whether the kinds of people that he profiles are those who offer the best hope for a democratic future in the region. i suspect that few people, at least in the democratic world would deny that these men are women and admirable. :

of course this dichotomy is not as stark as i just presented it. but it does i think help underline the potential for serious and legitimate disagreements about which sorts of individuals and groups democratists promoters should give priority to in seeking to advance their cause. to discuss this question we are very fortunate to have with us today not only the books author, joshua muravchik, but also three commentators highly qualified to discuss his book and the issues it raises. let me briefly introduce all of the members of the panel in the order in which they will speak.

joshua muravchik is a fellow with the foreign policy institute of the johns hopkins school of advanced international studies. he's the author of eight previous books, including heaven on earth the rise and fall of socialism, published in 2001, and exporting democracy, fulfilling america's destiny published in 1991. and he's also published almost literally countless articles in major newspapers and journals. he served as a member of the state department advisory committee on democracy promotion and he's a member of several editorial boards, including i am proud to say that of the journal of democracy. on my far right, dr. ziad whose and many years as a practicing physician as president and founder of the american task force on palestine. he's testified before congress on palestinian issues several

times and in may 2008 he served as a member of the presidential delegation to the palestine efforts in bethlehem. he's also the founder and chairman of the american charities for palestine, which works with the agency for international development to help meet palestinian humanitarian needs. mr. cooper on my right is a senior director for the middle east and north africa here at the national endowment for democracy. in 19 -- 2005 he took leave during which time he served as senior adviser to prime minister al-zawahiri and spokesperson for the iraqi government. from 1993 to 1998, he had been the director of international relations at the foundation in london. he also served on the board of the arab organization for human

rights. on my far left, tom tracks the project at the brookings institution center for middle east policy. she has had previously been a middle east specialist at the u.s. institute for peace and director of programs at the middle east institute. her most recent book, freedoms on steady march america's role in building in a democracy, was published with great acclaim last year. joshua will speak for about 20 minutes, and then now worth three commentators for about seven or eight minutes each, which should lead us plenty of time for questions and answers and discussion. so now it is my pleasure to call on joshua muravchik. josh. >> marc, thanks very much. thanks to you and the international forum for democratic studies and thanks

also to the national endowment for democracy and its marvelous president, karl gerstein. and thanks to each of the other panelists, each of whose expertise on the middle east far eclipses my own, and i'm especially honored to have them taking notice of my book. i was working on this book over perhaps three years and during that time when i ever i would find myself at a reception or cocktail party and someone would start a conversation by saying what are you working on i would reply i am working on a book of portraits of middle eastern democrats every single time my interlocutor shot back that would be a short book. [laughter] and i developed the responsive

"don't underestimate my capacity for verbosity." [laughter] of course with these people who tweaked me were pointing to is the quite overwhelming deficit of democracy in the middle east. if you look at the -- account that's made by freedom house of what they call electoral democracies around the world, you will see that if you subtract what you might call the muslim middle east, the 23 countries, 22 members of the arab league and iran, to gather you put them in one basket and take all of the rest of the world and the likelihood of being a democracy in all of the rest of the world is 70%. and the likelihood being a

democracy among those 23 countries of the muslim is zero dolph also at the margins lebanon, iraq, there are some closer than others. and it is this startling contrast that i think led to my having to put up with so much teasing while i was writing this book. but fact is although there is no democracy in the middle east there are democrats. first of all we have public opinion polls which show when asked the question overwhelming majorities say they want democracy. granted that we don't know always what the term connotes for them in polls, but then in addition there are people that we do know who are devoting their lives work and to working and fighting for liberalization

and democratization of their country's. and there are not enough of them, but we know how much too little about them. and they are not unique. they exist in the hundreds or thousands. we wish they existed in the hundreds of thousands. but we also have a lot of evidence that their views are more widespread along the younger generation that is coming up and it is among the middle-aged generation of the people that i have written about in this book. and these people are the analogues of the sakharov's or whole full's or to put it in american context of the medgar evers's, james meredith's, rosa

parks's and their like who are also few and numbers all of them at some earlier point in their struggles. in fact, one of the people i have written about in this book, a very fun and feisty saudi feminist who applies a columnist in the saudi press until she was banned for her no-holds-barred columns about women's rights and the deficiencies of males who resist women's rights often also under a pseudonym and one she used frequently was rosa parks. what we tell you more about some

of these individuals, the reason i want to is because not only are these admirable and brave people, and they are, they are at a point in their struggle in which like rosa parks and medgar evers and sakharov and walesa where they do what they do at great peril to themselves. they've been to jail, they have certainly been subjected to relentless call me and ed depue abuse and in several cases their lives have been endangered and have been the attempt against their lives. but in addition to being brave, they are already making an

impact on their respective societies that's not so small, and here is where i am enjoying towards more darkly answering the question that marc put out the outset which is these democrats are really able to constitute a force that can have a historic role in their societies. the other woman in my book is any kuwaiti. one thing i stumbled upon and interviewing both of these women and getting their life stories is that in both cases the driving energy behind their activism for women's rights was a sense that their mothers' lives had been ruined by

polygamy. in both cases by coincidence their mothers discovered after they were married that their husbands already had other why of this and in both of these cases their mothers were -- these women as girls, young girls loved their mothers and both had very devoted mothers and they had this sense that their mother were always on happy as a result of this, and in adulthood this sense of protectiveness of their mothers translated into their becoming fighters for women's rights. in the case of rhola she led the fight for the last decade for political rights for women in kuwait. if you look across the middle east, to -- kuwait is a market

that has more elements of democracy than almost any other or perhaps in any other country in the region. there's a relatively free press and there is a parliament that has genuine powers and is from a genuine elections except that dreary recently it was for men only. and rhola led the fight to give women political rights to vote and hold office, and that fight reached its culmination in 2005 with the passage of law that a most elegant piece of legislative drafting it amended

