

possible plans for a strike but as i understand it's a strike would probably be one of the more complex military operation is not just in israeli history by military history given the idea of a a flyover of the mediterranean and over turkey and iraq into iran, hitting every side with perfect intelligence and having multiple times with u.s.-made munitions and needed to get underground into concrete bunkers, not to mention what ever reprisals iran would have in store for israel should an attack take place so this is a very complex operation. one that i think of any military can pull off is probably israel, but this would be probably, would lead to regional war if not a war that stretches beyond the middle east. >> is it impossible for you to talk about what you think will happen over the next six months or a year or other so many variables that you can possibly

speculate? >> you still with us to, it is almost impossible to predict but in terms of prescriptions i get back to what i said before, i think the u.s. needs to continue to pursue iran as if there is no palestinian israeli conflict and then if they really think it is important to pursue the conflict as if there is no iran beverly pursue both on separate tracks and not make the link there should not be linkage. if it is an. >> two go after both duet but i was in this specter of every nuclear-weapons should overshadow everything at this point and i should be the focus of the u.s. at this point. >> i think that is about all we have time for so let me thank jonathan schanzer, the author of a "hamas v. fatah". lemme think c-span and thanks booktv. i am cliff may for the and the foundation for intensive democracies -- again, thank you all of you. [applause] >> jonathan schanzer is the deputy executive director of the

jurors policy center and a former counter-terrorism alice for the treasury department, the author of "al-qaeda's armies: middle east affiliate groups and the next generation of terror". for more information visit schanzer.pundicity.com. >> de capo press is one of the imprints of the perseus books group annalisa wharf is vice president at de capo press, what are some of the titles coming out from your imprint? >> we have a wonderful biography of james monroe coming up by a washington d.c. writer and is called the bill last founding father because he truly was one of the last xiaoning brothers emanation. >> what another biography of james monroe? >> this is one more complete than many of the others, new information has been found through all the archives and letters and records and we are finding that there is still a lot of patriotic interest out there so we want to give us to continue to feed that market. >> what else is coming out? >> a biography of a millionaire her coming out and actually

there is something of a movie tie-in to it, with hillary swank and richard gary that is coming out this fall and will bring the book how to coincide with that. >> how old is the book? >> is at least a decade, but we're giving it a new cover and rolling it back out there with an update. >> to is domenic? >> a very well-known author who has a history of new york times bestsellers behind him and a but we're doing with them is call a rainbow in the night about south africa and cover as a whole apartheid time and the turmoil that the country went to become the nation it is today. >> what kind of books do look for? >> we published nonfiction primarily a lot of promises is to make sure they fit into our core audience and areas we know we are going to be a was a fine successful traders, and out of military history russ, a general history, little politics and the current events and a pull culture to mix it up a little and the music and music history the m s