the existing election law in 28 by deleting one word. the word "man." and by that stroke of the pen, women had completely the same political rights as man immediately on the spot there was a press conference and reporters asked rola what are you going to do now? and she replied run for office, of course. and she did. and she came close, but lost. and this year she actually came close but lost twice, but this year the parliament was deadlocked. the dissolved parliament called new elections which were held in may, and in those elections rola and three other women were selected for -- this was not elected to seats reserved for women. all four of these women were elected by defeating man. and it is a landmark for kuwait

that i think will also reverberate in other countries in the region. let me mention another example methaal, the iraqi i write about in the book. he was an activist in the path movement of the time the ba'ath party itself had come to power and had a small number of members and therefore he was in the position of responsibility at a very young age. but he got to see right up close the grievance brutality of the baath, his best buddy in the baathist movement was a protege in the toughest, august figure in the new regime and was given the role of morgan, one of the worst prisons and he invited

methaal to be his deputy, which position, something methaal did not accept in the course of visiting the prison he saw with his own eyes how bloody this regime was and it started him rethinking his commitment to baptism. he eventually left iraq and left many places and spent two decades in germany in exile and then returned to iraq after the overthrow of saddam usian. you've probably all read about him because then in 2004, he became the first major iraqi figure to visit israel. and this created quite a stir and in one of the many attempts against his life his two sons were killed. his car was ambushed and it was shot to pieces but he wasn't in, his two sons were and they both died. but he has continued his

defiance and stall work best amazingly to despite the kind of blow he was expelled on the spot from the party for visiting israel and he formed his own party and out polled it has a seat in the legislature and he also has gone back to israel several times. most recently in 2008, and here is the point of my story this time when he returned from israel there was an act in parliament that stripped him of his parliamentary immunity and he was indicted for visiting the enemy country under the 1950's era which is a capital offense and carries the death penalty, and he then thought this in the

courts and i think this is one of the most interesting indicators of the progress of democracy in iraq that's been almost on reported which is that he won in the courts, that was a decision in the courts of the kind you would expect from an established democracy with separation of powers and which the iraqi court struck down his indictment, struck down the 1950's to all forbidding travel to any country on the ground the new iraqi constitution guarantees each iraqi the freedom to travel the iraqi courts said there for that old law is unconstitutional, the indictment is invalid and the removal of parliamentary immunity is invalid and lucey is going back strong in parliament as a party of one fighting for a

secular liberal democratic division of iraq's future. a third person that i've written about is of egypt. he is a newspaper publisher who has not singlehandedly but who has been the leader of transition that has been changed the press seen in egypt and restored freedom of press and egypt that has not been there since the time of the officers to of the early 1950's when all the newspapers were nationalized. he started the most he was able to do initially was to put out a fortnightly small english-language paper which was -- which was a complete breath of fresh air for those who write

in egypt. you know the press when it is like in egypt. i got a feeling for it on a visit i happened to be there a few years ago when this rare event that was a full solar eclipse visible from the desert and there was a lot of excitement about it and the next morning there were front-page headlines pity it didn't say full solar eclipse seen in egypt. the front page said president mubarak views the eclipse. [laughter] and so he started a different kind he was subjected to the kind of formal censorship of complicated reasons which would strip articles out of the paper and say you can't publish that and that. so he put up a website and would

post the band copy of his website which of course got more readers and it would have gotten in print and then some years ago some very wealthy investors wanted to start an arabic daily, they hired him as a publisher and that daily paper has pushed back the parameters of report what in egypt to the extent this year freedom house, which has a separate survey of press freedom in the world changed the evaluation of egypt from of freebies of the the press to partly free. so, that in essence is my answer to the question that marc put at the beginning, whom should we look to as agents of

democratization in the middle east. the people who are democrats or liberals or those who are islamist, and to me it seems obvious the people who are going to be the force for democracy are people who believe in democracy and some islamists may and if they do, they also deserve our support, but i think it is worth taking the democratic proclamations of some islamists with some grains of salt but meanwhile, there are these genuine democrats who are fighting and taking greater risks and as i just tried to illustrate are making marginal

but appreciable progress in changing the climate in their country, and i think they deserve our most enthusiastic and all-out support. one last point i think i've got one minute left. this makes me unhappy with the obama administration's lack of interest in democracy in the middle east but this change can only be blamed on one side of the ogle. the bush at the fenestration that started out gung-ho on the subject then varied dramatically trimmed its sales and pulled back. and the bush administration did so because it panicked after the reflections of 2005 when the muslim brotherhood scored well in egypt and how loss -- hamas

won the elections and the palestinian authority. when i say panicked, i mean if you stop and look at the elections and the muslim world since then almost everyone whether it has been a contest between radicals or islamists and moderates the moderates have been winning. last week in lebanon and before that in kuwait and before that and iraq and before that and jordan and morocco and pakistan, and most likely this weekend in iran if we ever get to find out who really won. so the idea that democrats are nice but they are so weak they offered no hope and the islamists are strong, so we have to throw in with the islamists in the hope that somehow they will transform themselves into

democrats seems to me to be a chancing strategy and also probably in the end a losing strategy. >> thank you very much, josh, for a very clear presentation given both a sense of your book but also with the and speaking directly and forcefully to the question that i posed. now we will hear from the three commentators. first ziad. >> first of all i would like to thank the national endowment for democracy and the international forum for democratic studies for organizing this each end and allowing me the opportunity to share this with the distinguished panelists. i would like to congratulate joshua muravchik for writing this extremely revealing and valuable book. it is vital through efforts such

as this american public begins to see arab and muslim world not simply as a collection of ann curry alienated resentful descent toward communities, but understand that there are courageous forward looking and a democratically inclined individuals such as those profiled in this book. in this book people learn about seven men and women who in their own very different ways have challenged orthodoxy, complacency, and the status quo in the search of a brighter future. joshua muravchik profiles real people with names and faces whose personal stories reveal the ongoing fight for democracy in the middle east. it is waged in different ways that reflect the unique political, social and cultural forces in severin different countries. as i scan the stories of these

indigenous to look for the reasons that place them on this book, as the next founders and whisper democracy, i thought that they shared several qualities in common. courage, which is the indispensable ingredient for leadership. commitment and perseverance, that stretched over decades, and a sense of mission that made them resist corset regimes and rendered them immune to oprah's if pressures -- commune it pressures. the need to free women and men in the shackles of gender inequality is part of a larger need of equality and whites, and in this light, it is in this light that i find the work and lives of the saudi feminist and rola dashti, the kuwaiti recently elected to parliament

compelling. with chehab writes about a things others only talk about. she has had the audacity to enumerate 21 attributes of agriculture's and regimes that amount to a bill of indictment. as she unflinchingly proceeds with her criticisms she is mindful that the criticism of the arab and muslim culture all regime is used by some in the west to denigrate all arabs and muslims. as she is equally aware of that startling internal criticism within the arab world is used to defend an intolerable status quo. rola dashti's thesis is enfranchisement and empowerment of women is an issue of national the interest. her argument that the failure to include women as full citizens limits the country's human

resources which they can not afford is one no thinking individual can possibly refused. the five men portrayed in the book tell five different stories of personal unrelenting effort to expound the boundaries of rights and freedoms in the middle east. some of them have paid unimaginable price for their work. it's important to learn about these people to understand individuals can make a difference but it needs to be kept in mind systems are far more important than individuals. as long as dictatorship with archer use of power continues to we need to put the work of these courageous in perspective and good use as we support the quest for systems that offer sustainable freedom, will will fall and creation of accountable institutions.

i would like to make one crucial point which is closely linked to our roadwork in pursuit of peace and reconciliation across the middle east by reaching and of conflict agreement between israel and the palestinians. i do agree that democratization is helpful in the pursuit of all noble and worth the political goals. including that of peace. however, these missions are not synonymous. they are paralleled. we know from experience and it is really peace can be achieved without the benefit of democracy. israel's peace treaties with egypt and jordan were achieved and continue to in were and function in the context of less than optimal space conditions. israel itself was in its own border of democracy as yet the situation the palestinian territories occupied since 1967 is distinctly undemocratic in

spite of palestinian free elections not least because the palestinians' lack independence and statehood. peace is possible as part of democracy on certain that it is sustainable. however it is worth asking whether it is possible that we managed transition to space reforms such as elections and absence of other space institution building could under the wrong circumstances threaten sustainability of excess think peace agreements. this is in no way an argument against elections or any other crucial elements of space reforms. but it is to suggest the relationship between reform and peace is far more complicated and subtle than it is sometimes alleged. the lack of democracy in many middle eastern states under the

failure to in power the citizenry provide pluralism and brigade effective functioning civil societies are important contributors to terrorism and extremism. however, terrorism and extremism also need to be confronted through the pursuit of peace. democratization reform to be sure bolster prospects for peace but similarly peace bolsters the prospect of democratization and reform. the least must be home to both peace and democracy but neither should be held hostage to. the problem facing the middle east liberals reformers is how to navigate the difficult waters between authoritarian states on the one hand and even more reactionary opposition's directing the politics of the extra religious right on the

other. it's difficult to attempt to move the arab world to the center towards democracy by championing the cause of parties and organizations that would charge one leader of the extreme right and which have no principled commitment to any of these values. let me be blunt. those liberals who support or defend radical islamist organizations because of shared grievances against israel and the west are deluding themselves if they think that they can do so and sustained liberalism and reform. the experience in iran, mentioned in this book, is particularly instructive. most arab liberals understand this and therefore have sought to engage and challenge the regime and societies and find ways within the existing systems

to press for the necessary reforms. this is what the individuals covered in this book have done. this, too, is precisely where the west and u.s. can contribute most effectively by working with different arab states constituencies and individuals to expand the space for rule of all accountability and pluralism to read and it was profiled in joshua was a book and countless others like the middle east have the ability and integrity to help lead transformation of society's away from authoritarianism to sustainable democracy. he is to be congratulated for getting his leadership, the glimpse into a small subsection of arabs and muslims who hope for the future lies. the united states and the rest of the world have a real stake in helping create the conditions that will allow such brave individuals take root and the

lead in helping build a better middle east. thank you. >> thank you for those comments. next we will hear from laith. >> i very much enjoyed reading the book. you are an excellent storyteller and i think it is very brave of you to try to explain to the readers a very complex situation through the voices and the narratives of seven people and i think you did an excellent job and introducing the complex issues i am not very sure if we have any clear answer where the region is going. but certainly i think the seven people as i read, and i know all of them, i think they all have

had one encounter or another with the nationalndowment for democracy and of course i know the topics in the region and i read with most interest and i learned a lot even about iraq and through reading the narrative, so i think it is excellent and entertaining. but i think very much you may be reading the introduction and conclusion you do make a couple of sound points but one of the loudest and the clearest as people do matter and if democracy was to come to the middle east and flourish we do need to look at people with the right qualities and i think a second important message the change has to come from within these countries and it has to come from we better look at the people who will bring those changes. but i think in your conclusions i tended to agree with some of

the name once you've made. no question that the exposure to the u.s. education to the west is beneficial and i think it is critical. however, i do believe that we need to look at how democracy can evolves and what support we ought to give the region through more complex views. there is no question in my mind despite the picture that the region is heading to exchange. the fact that the media barriers have fallen down we are living in a digital world. the fact that the citizens themselves that are more aware, they're needs are increasing. their exposure is wide open, and i think that we have a different population especially amongst the youth and i do believe that the economies in all of these countries are not sustainable without fundamental reform and

all of this puts the issue of democracy reform on top of the edge and what we see in iran today i think makes the point. but if i want to follow up the same excellent style that you have done and look and trying to tell this story and talk about how democracy can be brought about in the region through the case is you brought i will differentiate between the hero was that you chose and all of them are heroes. they are all risk takers. they are all most interesting they have an element of being self critical to their own cultures, to themselves, the fault. i think all of these qualities are there and that makes them very interesting to read. but from a democracy point of you who is most relevant and who isn't especially keeping in mind the title of the book, founders

and voices for democrats. i think i will look at the issue in three areas. the first area where you have covered three cases absolutely outstanding and i think they tell the story is and egypt a journalist who -- >> [inaudible] >> hisham and egypt is a journalist. you look at his biography how he fault in this field. very committed, consistent. you look at these qualities and most important he worked on a sector which is media knowing its importance, sticking to its ethics pushing the envelope and a very smart way, and you can say at the end of the day this person advanced the freedom of media. he created one of the first independent successful newspapers and is about to

create the second one and i think a second person is [inaudible] , and again with his complex upbringing and the way that he was reagan's but you do look at a person who is a palestinian looking both lives been under living in jerusalem having citizenship i think or an id card but at the same time passed to combat violation of human rights respective irrespective where they came from and that is a very difficult road to walk bearing in mind these people are through a national struggle pushing for independence but you can also read through it despite the stuff he has been adherent to and the third person of course is a rola dashti, who again, her contribution to women's participation which is critical to democracy as you've illustrate. i think the other two characters

i would look at them more pushing the envelope on the the culture broadly speaking really did. i am not talking about the political culture. i am talking about the culture in broad terms and i think they would make outstanding examples of people who push for liberalism and individualism, and i think i can use them as -- >> you should tell us which -- >> i'm sorry. the two that i am referring to is one you referred to and the other from syria to also pushed the envelope very much. you look at individuals treasurer the rights and freedoms as individuals and question the culture around them, and course we have space inclinations, and i think they can be used as probing the tolerance and probing their

environments, and in fact they provide outstanding value. i think the most difficult to cases you have are the ones on iraq and iran and the difference is born within the complexity of the two individuals each post and obviously it is not an easy task to try to choose one out of the 80 billion iranians, and 1i guess in that case out of arab countries somebody both characters were mabey with good intentions and definitely i would say being yawn and attracted to ideas walk into evolutions and coups and regime changes and then they get exposed to all sorts of things while they are being part of these regimes. and whether they were forced out, kicked out, threatened wherever it is they move out, but the big question comes, and

again i am raising the question because i think this is -- this is the implications are enormous. what do we do or how do we tackle forces within regimes that would reach out to the world and try to bring change. and i think here based on my experience having seen how the ba'ath party started with mobile slogans initially and ended up being the most impressive region in iraq and syria and looking again how the revolution in iran start with ideals and and about sliding into being a tierney, religious tyranny, and when you look at these cases, you start wondering what a change of rhetoric be sufficient or change of position, where do we need to look deeper into changes and mind sets and in other words changing the content of the

container or changing the container becomes necessary and i think those questions i don't have answers to, but i think what you've presented is certainly going to stimulate that. if i have maybe one last minute if i want to sum up and as i have said through reading the book i was trying to read your mind on how you see democracy can be brought up to their reaching and again it is most difficult to simplify such a complex question with a simple formula but if i was forced to simplify its i would not focus on the individuals who i would have all the hopes on. i think i would look at what we have currently really is strong currents of people pushing for democracy on one hand and regimes that are stagnant, maybe adapt a little bit here or there would in essence they are stagnant and stacked and not because only of culture but because the security agencies or guns they have and the money.

the control over the state and i think our overall approach in supporting those voices that are pushing for democracy need to look at beyond supporting individuals. we need to open up this piece. we need to use all the tools we have within international law to force changes and i think that would complement and give breathing space where we would see many of those voices and examples flourish and thousands and hundreds of thousands. >> thank you, laith kubba. now i will turn tamara. >> thank you, marc. it's a wonderful book and a wonderful read and not just because fortunate enough to call joshed a friend, but also because joshua as someone who has whose work i read and

admired from years back when i was in a grad school and since i've had the pleasure from learning from him for so many years it is a great delay to be here -- delight to help him send a bit of his wisdom and insight into the world and today is also a lovely occasion i think a great the for some i have the honor of being in front of the podium here at the net was five years ago to discuss an article i of regional article to the topic related to the book called promise of arab liberalism in policy review and the article was published on a counterpoint with another article that was entitled to a false promise of arab liberals, laith kubba was on the panel, and here we are is five years and one presidential transition leader and i think in many ways we find ourselves

facing essentially the same questions we were addressing five years ago. number one is the small number of courageous isolated but outspoken liberals in the arab world are they capable of making a meaningful difference moving their societies toward democracy. number two is the united states able to help these individuals in any meaningful way or does our support prove to be a kiss of death for them in one way or another. i want to spend a couple of minutes on each of these two questions because i think josh's book through the rich stories that tells of these liberal activists provokes us to try again and perhaps try harder for some answers to those two questions five years ago in the other article in policy review the author argued the liberal reformers are going to

increasingly isolated and diminishing in number. these liberals are losing the battle for the hearts and minds of their country's. if josh's book does nothing else i think it demonstrates conclusively the falsity of that argument. the liberal our guys he profiles in this book are not agent, they are in middle-age and since i am in middle-age that means they are not old. [laughter] far from being isolated increasingly prominent on their countries. newspapers on the airwaves of the region eat many of them are winning meaningful important political victories as josh outlined in the opening remarks and kuwait with respect to the pressing egypt keeping very flawed palestinian authority accountable for a period of many years. increasingly to these liberal activists are not working with one another across the region in a way that they weren't able to do effectively ten years ago.

drafting and signing joint statements coming together at conferences and reform in alexandria ordo ha or de groot, coming together to confront their governments at regional meetings like the form for the future. so whereas ten years ago feminists were entirely isolated in their feelings and in their struggles and indeed that sense of isolation comes through so strongly in an josh's narrative of her life. today aspiring women politicians in kuwait and saudi arabia and in the united arab have this light speed network of mobile phone calls, e-mails, text messages, they are constantly in touch with one another relating anecdotes, incidents, but each other up when the chips are down. so it seems to me that there is something fundamental that has changed with respect to the position of liberals.

and finally these liberal and leading lights are not being followed as josh points out in his book by a rising generation of mobilized and increasingly vocal young liberal activists. so in some manner these liberals have indeed become role models and they are being emulated. i think it is worth asking ourselves what the characteristics of our of these activists that make them persuasive advocates for liberal ideas and their local context and that make them effective at creating a real change in their own societies. and reading through josh's seven profiles, the one thing that came through very clearly to me is that these individuals are patriots. they love their countries over their nation and over its future development. the story of rola dashti who dropped out of graduate school when iraq invaded kuwait and put

her professional and personal life on hold to prepare and implement plans for the construction of her country. at great personal cost he held the new plo government in the west bank and gaza accountable for its human rights abuses because he knew he had not just the right but the duty to help build a palestine but adhere to universal human rights principles that was the kind of palestine he wanted to realize and he had i think what joshes profiles rebuke wonderfully is the extent to which the lessons here and deeply felt love of country is an essential to the impact that these liberals have. this patriotism is what in powers them personally to demand changes from their governments and keeps them in the game as they are painted by their opponents as western stooges and encouraged to enjoy a comfortable quiet life in western exile. i think this is very important

because there is one point which i have to confess i disagree with joshua. he says that these individuals and he just said it in his introduction are the analogs. in some ways that may be true, but i think that in one important way the situation in the middle east today is very different from the situation facing those liberal dissidents in eastern europe. the communist regimes of eastern europe were externally imposed. the external sustained. they didn't have any fundamental domestic legitimacy. and the arab regimes and the islamic republic of iran do have some degree of domestic legitimacy. it's weak, it's impaired for all the reasons that laith kubba stated earlier but nationalism anticolonialism are still very potent forces in the middle east and both regimes and the islamist opposition used those

sentiments of nationalism and anticolonialism against these democrats. so the fact that the liberals that josh is profiling are patriots who gave evidence of a league of their commitment to their country it allows them to reclaim that nationalism for liberals and for liberalism in a way that's very important, so they are powerful not just because they are disseminating liberal ideas in the middle east but because the act as living and breathing example of the idea that liberalism and patriotism are mutually supportive. they are not mutually exclusive but the pluralism isn't a western import but fundamentally compatible with arab identity and iran and identity. the second question is that question of whether and how the assessed this group of liberal activists, or whether as it is known in washington shorthand

american assistance is effectively kiss of death. so the question is if the u.s. speaks up in support of liberal reforms are provides them with material support helping or hurting their cause. and i think here we've really come to an important issue which was raised by the previous commentator switches that liberals are always in every society a small elite group that is in many ways isolated from the grassroots. it was true in a revolutionary america and true and enlightenment here up and true and eastern europe before the fall of the berlin wall. you would not have said that fox lot had a mass following. we didn't know that until we saw it in the streets. the blossoms are not usually that popular because liberalism is not fundamentally a populist ideology. so the idea that by providing more or material support the united states is marginalizing

the girls is at this point in the middle east not that relevant an argument. it may be irrelevant for some individuals in their region, those who are trying to build a new political party, trying to build a mass movement, different people are differently situated. and a different societies are also different in situated with respect to the united states. and if we autocratic regime that has adversarial relations with u.s. government the consequences of preceding u.s. support mabey didier indeed. it may be very easy for such a regime tatar a liberal activist with the brush of being a foreign agent. but in a country where the government already receives american support, u.s. assistance may not only be more tolerable, more acceptable, if my government is getting u.s. money why can't i get you less money is the argument that you hear for example from many egyptian activists, the but

getting u.s. support in those circumstances can provide a degree of protection to those activists. the key point here is that there is no single answer to the question of whether americans support helps or hurts. we can't assume that we know this answer. and we shouldn't make the patronizing decision to withhold or assistance out of concern that it might have a negative impact. what we have to do then is listen. we have to listen to the activists themselves to what they are trying to do and what they think we can do to help, and we have to understand that even in a given country there may be a range of an answers that we hear and what that means in terms of u.s. policy is we have to have a variety of mechanisms available by which to provide rhetorical support, diplomatic support, financial support that are relevant

different instruments to different actors. finally, i think it is important to underscore one of the points that josh to the book, which is that these individuals that he profiles are important because they are carriers of ideas. and josh notes that in the middle east for many years violence or threat of violence has been the main currency of governments. in this context, liberal ideas are crucial. even if they don't in the short or medium term produce liberal governments. even if they don't produce popular participation or government accountability. a central idea in liberal fought its toleration. the idea that different individuals have different conceptions of the good life and that we should tolerate one another's efforts to realize our individual conceptions of the

good life are different visions. and in this context, it seems to me that supporting the liberals in the middle east is not only about achieving space justice, but it's also about developing a political culture in which a disagreements are dealt with through nonviolent mechanisms and which the fundamentally liberal idea of toleration is in place and practiced. and that the point josh makes very well in this book and one that i think should lead us beyond the debate about democracy promotion to remember the importance about supporting liberalism wherever it appears. thank you. >> thank you, tamara, thanks to all three commentators for very stimulating presentations. before we open things up to the audience, josh, do you have any comments that you've like to make this point?

>> i didn't do it in one minute, which is i was grateful, grateful for all these comments and they were very generous. thank you, each of you. there were just a few points of possible disagreement none of which i regard as points of disagreement. certainly tamara, the people fighting for democracy and the middle east are different than the eastern europeans. i liken them because a, a our heroic, and become at the end the day they might become a turnout influential for you could judge right now for taking a poll but certainly a big problem for us is eight in eastern european democrats was

easy because most the country and were very pro-american. they look to america as a beacon of hope in the middle eastern democrats are often working in countries that are very angry at america, and it creates a whole different picture so i certainly agree with that. ..

>> it usually takes a number of free elections before voters get to a more sophisticated about how to use their boats. and finally, t to thank you for your tattered -- categorization i had not thought about it but i will use it the next time i talk about the book and it is very useful. you save between the lines that it did two figures in the book were immersed in politics but i think that is a fair and the oyster of the of political figures because if you go into

politics immediately will necessarily the do-it-yourself and a little bit and often what will happen at some moment there are political figures to come to a four who are much more tarnished then these two men in my book who play a true the important role. so in to revert to eastern europe i think of hungary and at 56 orajel glaceau balky at hidden 68 or gorbachev. and all of them were genuine communist to spend their whole lives in the communist party people descend but at some critical moment they became

the embodiment of reform forces that were tremendously important and i think politicians we may get that and i am fervently hoping we could see an analog with some politicians to all this time has been a part six of the islamic theocracy will seize the moment to present himself as the embodiment of the popular unrest and play a very positive role. >> thank you. you may have added boris yeltsin from russia up. i was thinking the same thing. but there was a more urge general

question -- people who become democrats after starting out committed to some type of totalitarian or of their terrie and -- authoritarian view and there is a question of the authenticity and so on. such figures later on, of their previous history makes you wonder about them a little bit to but in any case let me open the floor to discussion. i think i will take two or three questions in a row if you can states your name and affiliation and if you want to direct a question to any particular member of the panel, you may indicate that

as well. so first we have a microphone. >> and i and from the center of soviet democracy. i do enjoy the discussion but i have to put a few points to josh and the commentators. leaving for a real eye opener for many of us and in the arab world in particular we find there is support for democracy and support for islamic law or sharia law. what you spoke about, people who have deliverance in this sense people who may not have

voices in their society. you have the minorities to advocate the issue program our experience in the arab world, it islamist and secular and nationalist altogether in this unique network we found out all of them the defining prescription for all of them is they all need democracy. there is the union for democracy among all walks of life i wish you had some of the islamists w. dan democracy. thank you. >> this my question is for the author.

whether the ideal conditions ford democrats to be influential and not isolated? >> congratulations on the book i have read it and i enjoyed reading it. my question is probably about your reference to rosa parks about the different culture and the democrats are more isolated because of a colonialism. in the u.s., and the civil rights movement of which rose the parks was a part was able to play upon the contradiction that was written about between the american creed and the

american reality. what is it that arab liberals can appeal to in the middle east that may enable them to develop an effective strategy? that was the core of the civil rates strategy was any equivalent and if there is not there will be up a very tough situation there will be larger changes in communication and technology is it the issue of women? or is it something else? it is something we need to give a lot of thought to. >> go-ahead and respond. >> the question of why have not included islamists in this book and whether i will in the sikh well, i will be happy to do a sequel entirely about the

islamist democrats did you will introduce me to them. [laughter] i know there are is lamas who proclaim but i do not know of cases where it is crystal clear to me what they mean there is a lot of riding about the egyptian muslim brotherhood after the release of their new initiatives and in 2004 that did speak about democracy and spoke about the rights of women and non muslims and there was even a

moment when the muslim brotherhood supplanted the slogan is lomb is the answer with freedom is the answer but since then they have gone back to islam is the answer. we have seen in the effort last year of the egyptian muslim brothers to come up with a new platform or statement that date circulate a draft which is largely based on the previous system of a completely non democratic field crack system. -- a theocratic system. when i recall hearing of a laith kubba is when he was in london putting out a newsletter. that was seeking a kind of liberal islamism.

i was interested to understand what this was. and i would be happy to write a book for people like laith. but his own take on the world is so distant, that if you say there are fewer secular liberals then there are even the were laith kubba i am afraid. [laughter] we have a situation where in most cases, the islamists, are not in power and facing regimes that suppress them. and they said we want democracy but that in itself does not convince me that they are democrats because it is very normal for people who are suppress stand out of power to

say they want democracy. it would be more interesting if you could emerge some real statements of philosophy and islamist context that we some how could merge these two. it is not easy to merge because if by a understand what islamism means, and i am not at all sure that i do, but it is hard for me to understand in the islamist context how nonbelievers of muslim how equal citizenship or how you can have a full democracy f. certain things must come from scripture and

close to discourse. but i am opened to being educated by you and having my understanding of the planned. but has of the ideal conditions for the development of democracy, i don't think there are ever ideal conditions and we better not to wait for them. we better start where we are today. it is not up to less. one point* in my book that is if there will be democracy in the middle east it will be brought by middle easterners but i think it is incumbent upon us to do everything that we can to encourage and support them in whatever ways we can and the way they want to our support. the conditions are never a deal because if we don't have democracy or ideal conditions, i suppose the ideal condition was when we

transform japan, which we defeated much more thoroughly and occupied much more thoroughly than i iraq, and they are willing to take over a country locked stock and barrel like we did japan and every single bureaucrat in the country has an american military figure behind them saying now do this and now do that that worked in japan but maybe what made those conditions ideal is that we had dropped an atomic bomb on them first. >> we should make it clear you're not advocating. [laughter] >> no. i am advocating the opposite. but literally analysts say the one reason it worked so well

in japan is that japan was completely prostrate at the time we took over so we could mold it like clay and my point* is exactly, we better not look for the ideal condition because they may not be conditions that we want to replicate. and lastly, it is a very interesting question you raise about what is the intellectual ground that the fight for democracy can stand on and take root as the american constitution was and for the civil-rights movement? i don't know that we needed the analog because many other

countries in the world that we have seen struggles for human rights and democracy waged successfully, it did not have this same kind of symbol more thing to hold onto that the civil rights movement had in the u.s. constitution. and rather appealing to the same things the people who wrote the u.s. constitution appeal to which is not an existing document but a sense of natural law that human beings want to be very, live with dignity, andy -- and only e governed with consent and i

think talking from a universal perspective of that is all we got but that may be enough. >> any other comments? >> just to comment on your question, the civil rights movement is a movement that happened in one country so it is possible to presume the context of for the country to come up with a unifying concept with there are 22 different countries and a 56, so it is impossible to come up with a generalized few or ideology to present to combine people want and have the rally around it. i think the opposition in the islamic arab countries that we're talking right is defined by the power of the status quo. if it is for a pro-western country, then the opposition is islamic and by definition

almost not liberal. it is anti-democratic by definition because it is years to islam of the in the other hand opposition in a place like iran is more liberal by definition so we need to actually specify for each country and to rally around what we may call the democrat in that country and to oppose the policies in that country that are anti-democratic. both countries specific and 80 logically specific. we cannot separate the government's system from the political realities in the middle east it is having a huge conflict that is unresolved so back to the point* made, if these people who are democrats are not

perceived as the fending something of value in support of their country, that is pretty much what happened to the liberal democratic movement is they were perceived as pro western and not connected to their country. we'll having stated that the need is to combine people who are for reform as they are for moderation with international policy issues. if such a thing is formed and is patriotic we will have something but i don't think it has happened so far. >> also that is an important question the first thing that can to my mind was without thinking about it too much i do believe we're the region is heading people want life with

dignity. but is something very basic has nothing to do with big or grant or complex ideas because both of these countries are so bad not only because life is difficult because the development of lack of dignity and there is no real social intact of any kind that can preserve the minimum. you can get away with it if the population was isolated from the rest of the world but because the world is one to date i do not believe it can continue and i am optimistic about the future were i look egypt is headed i do not look to its past but i look to where it is headed. and i can see clearly and i am optimistic. >> it seems the statistic that josh started out with provides us an answer that if you lived anywhere else in the world

your chance to be in a democratic country is 70% there is a global norm that has emerged. especially with the overwhelmingly useful population of the middle east and the fact that these people have access in how the world is governed and what opportunities young people have been india, brazil and developmentally 30 years ago with more anbar but they know in the arab world they have slipped further and further behind. the desire to join the rest of the world as part of a global trend is a very powerful tool. >> thank you. other questions or comments? >> originally i am from

somalia. the last two months i have had a glimmer of hope one of these was the center for training of human rights event of. we have just launched and i found an activist double feature from bahrain particularly. and women with the traditional

attire and some of them went to the trainings but they point* out the difference but together [inaudible] one person from doha was not that much educated but taking a real issue in his country at one point* they said he should be removed from the meeting. so i am thinking that the possibility of the incite with

some newspapers the other is the establishment is part of the commission for human rights. where independent people come together maybe this is the discourse as going to the commission. one setback the emergence of a group that the u.s. -- u.n. human rights conference in geneva along with russia and china and cuba they come out from the middle east and want to produce aa there was a lineup of 10 over 20 cubans

and sudanese and they lined up and greet each other you have done a great job, you have done very well, there are some opportunities opening up. imf the opinion that fundamentally we must come up and say we should have public discourse. billions. -- brilliant. [inaudible] it is not islamic it is surely a. it is something else.

[inaudible] thank you. >> i am and from chad and member of the democratic center. [inaudible] middle eastern countries i would like to know what is the lessons learned from the middle east countries that should be used in africa?

that is my question. >> when you said we shouldn't be afraid of bad results but how should the country's react that promote when the elections do not go their way like when hamas one in gaza out or i ran with the iranian election but there is still a probability that some voted for ahmadinejad although not with the high a margin. so i would like to know what makes you so positive, a laith kubba of your future?

>> speaking in a purely personal capacity is came back from one hearing so my question comes from that angle. the i raki in your group and why did he go to israel? of these things you talk about looking as a patriot, he was on the west bank with the way that it is but an b. goes to israel just seems to complete discredit himself? why did he go? and what did he accomplish by doing so? the second, you said the results of the elections wrote something but again i was thinking of the 2006 election for the palestinian authority and the trade-off but they were happy in the medium run

as the u.s. learned something for how they learned something differently before or after parks. >> thank you and now, we will let josh finished up altogether to any other commentators want to respond to those questions? >> i am sure he has things he was to say on the question related to palestine but i do just want to address one question about elections specifically hamas and what may have happened with iran. vs. i hope you'll come away from this discussion and if not a urge you to read the book with a sense democracy promotion is not about elections but these individuals have a set of

liberal principles that they are trying to disseminate within their society and they believe the society's embrace these principles then elections will be meaningful exercises. a lot of these countries have elections today but i do not think we would call most of them democratic elections but getting specifically to hamas it makes to the point* there is the integral link answers to parts of this region between conflict resolution efforts and severance of democracy promotion. and so is lebanon from which i just returned but in the case of cause the we had the opportunity that we failed to pursue which was the israeli willingness to withdraw and turn over that territory to the palestinian authority in a period during which they were

preparing for legislative election. if it had occurred through a process of negotiation and agreement between the parties it would have further the process of conflict resolution and created a situation that the removal of occupation was seen as negotiation but instead since it occurred unilaterally it was interpreted as the removal of occupation being achieved through the the finance and resistance of hamas. and in that context i don't think the out won't -- outcome of that election should surprise anybody. also be a failed to effectively promote democratic ideas and practices within the palestinian authority so it's governance was corrupt and arbor jury and coercive and when to elections with a very poor record in that regard. he was absolutely correct when

he points to the necessity of points of conflict resolution in tandem when we're dealing with situations with palestine a lebanon for iraq with ongoing conflict. >> i pretty much agree. also with a very significant point* that was made by laith a lot of what is happening here house to do with a great concept of dignity. of the much discounted concept of filling with the politics of the middle east the opposition of each and every country defines itself rather it is islamic or leftists, in terms of people who are defending dignity more than they are defending their housing more the children education, etc.. it is not possible to divorce

the speech of president obama that he made in cairo the other day from this deep understanding of what makes the people have a real sense of grievance, not just against the united states or israel but against their own government because of the deprivation of the concept of dignity and that is why he talks to the people i do believe this approach will have consequences and will have a basis for support for the democrats who are sitting there waiting to be supported on the issue of the palestinian election and on the issue of hamas, etc., etc. i think i have said in my notes it is not possible to build democracy foundation for democracy, by forces to by definition are

committed, religiously committed, against conflict including others. this is a problem the iranian revolution has applied very clearly when all forces have a choice and khomeini in his attempt against the job of press people were democrats. i think what tomas has done in gaza and nobody should be surprised to give a serious interest in democracy you need to depend on the democrats and empower them and force the space available to them and this is where the united states, it uniquely qualifies to help to force its way through the means available to make it possible for democrats to function in these countries

is their obligation to come up with the finding ideologies >> the question raised what makes me optimistic? it is not i believe democracy will come to the region because it sounds nice, looks nice, or for other reasons, i think the trajectory the region is setting, i would rather stay still and pressure buildup or partially forms i think will reach a breakdown as we are seeing. you end up alternately bending to more reforms. if a government in system and holding on power and i think some of them will it will

reach a breaking point*. and so i think what is driving and what will bring democracy to the region may be in a painful way, the passion and trial and error but ultimately there is no alternative the pressure is building up because the economy, because of the governments can no longer control what flows in and out of the country and they have begun population demanding, the current system cannot cope with the level of corruption and to deliver services, and necessary services, and i think, i do not know when those countries can shield themselves from democracy maybe too late can shield themselves but others like egypt or algeria, eight do not think they can shield themselves for long. >> now for the final word we

will turn to our author, joshua muravchik. >> ag. there were four christians and quick answers. to the gentleman from somalia about the u.n. human rights council, the reason it is created is because the u.n. commission on human rights was such a disaster and the human rights council has proven to be a bigger disaster and there is no solution because the very principle of the when it is all member states are equal both that the human rights and those that violate human rights even in the most egregious way. the best that i can imagine to duke, there is this ephemeral thing called the community of democracies. if it would grow stronger eighth most useful thing it could do is create its own

human rights council made up of only of governments that our democratic and could eventually and the fact supplanting the u.n. human rights council not officially but people would understand that there are two council's one takes it seriously and the other makes a mockery. to the gentleman in the back who says what can never tell learn from the middle east? i think it is the other way around. despite poverty and other relevant problems in africa and tribal divisions within countries, currently we have half of the governments of africa or upwards of half our elected governments. so and fact africa has made more progress even though the

per-capita entries is considered lower than in the middle east countries so it is more a question of what africa can teach to middle east which is you don't have to achieve wealth or development for democracy as well. to the question about how to respond to the election results i have occurred in the arab world the united states was critical and hamas was elected and we did not continue to get aid to hamas but it seems to me it is the logical argument. i think we could believe in elections were all people and all countries but if they elect governments that are hostile to us, went, bad actors, we will respond to

those accordingly it is not something they are inherently entitled to a and and health of those conduct themselves to construct and finally why did you see go to israel? id techtium the way that you pose the question both a moral question and analytical. the moral question was you did not think anyone should go to israel as long as israel was doing things that were violating the rights of palestinians but if you took best standard and applied it consistently, that would mean no arab could travel anywhere within the middle east if they should not travel to a country were human rights we're being violated. i do not think the moral side of this question holds up but

more interesting question is why did he go to israel? he is very passionate about terrorism for one thing and was even before himself. he agonized until the last moment if he would actually go but his wit feeling was and is really is fighting terrorism and we're fighting terrorism and i am willing to join forces in that fight. when i interviewed at length i realize there was another thought which was certainly heretical but it is a thought

he wants to carry a banner for that tamara cofman wittes has spoken about this, liberalism. although it comes out of a very ill liberal tradition the lives in exile 42 ganes -- for two decades in germany, he was very influenced in his thinking by living in a western secular democratic state. as far as he is concerned that this point* the only country in the region that approximates that is israel and he hopes iraq will be the next one and he believes there is a substantial portion of iraqis who also yearn for this

and will hold a banner for it. >> thank you joshua muravchik and thank you to the panelist and two hour guests for coming. this has been a fascinating discussion [applause]

>> if it is so terrific to be back here because in this room as jacked suggests should my life changed radically about two years ago it was another beautiful bellingham day i have been here three times and the weather has been here like this all three times as i do not understand the seasonal attitude disorder. [laughter] and is that led it is? and needing to come down to san francisco? so here i was talking to the camera periodically because booktv was here. the book i was talking about was my book which was extraordinarily difficult to research and write and talk about because the stories in it are the